(Gorgias Ugaritic Studies) Chloe Sun - The Ethics of Violence in The Story of Aqhat-Gorgias Press (2008)

The Ethics of Violence in the Story
of Aqhat
GORGIAS DISSERTATIONS
34
NEAR EASTERN STUDIES 9
The Ethics of Violence in the Story
of Aqhat
CHLOE SUN
GORGIAS PRESS
2008
First Gorgias Press Edition, 2008
Copyright © 2008 by Gorgias Press LLC
All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright
Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise without the prior written
permission of Gorgias Press LLC.
Published in the United States of America by Gorgias Press LLC, New Jersey
ISBN 978-1-59333975-3
GORGIAS PRESS
180 Centennial Ave., Piscataway, NJ 08854 USA
www.gorgiaspress.com
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Sun, Chloe, 1967-

The ethics of violence in the story of Aqhat / Chloe Sun. -- 1st Gorgias Press
ed.
p. cm. -- (Gorgias dissertations ; 34. Near Eastern studies ; 9)
Includes bibliographical references (p. ) and index.
ISBN-13: 978-1-59333-975-3 (alk. paper) 1. Aqhat epic. 2. Violence in litera-
ture. I. Title.
PJ4150.Z77A6533 2008
892'.67--dc22
2008006652
The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the
American National Standards.
Printed in the United States of America

To Eddie and Jed
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgments ..................................................................................................ix
Abbreviations ..........................................................................................................xi
Introduction .............................................................................................................1
PART ONE: THEORY ........................................................................................5
1 Methodology ...................................................................................................7
A Text-Oriented Approach ..........................................................................7
A Behind-the-Text-Oriented Approach ...................................................22
The Benefits of the Combination Approach ...........................................25
2 Previous Interpretation................................................................................27
Previous Works on the Text-Oriented Approaches to the Story Of
Aqhat .....................................................................................................27
Previous Interpretation of Anat’s Violence .............................................35
The Revelance of the Topic And Its Contribution to the Discipline ..44
The Summary of the Story Of Aqhat........................................................45
Conclusion to Part One...............................................................................50
PART TWO: IMPLEMENTATION ...............................................................51
3 Divine Characters’ Points of View (I): El And Baal ...............................53
El 54
Baal 70
Summary And Conclusion ..........................................................................89
4 Divine Characters’ Points of View (II) – Anat And Yatpan .................91
Anat 91
Yatpan ..........................................................................................................110
Summary And Conclusion ........................................................................116
5 Human Characters’ Points of View: Dan’il, Pughat, Aqhat ................117
Dan’il ............................................................................................................117
Pughat...........................................................................................................134
Aqhat ............................................................................................................147
Summary And Conclusion ........................................................................151
Conclusion to Part Two ............................................................................152
vii
viii THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT
PART THREE: RELIABILITY CHECK......................................................155

6 The Hypothetical Actual Audience’s Point of View.............................157
A Profile of the Hypothetical Actual Audience.....................................157
Summary of the Profile .............................................................................181
How Would the Hypothetical Actual Audience View the Two Acts
of Violence in the Story of Aqhat? .................................................182
Conclusion to Part Three..........................................................................185
Conclusion............................................................................................................189
The Power of Characterization ................................................................190
The Dynamics of Point of View ..............................................................190
The Ethics of Violence..............................................................................192
The Purpose of Ambiguity And Openness............................................193
Conclusion...................................................................................................194
Areas for Further Research................................................................................194
The Ethics of Violence in the Other Ugaritic Texts.............................195
The Ethics of Violence in Other Ancient Near Eastern Texts...........195
The Ethics of Violence in the Hebrew Bible.........................................196
The Ethics of Violence in Modern Middle East ...................................199
Bibliography .........................................................................................................201
Primary Sources ..........................................................................................201
Secondary Literature ..................................................................................201
Index......................................................................................................................215
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The whole dissertation process for me has been not only an academic quest
but also an emotional and a spiritual journey. There were times when I
could not foresee the end of it. There were also times when I was so excited
by the new insights that I could not fall asleep. Many laments and thanks-
givings characterize this period of my life. And it is indeed ending in praise.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank Professor John Goldin-
gay for “adopting” me as one of his students. His redirection of the focus
of this dissertation turned the whole process around. In light of his busy
teaching and writing schedule, his availability and promptness in reading the
materials that I have sent him are incredible. I especially appreciate his in-
tegrity, humor, and intellectual creativeness. It is really a privilege to have
him as my primary mentor.
Special thanks go to Professor Tremper Longman III for his encour-
agement, helpful comments and prompt feedback. His training and experi-
ence in the disciplines of Ancient Near Eastern Studies and the Old Testa-
ment and his interest in theological and ethical issues made him an ideal
person to guide this topic. I am truly honored to have him as my second
reader.
I am obliged to Dr. Joel Hunt for directing me to write this particular
topic in the first phase of the writing. His many insights are still visible
through the pages. I am indebted to Dr. Glen Stassen for discussing with
me the various concepts involved in ethics and violence. Thanks also go to
my fellow graduate student and friend, Athena Gorospe, for her offering of
ideas and suggestions throughout the different stages of this dissertation.
I would also like to thank the Dean of the School of Theology, Dr.
Howard Loewen, the Associate Dean, Dr. David Scholer, and the then pro-
gram director for the Center for Advanced Theological Studies, Dr. Robert
Hurteau, for their support and commitment to help me through the diffi-
cult transition in the course of writing. I also want to thank Nancy Gower
for proofreading the earlier draft of the dissertation and for my brother, Dr.
Chun Tse, who proofread the later draft. Special thanks also go to my par-
ix
x THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT
ents who sacrificed much to make it possible for me to receive a higher

education in the United States.
This dissertation would not be complete without the editing work
done by my fellow graduate student and friend, Deb Flagg. Her gentle and
insightful comments saved me from many mistakes. I am truly thankful for
her interest in this study from the very beginning and for her dedication to
polish this work in the midst of her various challenges.
Thanks also due to my collegue and friend Ekron Chen for his help in
formatting the dissertation to be published. Without this part of the work,
there will not be a book!
I appreciate Gorgias Press for taking on this project. Dr. Steve Wig-
gins has shown tremendous patience in anwering my questions and helping
me solve different technical issues. His help makes the whole project possi-
ble.
Finally, I would like to thank my husband, Eddie, for his patience, lov-
ing support, encouragement, and prayer during the long years of my life as a
graduate student. He gave me the space and time needed to complete this
study. I would like to thank my son, Jedidiah, for constantly reminding me
of the vitality, the joy, and the beauty of life. May my long years as a semi-
nary student inspire him to persevere and to be faithful to the calling of
God. To them I dedicate this work.
All the acknowledgements cited above culminate in my thanks and
praise to Jesus, my Lord and Savior, who is behind all the people I men-
tioned above, and who is the reason and motivation of my pursuit of theo-
logical education. I see the struggles and challenges that I encountered in
the course of writing this book as a part of his plan to mold me into the
person he wants me to be. To him be the glory.
ABBREVIATIONS
ABD Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by David Noel Freedman. 6

vols. New York: Doubleday, 1992
AOAT Alter Orient und Altes Testament
ARTU An Anthology of Religious Texts from Ugarit by Johannes C. de
Moor. Brill, 1987.
BA Biblical Archaeologist
BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research
BDB A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament. Francis
Brown, S. R. Driver and Charles A. Briggs. Oxford: 1907
BGUL A Basic Grammar of the Ugaritic Language by Stanislav Segert.
Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California,
1984
CAD The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University
of Chicago. Chicago: 1956-
CANE Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Edited by Jack M. Sas-
son. Massachusetts: Hendrickson, 1995
CML Canaanite Myths and Legends. J. C. L. Gibson. Edinburgh:
1977
COS Context of Scripture. Edited by W. W. Hallo. 3 vols. Leiden:
1997-
CR Canaanite Religion: According to the Liturgical Texts of Ugarit by
G. del Olmo Lete. Translated by Wilfred G.E. Watson.
Maryland, 1999.
CRAI Comptes rendus de l’Acade mie des inscriptions et
belles-lettres
DDD Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible. Edited by K. Van
der Toorn, B. Becking and P.W. van der Horst. Leiden:
1995
HALOT The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, Ludwig
Koehler and Walter Baumgartner. Leiden, New York,
Koln: 1994
HR History of Religions
xi
xii THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT
HSM Harvard Semitic Monographs

HTR Harvard Theological Review
HUS Handbook of Ugaritic Studies. Edited by W.G.E. Watson and
Nicolas Wyatt. Leiden-Boston-Koln: 1999.
IEJ Israel Exploration Journal
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature
JJS Journal of Jewish Studies
JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies
JNSL Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages
JSOTSup Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series
KTU The Cuneiform Alphabetic Texts from Ugarit, Ras Ibn Hani and
Other Places. Edited by M. Dietrich, O. Loreta and J. San-
martin. Munster: 1995.
OBO Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis
Or Orientalia
PRU Le Palais Royal D’Ugarit.
PTMS Pittsburgh Theological Monograph Series
RSO Ras-Shamra - Ougarit
RTU Religious Texts from Ugarit by N. Wyatt. Sheffield, 2002.
SBLWAWS SBL Writings from the Ancient World Series
SEL Studi epigrafici e linguistici
TO I Textes Ougaritiques. Tome I. Edited by A. Caquot, M. Szny-
cer, and A. Herdner. Paris, 1974
TO II Textes Ougaritiques: Textes Religieux Rituels Correspondance.
Tome II. Edited by A Caquot, M. Sznycer, and Jesus-Luis
Cunchillos. Paris, 1989
TDOT Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. Edited by G. Jo-
hannes Botterweck and Jelmer Ringgren. Grand Rapids,
Mich.: Eerdmans, 1975
TWOT Theological Wordbooks of the Old Testament. Edited by R. L.
Harris, G. L. Archer Jr. 2 vols. Chicago: 1980
UBC The Ugaritic Baal Cycle, Vol. 1. Mark S. Smith. Leiden: 1994
UBL Ugaritische-Biblische Literatur
UF Ugarit-Forschungen
Ug V Ugaritica V
UNP Ugaritic Narrative Poetry. Edited by Simon B. Parker.
SBLWAW 9. Atlanta: 1997.
UPA The Ugaritic Poem of Aqht. Baruch Margalit. Walter de
Gruyter: 1989
UT Ugaritic Textbook. C. H. Gordon. AnOr 38. Rome: 1969.
ABBREVIATIONS xiii
VT Vetus Testamentum
VTSup Vetus Testamentum, Supplements
INTRODUCTION
The Story of Aqhat contains some of the most fascinating themes found in
ancient literature. The themes of the need for a male heir, the conflict
caused by the bow (a significant symbol in the story), the social roles of the
human characters, the gender roles of male and female, the encounter be-
tween divine and human, the murder and the subsequent vengeance, the
concept of immortality, and the dynamics of ritual in the story have all re-
ceived attention. Among these themes, however, the violence of Anat has
largely been treated one-dimensionally.
In this story, Anat kills a human being for his bow and gets away with
it. The story itself neither explicitly condemns her behavior nor justifies her
violence. This reticence on the part of the author of the story opens up op-
portunities for modern interpreters to express their opinions regarding
Anat’s violence against Aqhat. Yet, the opinions of these interpreters are
often too simple, subjective, and one-dimensional, failing to provide any
basis for their judgment.1
The goal of this dissertation is to discover the ethical understanding of
violence implicit in the Story of Aqhat by attempting to answer two ques-
tions: (1) How did the author of the story use characterization and points of
view to influence his implied audience regarding the two acts of violence in
the story? (2) How would the hypothetical actual audience view the two acts
of violence in the story? As this study will demonstrate, the reticence of the
author concerning Anat’s violence does not mean that the audience is un-
able to discern his point of view through the hints and clues he provides in
the story. We will devote our attention to the various points of view the
author employs to influence the perception of his implied audience on
Anat’s violence.
1 For example, Margalit describes Anat as a capricious, immoral, cunning and
shrewd goddess. He sees her as the power of “Evil” in the Story of Aqhat, without
providing any basis for his view. See Baruch Margalit, The Ugaritic Poem of AQHT
(Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1989), 477.
1
2 THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT
Since there are two acts of violence in the story, Anat’s killing of
Aqhat and Pughat’s vengeance for Aqhat, and since the latter has received a
relatively uniform interpretation, we will direct our focus primarily on
Anat’s violence and secondarily on Pughat’s vengeance. Understanding the
nature of these two acts of violence will serve to provide a window into the
ancient audience’s conception of violence in their world.
We entitle this study “the ethics of violence,” drawing upon
McClendon’s definition for ethics as “the systematic reflection of morals.”
Here, “morals” refers to the actual conduct of deities and people viewed
with concern for right and wrong, good and evil, virtue and vice.2 Addition-
ally, we define violence as “the intentional use of physical force to cause
harm, injury, suffering or death to persons against their will.”3 Combining
these definitions, we define “the ethics of violence” as a systematic reflec-
tion with the primary concern for right and wrong in the concept of using
physical force to harm another person against his or her will. As Girard
indicates, “death is the ultimate violence that can be inflicted on a living
being.”4 The ethics of violence explored in this study enhances this under-
standing of violence in its extreme form of causing another’s death.
Part One deals with theory. Chapter one will set forth the methodol-
ogy for this study, defining and offering the reasons for choosing a combi-
nation of both the text-oriented approach and the behind-the-text-oriented
approach. This will illuminate the ways in which this combination approach
helps us to discover the ethical understanding of violence implicit in the
story.
Chapter two will first critique the past text-oriented approaches to the
Story of Aqhat, thereby justifying the need for using the current methodol-
ogy for the present study. It will then survey the one-dimensional, or the
bipolar interpretation of the violence of Anat in past scholarship in order to
illustrate its lack of a foundation upon which the moral claims regarding her
violence may be based. Lastly, in chapter two, we will establish the rele-
vancy of the current study and provide a summary of the story.
2 James Wm. McClendon, Systematic Theology: Ethics (Nashville: Abingdon, 1986),

47.
3 Robert Audi et al., Violence: Award-Winning Essays in the Council for Philosophical
Studies Competition (New York, David McKay, 1971), 109. This definition is in con-
trast to a broad definition of violence which includes all kinds of forceful coercion
that cause psychological and physical injury. See John J. Collins, Does the Bible Justify
Violence? (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2004), 2-3.
4 Rene Girard, Violence and the Sacred (trans. Patrick Gregory; Baltimore and
London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1972), 255.

INTRODUCTION 3
Part Two is concerned with implementation. Chapters three to five

will implement the methodology set forth in chapter one to elucidate the
text’s understanding of violence. Chapter three demonstrates how the au-
thor of the story uses the characterization of El and Baal and their disparate
points of view on Anat’s violence to influence the perception of his implied
audience regarding her violence in the story. Chapter four illustrates how
the author of the story uses the characterization of Anat and Yatpan and
their respective points of view as the means to reflect the ethics of Anat’s
violence. Chapter five turns the focus from the story’s divine to its human
characters. It explores the characterization and the points of view of Dan’il
and Pughat on the two acts of violence in the story and situates Aqhat in
the context of these two acts.
The conclusion to Part Two will draw upon the results from chapters
three to five to present two ideologies inherent in the story and how the
author employs these two ideologies to move his implied audience to re-
spond.
Part Three is completed with chapter six. In this chapter, we will com-
pile a profile of the hypothetical actual audience and inquire into their con-
ception of deities, death and afterlife, family values, and authority. We will
use this information to investigate how the hypothetical actual audience
would view the acts of violence in the story. In this section, we place the
audience into three categories: an Ugaritic king, an ordinary Ugaritic man,
and an ordinary Ugaritic woman.
The conclusion to Part Three will summarize the various points of
view of the hypothetical actual audiences and will compare and contrast the
uniformity or disparity between the views of the implied audience and the
hypothetical actual audience concerning the acts of violence in the story.
The conclusion will draw upon the results of this study and assess how
the goals of this dissertation have been accomplished through analysis of
the author’s use of characterization and point of view as interpretive lenses
to recover the text’s ethical understanding of violence in the story. We will
see how, through characterization and point of view, the author influences
the audience to identify with certain characters and their points of view
over other characters. We will also see how the reticence on the part of the
author leaves ambiguity and openness for the audience to resolve.
Thus, based on the various points of view of the characters in the
story, we will observe that the ethics of violence is largely a matter of point
of view. Where one stands influences how one views the acts of violence in
the story. As this study shows, one’s point of view is strongly influenced by
one’s relationship with the perpetrator and with the victim of the violence,
one’s knowledge of the situation in which the act of violence takes place,
and one’s self-interest factor. Therefore, the ethics of violence, or the right
and wrong of violence is not an objective matter, but a personal, subjective
and fluid enterprise contingent upon the aforementioned factors. Areas for
further research will follow the conclusion.
PART ONE: THEORY
1 METHODOLOGY
This chapter sets forth the methodology for the current topic. The three
major methodologies in the interpretation of a text include those that focus
on the text, those that go behind the text, and those that go in front of the
text. First, we acknowledge that the question on ethics is one that arises out
of our contemporary context. This places us in front of the text, though we
do not intend to impose modern questions on an ancient text.
Second, we will use the text-oriented approach to answer the first
question pertaining to the goal of this study: How did the author of the
Story of Aqhat use characterization and points of view to invite his implied
audience to make ethical judgments on the two acts of violence in the
story? Then we will use the behind-the-text-oriented approach to answer
the second question: How would the hypothetical actual audience view the
two acts of violence in the Story of Aqhat?
Section one defines and explains the benefits of using a text-oriented
approach for the present topic, states the reasons for choosing point of
view as its focus, and nuances the terminologies involved in this approach.
Section two defines the behind-the-text approach, states its presupposi-
tions, method, and significance. Section three explains the benefits of using
a combination of these two approaches to elucidate the author’s possible
understanding of violence in the Story of Aqhat.
A TEXT-ORIENTED APPROACH
Defining a Text-Oriented Approach

Since many significant works have been devoted to a text-oriented ap-
proach to literary interpretation, this discussion does not repeat all that they
have discovered but simply presents what we understand as a text-oriented
approach and why we choose this approach as one of the methods for the
current topic.1 To avoid confusion, we use the term “the text-oriented ap-
1 For example, Leland Ryken, How to Read the Bible as Literature (Grand Rapids,
Mich.: Zondervan, 1984); Meir Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative: Ideological
Literature and the Drama of Reading (Bloomington: Indiana University, 1985); Tremper
Longman III, Literary Approaches to Biblical Interpretation (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zon-
7
proach” rather than “literary approach” to differentiate it from “source

criticism,” also known as a literary approach. Our approach is a synchronic
method; the older literary approach is diachronic.2
The essence of a text-oriented approach to interpretation is its focus
on the text itself – on its genre identification, and on the literary conven-
tions and techniques of the text such as its structure and language, its theme
and plot development, its characters and their characterization, its uses of
repetition, irony and points of view – in order to determine how and what
the text communicates to its reader or audience.
By focusing on the text, we do not mean that the text has its meaning
apart from its author and reader or audience. The author seeks to commu-
nicate something through a text. In this sense, meaning resides in the au-
thor. The author creates the story in order to “do something to some peo-
ple and the story is told in such a way as to work for an audience.”3 We will
differentiate the four types of audience in the section on “Types of the Au-
dience.” As Longman maintains, “Literature is an act of communication
between author and reader through a text.” These three aspects are closely
connected and one aspect cannot be understood apart from the other two.4
The text-oriented approach considers the author as the maker of meaning
because the text cannot bring itself into existence. Its author is the “histori-
cal cause of a textual effect.”5 Yet, the reader or audience also plays a role in
determining the meaning of a text, perceiving aspects of the text not even
intended or seen by the author.
Additionally, by focusing on the text, we do not mean that the text it-
self is self-contained and that we have no need to consider aspects from
outside such as its linguistic aspect, the social and historical background
presupposed by the author and the original historical audience.6
In summary, the text-oriented approach focuses on the text. The two
crucial questions inherent in the text-oriented approach are: How does the
dervan, 1987); John Goldingay, Models for Interpretation of Scripture (Grand Rapids,
Mich.: William B. Eerdmans, 1995); Kevin J. Vanhoozer, Is There a Meaning in This
Text? (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1998). For a brief but close examination
of a literary approach, see Anthony C. Thiselton, New Horizons in Hermeneutics: The
Theory and Practice of Transforming Biblical Reading (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan,
1992), 479-486.
2 Longman, Literary Approaches, 13-35.
3 Goldingay, Models for Interpretation, 37.
5 Vanhoozer, Is There a Meaning, 44-46, 75.
METHODOLOGY 9
author use a literary text to communicate to its reader or audience? And

what does the author intend to communicate to them?
The Benefits of the Text-Oriented Approach

The interest in the text-oriented approach arose in the middle of the twenti-
eth century, especially since Robert Alter’s work, The Art of Biblical Narrative,
published in 1981.7 It was after this book that various fruitful works have
been produced using this paricular approach by focusing on the text and on
its literary conventions. 8 Most recently, in the twenty-first century, the
dominant approaches include deconstruction, feminism, and reader-
response. Although the text-oriented approach is not the most popular ap-
proach in the twentieth-first century, it is still a valuable one as we will ex-
plain shortly.
Like other approaches in interpretation, adopting a text-oriented ap-
proach has both advantages and disadvantages. According to Longman, the
text-oriented approach, or what he calls “the literary approach,” suffers
from contradictory schools of thought. These schools of thought originate
from a diverse understanding of literary theory and the related discipline of
linguistics. Each school of thought develops its own “insider” language and
terminology which may cause confusion and misunderstanding. Using
modern literary theory also runs the risk of imposing western concepts on
an ancient text and eliminates the authorial intention by focusing strictly on
the text.9
In order to avoid these disadvantages, we will take great precaution in
defining the terminologies in our adoption of the text-oriented approach.
By focusing on the text, we do not intend to separate it from the authorial
intention and the reader or audience’s interpretation.
While there are disadvantages of the text-oriented approach, there are
also advantages. A literary text serves multiple functions. Ryken lays out
several of the most significant:10
1. It appeals to the reader’s imagination: Literature presents an ex-
perience and invites the reader to participate in the image-making
process.
7 Robert Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative (New York: Basic Books, 1981).
8 For examples of these works, see T. Longman III, “Literary Approaches to
Old Testament Study” in The Face of Old Testament Studies (Edited by David W.
Baker and Bill T. Arnold (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 1999), 97.
10 Ryken, How To Read the Bible, 14, 21-24, 58.
2. It expresses truthfulness to life and reality: Literature can be true

to reality and human experience.
3. It conveys ethical messages: It asks the question: “What consti-
tutes good and bad behavior?”
4. It communicates values: It is concerned with “What really mat-
ters?”
5. It is affective: Literature influences the reader or the audience’s re-
sponses to events and situations.
Thus, the text-oriented approach aids the reader or the audience in
unlocking the meanings and the significant aspects of a literary text.
In addition to Ryken’s insights, Longman points out three benefits in
using the text-oriented approach:11
1. It reveals literary conventions in the text: The text-oriented ap-
proach makes explicit the conventions of the text to aid the
reader’s understanding of the message it intends to convey.
2. It stresses whole texts: The text-oriented approach sees the text as
a coherent whole which prevents atomizing the text as separate
parts.
3. It makes the reading process more enjoyable: The text-oriented
approach forces the readers to focus on the text and to make their
own applications.
Since the text-oriented approach originates from non-biblical literature
and although different cultures and time periods may have different literary
conventions, the value and impact of the text-oriented approach remain the
same across cultures and time. Therefore, when we adopt the text-oriented
approach to an ancient work like the Story of Aqhat, the same benefits
listed above apply. Because of these benefits, the text-oriented approach is
valuable and appropriate to serve the purpose of recovering the text’s ethi-
cal understanding of violence in the Story of Aqhat.
Discovering the Narrative Poetics in the Story of Aqhat

Since the author, the text, and the readers are inseparable in the reading and
in the interpretation process, the text-oriented approach to the Story of
Aqhat must include all three aspects in order to do justice to the text’s un-
derstanding of violence. By “narrative poetics,” we mean those literary con-
ventions, techniques, and devices such as the text’s structure, language, plot
development and the like. In the following section, we single out four liter-

METHODOLOGY 11
ary aspects: point of view, character and characterization, author, and reader
as the focus of our discussion.
Point of View
Narrative is a form of representation.12 The characters and the plot in a text
come from a deliberate representation by the author of the text. Point of
view is one of the literary techniques used in the field of narrative poetics.
Definition and Nature. What is “point of view” in the text-oriented
approach? The term “point of view” is used to designate the position or
perspective from which a story is told.13 Lotman describes “point of view”
as “an element of literary structure which we become aware of as soon as
there is a possibility of switching it in the course of the narrative.”14 Point
of view is not limited to literature but also used in various art forms includ-
ing painting, film, and theater.15 The analogy with film serves as an apt illus-
tration of understanding point of view in a literary text. The choice of back-
ground, of the foreshortening of the visual field, and of the various types of
camera movements such as a close up shot or a long shot are dependent on
point of view. The camera controls the audience’s insight and perception.16
Point of view in a literary text is closely connected with the author. A
literary text not only offers a perspective view of the world of the author
but also provides access to what the reader or audience is meant to visual-
ize.17 The author mediates perspective on the characters and events of the
story and leads the reader or the audience to share with his or her point of
view. Thus, the function of point of view serves as a “connecting medium
between representation and evaluation.”18
Sternberg observes that “point of view has emerged as an ideological
crux and force.” He sees point of view as a system of perspectival relations
12 Adele Berlin, Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative (Sheffield: Almond,

1983), 13.
13 Berlin, Poetics and Interpretation, 46.
14 J. M. Lotman, “Point of View in a Text,” New Literary History 6 (1975), 339.
15 For a description of the use of point of view in these art forms, see Boris Us-
pensky, A Poetics of Composition: The Structure of the Artistic Text and Typology of a Com-
positional Form (trans. Valentina Zavarin and Susan Wittig; Berkeley, Los Angeles,
London: University of California, 1973), 2-5.
16 Uspensky, A Poetics of Composition, 3; Longman, Literary Approaches, 87.
17 Wolfgang Iser, The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response (trans. Der Akt
des Lesens; Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978), 35.
18 Robert Weimann, Structure and Society in Literary History: Studies in the History and
Theory of Historical Criticism (Charlottesville: University of Virginia, 1976), 236.

that involves four basic perspectives: the author who fashions the story, the
narrator who tells the story, the audience or reader who receives the story,
and the characters who enact the story.19 By questioning the point of view
in the story, we can get a better sense of what the story is trying to commu-
nicate.
There are multiple ways in which an author expresses his or her point
of view. He or she can accomplish this by using explicit statement or
evaluative comments, by using “asides,” 20 by withholding and preserving
information, through the portrayals of the characters, through their
speeches and emotions, and through the ending of the story as ways to in-
fluence the responses of his or her reader or audience.21
Often times, the author’s point of view is expressed through the char-
acters in the story. Ryken thinks that normative characters within stories
tend to utter what the story as a whole is asserting, such as in the case of
Joseph who tells his brothers, “You meant evil against me, but God meant
it for good” (Gen 50:20).22 This statement summarizes the point of view of
the story.
However, it is sometimes difficult to discern which character is the ob-
ject through whom the author identifies, especially when there is more than
one normative character in the story. This is the case in the Story of Aqhat,
where we have more than one normative character and all the major charac-
ters do not share the same point of view on the violence in the story. As
Lotman maintains, “Point of view introduces a dynamic element into a text:
every one of the points of view in a text makes claims to be the truth and
struggles to assert itself in the conflict with the opposing ones.”23 Thus, the
multiplicity of points of view in the Story of Aqhat requires the reader or
audience’s close attention to details in order to discern the author’s point of
view and participate in the interpretation process of Anat’s violence.
Point of View in the Story of Aqhat. In the Story of Aqhat, the au-
thor employs several points of view to portray the violence of Anat in the
story. He uses El and Baal’s varied points of view, Anat’s point of view be-
fore and after her act of violence, Yatpan’s point of view, and Dan’il and
19 Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative, 129-130.

20 i.e. the phrase and comments which do not figure as part of the events them-
selves and which involve information which the characters in the story are unaware
of. See David Rhoads and Donald Michie, Mark as Story: An Introduction to the Narra-
tive of a Gospel (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1982), 38.
21 Cf. Ryken, How To Read the Bible, 62-66.
22 Ryken, How To Read the Bible, 62.
23 Lotman, “Point of View,” 352.
METHODOLOGY 13
Pughat’s points of view to present Anat’s violence. The author uses several
techniques in portraying these points of view. He uses direct speech and
action of the characters to reflect their respective points of view. For in-
stance, he uses El’s comment to Anat to reveal El’s thoughts on the interac-
tion between Anat and Aqhat.24 He uses Baal’s actions and reactions after
Anat’s violence to throw light on Baal’s point of view regarding Anat’s vio-
lence. Since the author is reticent regarding Baal’s perception of Anat’s vio-
lence, we can only infer that perception through his actions.25
The author also employs the emotions of the characters to reflect on
Anat’s violence. By controlling the information and by withholding infor-
mation from certain characters, the author influences the response of the
audience. For example, he gives inside views of the emotional state of the
human characters, Dan’il and Pughat, but withholds the inside view of the
emotional state of El and Baal from the audience, thereby drawing the audi-
ence closer to Dan’il and Pughat but creating an emotional distance in the
audience’s perception of El and Baal.26
Since each major character in the story has an opinion or reaction re-
garding Anat’s violence, this study will focus on the various points of view
as possible reflections of the author’s intention concerning Anat’s violence.
The author’s employment of the multi-level points of view prevents any
reductionistic approach to Anat’s violence in the story.
The narrator of the Book of Job serves as an example of using multi-
ple points of view to reflect on Job’s suffering. For instance, the narrator
uses the varied points of view of God, the adversary in the divine realm,
and the different points of view of the three friends of Job regarding the
cause of his suffering to create a narrative that has depth. At the same time,
he creates an “open-endedness” for the reader to ponder on multiple levels.
Past scholarship has produced several works on the literary and con-
textual analysis of the Story of Aqhat, yet none has devoted much attention
to the aspect of point of view in the story. Here we mention two examples.
Parker has done an extensive analysis on the literary aspect of Ugaritic nar-
rative poetry.27 He pays attention to the conventional patterns of parallelism
24 KTU 1.18 I:19.

25 Alter states that character revealed through actions leaves us substantially in
the realm of inference. See Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative, 117.
26 This concept of emotional distancing is drawn from R. Allen Culpepper,
Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel: A Study in Literary Design (Philadelphia: Fortress Press,
1983), 20.
27 Simon B. Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative Tradition: Essays on the Ugaritic Poems
of Keret and Aqhat (Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1989).

and versification, poetic formulae, epic repetition and the non-conventional

patterns of social speech, including the birth announcement, the vow, and
the marriage blessing in those texts. Then he directs the focus to the literary
analysis and the interpretation of the Story of Aqhat. He emphasizes the
discrete units of the narrative and demonstrates how these units combine to
produce a coherent whole. Yet, given these valuable insights, point of view
does not receive proper attention in his study.
Aitken has also produced several works on literary analysis in the Story
of Aqhat. He studies the formulaic languages and word-pairs in the story.28
In his monograph, he focuses on the structural analysis, theme levels, plot
development, and some characterization of the Aqhat story,29 yet point of
view is not one of his foci. Besides these two examples, past scholarship
tends to portray Anat’s violence in a one-dimensional fashion without rec-
ognizing or acknowledging its multiple dimension through point of view.
We will critique these works in the next chapter.
In light of the significance of point of view in the portrayal of violence
in the Story of Aqhat and the neglect of this aspect in the narrative poetics
of the Story of Aqhat in past scholarship, this study is an attempt to dis-
cover the text’s implicit ethical understanding of violence through a focus
on the points of view inherent in the story. Part Two (chapters three to
five) will address the varied points of view of the characters in the Story of
Aqhat regarding the two acts of violence in the story as means to elucidate
the author’s possible understanding of violence.
Levels of Point of View. Point of view can be distinguished at differ-
ent levels, and every point of view is carefully designed and intended by the
author. For this study, we choose to combine the categories of Chapman
and Uspensky’s works acknowledging their usefulness and fruitfulness in
application in the past.30 We add an additional category (contextualization)
to complete the list. Each level contributes to the story’s understanding of
violence.
28 Kenneth T. Aitken, “Formulaic Patterns for the Passing of Time in Ugaritic
Narrative.” UF 19 (1987): 1-10; “Oral Formulaic Composition and Theme in the

Aqhat Narrative,” UF 21 (1989a): 1-16; “Word Pairs and Tradition in an Ugaritic
Tale.” UF 21 (1989b): 17-38.
29 Kenneth T. Aitken, The Aqhat Narrative (Manchester: University of Manches-
ter, 1990).
30 See for instance, Berlin, Poetics and Biblical Interpretation, 83-110. Seymour
Chatman, Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film (Ithaca and Lon-
don: Cornell University, 1978); Uspensky, A Poetics of Composition, 8-119.
METHODOLOGY 15
1. Perception: how the character perceives the events such as Anat’s

killing of Aqhat. Does the character approve or disapprove of
Anat’s violence?
2. Conception: what constitutes the character’s worldview, attitudes,
or ideology regarding the events. For example, what is the charac-
ter’s concept of the divine-human relationship?
3. Interest: From the point of view of the audience, the outcome of
the characters’ actions, such as their well-being, profit and loss re-
flect the story’s evaluation of their actions. For example, the fact
that Anat loses the bow at the end of her violence does not reflect
well on her act.
4. Emotion: the characters’ emotions and attitudes such as distress,
grief, and arrogance reflect the story’s portrayal of them.
5. Contextualization: the characters’ behavior in other contexts. For
the Story of Aqhat, we will assess the characters’ view of violence
in the light of their association with violence in other Ugaritic
texts.
The purpose of adding the contextualization level is to determine
whether the character’s point of view in the Story of Aqhat is an exception
to the norm or whether it conforms to his or her view of violence else-
where in the Ugaritic texts. We will employ all five levels of points of view
in Part Two whenever they are relevant to the context of the story. For in-
stance, since other Ugaritic texts do not include information concerning
Dan’il and Pughat’s association with violence, we will skip level five in our
analysis of their points of view.
The Benefits of Point of View. Using point of view to elucidate the
story’s understanding of violence yields many benefits. These benefits, at
the same time, coalesence with the advantage of using a text-oriented ap-
proach.
1. It is inherent in the story.31
2. It reveals the author’s intention and ideology.
3. It helps to safeguard the modern reader from making subjective
interpretation.
4. It helps the readers to be aware of the complexity and ambiguity
in the story’s portrayal of violence.
5. It intensifies the impact of the message.32
6. It enhances pleasure in reading.33
31 Chatman, Story and Discourse, 154.

7. It gives the reader the advantage over the characters in the story
who are often unaware of what other characters are thinking and
doing.34
The basic advantage that undergirds all the above benefits is its objec-
tivity. Point of view cannot be imposed from outside of the text.
Character and Characterization

Point of view is closely bound up with the characters in the story. Thus, we
cannot speak of point of view apart from the characters and their charac-
terization. Berlin’s work makes a helpful distinction between three character
types: the full-fledged character, the type, and the agent. A full-fledged
character (also known as a “round character”) is one who has a broad range
of traits, and about whom the audience knows more than is necessary for
the plot. A type (also known as a “flat character”) has some limited and
stereotyped traits, and who is representative of a group of people with the
same traits. An agent (also known as a “functionary”) is one about whom
nothing is known except what is necessary for the plot.35 We will make use
of these three character types in our analysis of the characters in the Story
of Aqhat.
Characterization refers to the way an author brings characters to life in
a story.36 An author can use a variety of ways to achieve this purpose in-
cluding outward appearance, inner personality or feelings, direct speech,
action, and comparison or contrast with other characters. The author can
also give comments and evaluations of the characters and characterize them
by the way he or she introduces them in a narrative.
Characterization in the Story of Aqhat. In the Story of Aqhat, the
method that the author employs in forming a character is through both
“telling” and “showing.” “Telling” is a direct, concrete description of a
character such as “this person is a good king” whereas “showing” is an indi-
rect way of pointing to a character and invites the audience to make their
own judgments about that character. Because of this involvement on the
part of the audience, there is room for ambiguity.37 In the Story of Aqhat,
the author “tells” the audience about the characters through the description

34 Rhoads and Michie, Mark as Story, 38. Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narra-
tive, 163.
35 Berlin, Poetics and Biblical Interpreation, 23, 32.
36 Rhoads and Michie, Mark as Story, 101.
37 Goldingay, verbal communication.
METHODOLOGY 17
of their epithets, but most frequently, he “shows” the characters by present-

ing them through speech, emotions, and actions.
In the “telling” part, the author uses the epithets of the characters to
describe their respective status and roles. For example, El’s epithets include
“Bull” (l¨r), “my father” (’aby), “Creator of Creatures” (bny bnwt), “The
King” (mlk), “The Father of Years” (’ab šnm), and “The Kind One, El the
Good-Natured” (lṭpn ’il dpid).38 These epithets reflect El’s supreme position
in the pantheon and his nature as a benevolent god.
Baal’s epithet is “The Rider of the Clouds” (rkb ‘rpt). 39 It points to
Baal’s association with rain and the fertility of the land. Anat’s epithets in-
clude “Maiden Anat” (btlt ‘nt) and “Sister of Limm” (ybmt limm).40 The first
epithet points to her relative age whereas the second epithet points to her
relationship with Baal. Yatpan’s epithet is “Soldier of the Lady” (mhr št),
which reflects his role as the henchman of Anat.41
Dan’il’s epithets “Man of Rapiu” (Man of Healing), “The Hero” (Çzr),
and “Man of the Harnemite” (mt hrnmy) are frequently attached to his
name.42 The first epithet “Man of Healing” forms an irony to the actual
situation unfolded in the story, as we shall explore in chapter five. “The
Hero” is a standard term addressed to a man or a young man in the ancient
world. The term “Man of the Harnemite” probably indicates Dan’il’s geo-
graphical or ethnic association with the Harnemite.
Aqhat’s epithet is “The Hero” (Çzr), which is a standard term referring
to him as a young man. Pughat’s threefold epithet “Bearer of Water”
¨kmmym), “Collector of Dew from the Fleece” (ḥspt lš‘r tl), and “Who
Knows the Course of the Stars” (yd ‘t hlk kbkbm) all point to her role as a
dutiful house girl.43
In the “showing” part, the author uses dominant character traits to
depict the characters.44 For instance, Dan’il’s activity “Taking care of the
case of the widow, defending the need of the orphan” (ydn dn ’almnt y¨pṭ ¨pṭ
ytm) is his dominant trait, reflecting his role as a good king. The author
38 KTU 1.17 I:23; VI:49; 1.18 I:15.

39 KTU 1.19 I:43-44.
40 KTU 1.17 VI:18-19, 25-26, 53; 1.18 I:6, 19-20, 22; IV:6, 12, 16; 1.19 I:5; II:43.
41 We will explain the meaning of št as Anat’s epithet in chapter 4.
42 KTU 1.17 I:1-2, 16-18, 36-37; II:27-29; V:4-5, 13-15, 33-35; 1.19 I:19-21, 36-
37, 38-39, 46-48; II:41; IV:17, 18-19, 35.

43 KTU 1.19 II:1-3, 5-7; IV:36-38.
44 A character trait expresses a personal quality of a character which persists
over the whole or part of the story. Rhoads and Michie, Mark as Story, 102.
uses repetitions of the epithets and the dominant traits to impress upon the
audience of the characters. Additionally, he uses direct speech to reveal the
characters’ thoughts and feelings. Therefore, we will cite and translate many
of these direct speeches in our analysis of the portrayal of her violence.
The author also uses the characters’ emotions, attitudes, actions, and
responses to the events to “show” them. Additionally, he uses the perform-
ance of rituals to describe the characters’ thoughts and their interactions
with the divine world. He uses the consequences upon nature to reflect
Baal’s point of view regarding Anat’s violence.
In addition, the author also uses the development of characters to add
depth, realism, and sophistication to their characterization. For instance,
Baal appears first to be a type and then moves to become a more full-
fledged character. Yatpan first appears as an agent and then develops into a
type with his own distinctiveness. Last but not least, the author compares
and contrasts the characters as a way to make the “normative” characters
stand out. For example, he contrasts Anat’s violence with Pughat’s and
Yatpan’s villain image with Pughat’s heroic image. The characterization of
the characters greatly influences the audience’s perception of them. We will
explore the author’s use of characterization in Part Two (chapters three –
five) of this study.
Author, Implied Author, and Narrator

The text-oriented approach often distinguishes between the author, the im-
plied author, and the narrator. The author is the person who actually com-
poses the text whereas the implied author is the textual manifestation of the
real author. The narrator is a rhetorical device or a creation of the author.45
All three can share the same point of view.
Who is the author of the Story of Aqhat? At the end of the Story of
Aqhat (KTU 1.17 VI), about twenty lines are missing. On the left edge of
the tablet is the remains of a colophon: [spr ’ilmlk šbn lmd ’atn p]rln “[Scribe:
Ilimilku, Shubanite, student of Attenu,] the diviner.” 46 This points to
Ilimilku as the author, or perhaps the copier of the story.
45Longman, Literary Approaches, 83-84. Wayne Booth proposes the idea of “the
implied author.” He notes that “the implied author chooses, consciously or uncon-
sciously, what we read; we infer him as an ideal, literary, created version of the real
man; he is the sum of his own choices.” See Wayne Booth, The Rhetoric of Fiction
(Chicago: University of Chicago, 1961), 74-75.
46 This colophon appears the same as in KTU 1.4 VIII lower edge, 1.6 VI: 54-8
and 1.16 VI: 59 lower edge. See Nicolas Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” in Handbook
METHODOLOGY 19
Who is Ilimilku? In the colophon of the Baal Cycle (KTU 1.4 VIII),
we have [¨]‘y. nqmd . mlk “[sac]rificer of king Niqmaddu.”47 The exact na-
ture of Ilimilku’s identity remains uncertain, yet based on the information
provided above, he is a scribe and is closely associated with the royal house
of Ugarit, with considerable power and authority.48 The major myths at Ug-
arit might have circulated for a long period of time in an oral tradition be-
fore they appeared in written form.49 If this is the case, Ilimilku could have
been the final redactor who put the myths into writing. In any case, for the
purpose of this dissertation, we consider Ilimilku as the author of the Story
of Aqhat.
What Kind of Author Do We Have in the Story of Aqhat? First,
the author of the Story of Aqhat knows more than the characters in the
story. 50 He speaks from a third-person perspective and refers to all the
characters impersonally without stating “I” or “we.” He has a seemingly
unlimited knowledge of all the events in the story. For instance, he knows
the motive of Dan’il when he presents an offering to the gods at the outset
of the story; he knows what El’s view is regarding his conception of divine-
human relationship; he knows what Aqhat’s value is concerning gender dif-
ferentiation and human mortality; he knows what Pughat thinks regarding
Anat’s violence. All this knowledge is not shared among the characters in
the story. As Rhoads and Michie note,“no character has enough knowledge
of other characters or events to be able to tell the whole story as the narra-
tor has told it.”51
Second, the author of the Story of Aqhat is omnipresent and is not
bound by space and time. He jumps from scene to scene, both in public
arena and in private quarters. He is present in Dan’il’s various ritual per-
formances; he is present in the encounter between Anat and Aqhat and
of Ugaritic Studies (HUS) (ed. Wilfred G. E. Watson and Nicolas Wyatt; Leiden-
Boston-Koln: Brill, 1999a), 234.
47 For the possible meaning of this title, see M. Dietrich and O. Loretz, “Amter
und Titel des Schreibers Ilmlk von Ugarit,” UF 12 (1980b): 387-9.

48 Cf. N. Wyatt, “Ilimilku’s Ideological Programme,” UF 29 (1997): 777-78.
49 For an overview of how the literature of Canaan (an imprecise name for Uga-
rit) develop through time, see Parker, “The Literature of Canaan, Ancient Israel,
and Phoenicia: An Overview,” in vol. 4 of Civilizations of Ancient Near East (CANE)
(ed. Jack M. Sasson; Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1995), 2399-2410.
50 Goldingay points out that to say “the author is an omniscient one” is exag-
gerating since the author may not know everything. Goldingay, verbal communica-
tion.
hears their conversations; he is there when Anat appeals to El at his abode;

he is the eyewitness of Anat’s killing of Aqhat in the town of Abiluma; he is
with Dan’il and Pughat when they note the diminishing of nature; he also
accompanies Pughat to enter into the tent of Yatpan and is present at the
wine feast when the former attempts to take vengeance against the latter.
Because of the author’s omnipresence, the reader and audience also
experience the same sense of being invisibly present to witness the events as
the story unfolds. 52 This advantage of the reader is what Sternberg calls
“reader-elevating” in which the reader knows better than the characters.53
By inviting the audience to witness the events along with the author, the
author establishes a reliable relationship with the audience and gains his or
her trust, thereby moving the audience to share his point of view.
Third, the author of the story is reticent. He narrates what happens,
but remains silent in giving evaluations of the events. However, his point of
view is revealed through other means such as the portrayal of the charac-
ters, the point of view of these characters, and from “asides.” Thus, the
reticent author leads his implied audience to make judgment and evaluation
based on the hints and clues he provides in the story. At the same time, he
opens the opportunity for his audience to apply elements in the story in a
personal way.
Fourth, the author of the story speaks from an ideological point of
view. There is a message in the story. Meaning resides in the author’s inten-
tion to convey a particular message through “signals” or “signs” or through
different literary devices.54 Although the author reserves making evaluations
of the events and characters in the story, he presents the whole story in a
way that shapes the responses of his audience. The violence of Anat serves
as an example. The different points of view of the divine characters and the
human characters of the story suggest that the author intends to present her
violence in a complex and multi-perspectival fashion. The fact that he fa-
vors certain characters in the story over others also points to his ideological
point of view.
This nature of the author as both a reticent and an ideological author
adds to the depth of the story’s presentation of its message and invites the
reader and audience to participate in the interpretation process.

53 Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative, 163.
54 Vanhoozer, Is There a Meaning, 43.
METHODOLOGY 21
Reader, Audience
The difference between reader and audience is: the former reads the story
whereas the latter hears the story. For this study, we choose the term “the
audience” rather than “the reader” because in the ancient world, the usual
way to attend to myths and epics would be through hearing rather than
through reading.55 In ancient times, only a minority of the elite group such
as the scribes and the priests would have the access and competency read-
ing the written texts.56
Types of the Audience. Stories presuppose certain sorts of audi-
ence.57 Four types of audience can be identified: (1) the modern audience;
(2) the historical audience; (3) the implied audience; (4) the hypothetical
actual audience. The “modern audience” refers to those who read the story
in the twenty-first century or in recent centuries or decades. The “historical
audience” is the original audience who actually heard the story in the sec-
ond millennium BCE and made the documented reactions towards the
story.58 The “implied audience” is the audience presupposed by the story
itself. This type of audience is not the real audience but is imagined in the
mind of the author as he narrates the story. In some cases, the historical
audience and the implied audience are the same and in other cases, they are
not. The “hypothetical actual audience” is the reconstructed historical audi-
ence based on what the modern reader knows about them.59
In determining the responses of the audience toward the violence in
the Story of Aqhat, we are not speaking about the modern audience. We are
not going in front of the text to ask for the modern reader’s imaginative
reflection. Nor are we speaking about the historical audience since we have
no way of knowing who the historical audience is and no documented ac-
count of his or her view on the acts of violence in the story.
When we speak of the audience in Part Two of this study, we are re-
ferring to the implied audience, i.e. the audience presupposed by the author,
Ilimilku, and how he employs characterization and point of view to shape
the responses of his implied audience toward the perception of violence in
the story.
55 Drawing upon Goldingay, Models for Interpretation, 37.

56 W. H. van Soldt, “Ugarit: A Second-Millennium Kingdom on the Mediterra-
nean Coast,” in vol. 2 of CANE, 1263-64.
58 For a discussion about the historical and the implied audience, see Iser, The
Act of Reading, 20-50.

59 I borrowed the term “the hypothetical actual audience” from Goldingay. For
more information about this kind of audience, see Iser, The Act of Reading, 28.
However, in Part Three, we will speak of the hypothetical actual audi-

ence in the behind-the-text-oriented approach.
A BEHIND-THE-TEXT-ORIENTED APPROACH
Defining the Behind-the-Text-Oriented Approach

As its name suggests, a behind-the-text-oriented approach goes behind the
text to investigate its historical settings and realities. This approach is often
contrasted with the text-oriented approach. The text-oriented approach is
synchronic in nature whereas the behind-the-text-oriented approach is dia-
chronic in nature. The former focuses on the final form and the latter fo-
cuses on the historical development of a particular text. 60 The two ap-
proaches need not be seen as mutually exclusive and can be complementary
to one another.61
For present purposes, this study does not intend to trace the historical
development of how the Story of Aqhat ended up in its final form nor to
investigate the story’s historical setting, but to place the focus on the world
and values of the hypothetical actual audience. By using the term “hypo-
thetical,” we do not mean “fictional” but more in the sense of “recon-
structed historical audience.” Due to the fact that it is impossible to deter-
mine who the actual historical audience of the Story of Aqhat is, we recon-
struct the identity of the historical audience based on the evidence known
to us. Therefore, there exists a historical link between the hypothetical ac-
tual audience and the text itself.
By this reconstruction, we attempt to use our imagination supported
by the known facts about the audience to see how the audience would view
the violence in the story so as to illuminate our understanding of the an-
cients’ view on violence. Their point of view may differ from our modern
understanding of violence in the story.
Presuppositions
The behind-the-text-oriented approach presupposes who the historical au-
diences (our hypothetical actual audiences) are and what they value, deter-
mine how they view the violence in the Story of Aqhat.62 Like the charac-
ters in the Story of Aqhat, each character views the violence in the story
from his or her vantage point. Similarly, the hypothetical actual audience
60 Longman, Literary Approaches, 22.

61 Longman, Literary Approaches, 151.
62 Goldingay, Models for Interpretation, 42-50.
METHODOLOGY 23
also views the story from his or her vantage point. Therefore, where the
historical audience stands determines and influences his or her perception
of violence in the story.63
Another presupposition is that the story’s historical audience (our hy-
pothetical actual audience) must share common or similar experience with
the human characters in the story. 64 The audiences must understand and
share the struggle with the same or similar events experienced by the hu-
man characters in the story in order for the story to have an effect and im-
pact upon them. Thus, the themes of the need for a son, especially a king’s
or a leader’s need for a son, the death or murder of a family member, the
interactions with the divine world, and the act of blood-vengeance are all
relevant and familiar to the story’s historical audience.
Finally, we presume that the structure and values of the divine family
correspond to the structure and values of the human families. The myth-
makers constructed the world of the gods based on human experience be-
cause they could not construct something that was outside of their experi-
ence in this world.65 It is interesting to note that as a construct of the hu-
man mind, the divine world is bound in some way to reflect the workings of
the human world. The interaction between the divine and human sphere is
complex, “for while the human originated the divine world, the human
world in turn models itself on its own construct. As a result, the two worlds
reflect and interact with each other.”66
The representation of Ugaritic deities in anthropomorphic images dis-
closes the fact that the Ugaritians conceived their deities in human terms.67
The gods have gender, male and female, just like human beings. They en-
gage in human activities such as walking, talking, eating, drinking, and in-
63 Iser points out that the reader’s role is prestructured by three basic compo-
nents: the different perspectives represented in the text, the vantage point from
which he joins them together, and the meeting place where they converge. See Iser,
The Act of Reading, 36.
65 For the projection of the earthly realities into the heavenly realm, see
Thorkild Jacobsen, “Primitive Democracy in Ancient Mesopotamia,” in Toward the

Image of Tammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture (ed. William L.
Moran; Canbridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1970), 164.
66 Gay Robins, Women in Ancient Egypt (Cambridge: Harvard University, 1993),
17.
67 Marjo Christina Annette Korpel, A Rift in the Clouds (Munster: Ugarit-Verlag,
1990), 88; Mark S. Smith, The Origin of Biblical Monotheism: Israel’s Polytheistic Back-
ground and the Ugaritic Texts (Oxford: Oxford University, 2001), 87.
volved in marriage relationships.68 The divine family shares similar family

structure and relationship. For instance, the divine family is patrilineal in
nature, parallel to human families. The assumption that the divine world is a
projection of the human world, and the assumption that the mythmakers
cannot imagine the former out of a vacuum are plausible ones. We will test
the validity of this hypothesis in chapter six, Part Three.
Method of Reconstructing the Hypothetical Actual Audience

In the light of the above presuppositions, we will use texts apart from the
Story of Aqhat to investigate the identity of the historical audiences and
their values in the second millennium BCE regarding the following con-
cepts:
1. The conception of deities
2. The conception of death and afterlife
3. The conception of family and its values
4. The conception of authority
We choose these concepts because of their relevance to the major
themes in the story since the major themes of the story include deities caus-
ing trouble to human beings, death and mortality, roles of sons and daugh-
ters in the family, and obedience and disobedience to authority. The recon-
struction of these concepts of the ancient historical audiences also serves to
establish some kind of objectivity in our understanding of the audiences’
status and mental world, and thus avoid reading an alien insight or imposing
modern or western insights into the ancient people and into an ancient
text.69
The evidence for these concepts appears primarily in the religious texts
from Ugarit (KTU 1.1-1.169) since it is in these texts that human experi-
ence finds its full gamut of expression. However, other texts such as letters,
legal texts, and administrative texts also provide evidence to the under-
standing of these concepts.
Rather than considering the historical audiences as a collective whole,
we choose three categories of people to reflect their respective readings of
the story. These three categories of people occupy different tiers in a society
and their readings of the story may likely vary. These categories include:
1. An Ugaritic king
2. An ordinary male Ugaritian
3. An ordinary female Ugaritian
68 Smith, The Origin of Biblical Monotheism, 86-7.

METHODOLOGY 25
The Significance of Determining the View of the Hypothetical Actual

Audience
The significance of this is threefold. First of all, an understanding of how
the hypothetical actual audiences view the violence in the Story of Aqhat
provides a window into the ancient people’s conception of violence. Sec-
ondly, this understanding prevents the modern readers from making any
simple, subjective, or one-dimensional interpretation of the violence in the
story without providing any basis for it. Thirdly, this understanding offers
an interpretive lens to the conception of violence in other ancient literature
such as the Hebrew Bible. We will address this concern in “Areas for Fur-
ther Research” at the end of this study.
THE BENEFITS OF THE COMBINATION APPROACH

Since no single approach is sufficient in itself to accomplish the purpose of
understanding a text in its full significance and vitality, a combination ap-
proach helps to illuminate the meaning of the text in a more diverse man-
ner. The text-oriented approach aids in our appreciation of the author’s
artistry in presenting the message of the story. The behind-the-text-oriented
approach provides a check on the reliability of the author’s intended mes-
sage by investigating the worldview and values of the hypothetical actual
audience to see how they might view the violence in the story. This combi-
nation approach enables us to see whether the hypothetical actual audiences
have indeed received the intended message or whether there is a discrep-
ancy in their understanding of violence compared to the author’s portrayal
of violence in the story.70
70I owe this concept of “a check on reliability” to Marsman’s work. In this

work, Marsman uses the evidence provided by the Ugaritic letters, seals, legal
documents, and administrative records to check on the reliability of the status of
Ugaritic women depicted in the mythological texts. See Hennie J. Marsman, Women
in Ugarit and Israel: Their Social and Religious Position in the Context of the Ancient Near
East (Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2003), 627.
2 PREVIOUS INTERPRETATION
The purpose of this chapter is first to give a critique on the previous text-
oriented approaches to the Story of Aqhat and the past one-dimensional,
bipolar interpretation of Anat’s violence in the story, therefore justifying the
present approach to the Story of Aqhat. Then we will establish the rele-
vancy of the present topic. Lastly, we will provide a summary of the story.
PREVIOUS WORKS ON THE TEXT-ORIENTED APPROACHES TO

THE STORY OF AQHAT
Numerous works have been devoted to the general interpretation of the
Story of Aqhat1 and the particular themes in the story including the identity
of Dan’il,2 the list of Ideal Sonship,3 the symbolism of the bow, 4and Anat,
1 The first publication of the Story of Aqhat is by Ch. Virolleaud, La Legende
Phenicienne de Danel: texte cuneiforme alphabetique avec transcription et commen-

taire... (MRS I; Paris, 1936). For the survey of interpretation of the Aqhat text, see
A. Caquot et al, Textes Ougaritiques. Tome I (TO I). Litteratures Anciennes du
Proche-Orient 7 (Paris: Les Editions du Cerf, 1974), 401-15; G. G. Del Olmo Lete,
Mitos y Leyendas de Canaan Segun la Tradicion de Ugarit (Madrid: Edicioues Christian-
dad, 1981), 327-401; Margalit, UPA, 3-92; Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” 238-247.
2 Past scholarship debates whether Dan’il is a king or a village chief. The status
of Dan’il as a king is reflected through his title “king” (KTU 1.19 III:46) and
through the description of his dispensing justice at the gate and taking care the case
of widows and orphans. This expression is used to describe kings in the ancient
Near East. See H. L. Ginsberg, “The North-Canaanite Myth of Anath and Aqhat,
I” BASOR 97 (1945): 4, n. 6; John Gray, The Legacy of Canaan (Leiden: E. J. Brill,
1957), 74; and Ivan Engnell, Studies in Divine Kingship in the Ancient Near East (Ox-
ford: Basil Blackwell, 1967), 134-142.
Others argue against this view and see Dan’il as a village chief because the de-
scription of his environment, including his house and his agricultural rites reflect
this latter status. See John C. L. Gibson, “Myth, Legend and Folk-Lore in the Uga-
ritic Keret and Aqhat Texts,” VTSup (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1975), 66-67. Margalit
argues against seeing Dan’il as a king because Dan’il is only once addressed as
“king.” For Margalit, once does not seem enough. See Margalit, UPA, 44-46, 60.
27
the goddess. 5 For the purpose of this study, we do not intend to give a
comprehensive survey on these works, but we acknowledge that the present
Barton calls Dan’il a “demi-god,” and a “deified human being.” See G. A. Barton,
“Danel, A Pre-Israelite Hero of Galilee,” JBL 60 (1941), 221-222.
3 For literature regarding the list of Ideal Sonship, see Otto Eissfeldt, “Sohnesp-
flichen im Alten Orient,” in Kleine Schriften (Edited by Otto Eissfeldt; Tubingen:

J.C.B. Mohr, 1968), 268-9; J. Healey, “The Pietas of an Ideal Son in Ugarit,” UF 11
(1979): 353-6; Yitzhak Avishur, “The ‘Duties of the Son’ in the ‘Story of Aqhat’
and Ezekiel’s Prophecy on Idolatry (Ch. 8),” UF 17 (1985): 49-60; M. J. Boda,
“Ideal Sonship in Ugarit,” UF 25 (1993): 9-24; and Eugene Clifford McAfee, “The
Patriarch’s Longed-for Son: Biological and Social Reproduction in Ugaritic and
Hebrew Epic,” (Ph.D. diss. Harvard: Harvard University, 1996, 67-74.
4 Many scholars have discussed the significance of the bow in the Story of
Aqhat. D. Hillers (1973), drawing upon Harry Hoffner’s article, suggests that the
bow connotes sexual symbolism and meaning. By taking away the bow, a symbol of
masculinity, Anat reverses the traditional roles of men and women. Hillers sees the
confrontation between Anat and Aqhat as a symbol of emasculation. See Harry
Hoffner, “Symbols for Masculinity and Femininity,” JBL 85 (1966): 326-334;
Delbert R. Hillers, “The Bow of Aqhat: The Meaning of a Mythological Theme,”
AOAT 22 (1973): 71-80.
H. Dressler (1975) challenges Hillers’ idea. Dressler thinks that the bow is the
symbol of masculinity, but this does not necessarily make it a symbol of virility
because masculinity and sexual prowess are two different things. Dressler thinks
that Hillers equates masculinity with virility and confuses the issue. Parker (1989)
thinks that the most important thing about the bow is that it is a composite bow –
a new piece of technology which allows Aqhat to display his modern analytic
knowledge. The bow is significant to the plot of the story, yet its symbolism re-
mains a conjecture. See Harold H. P. Dressler, “Is the Bow of Aqhat a Symbol of
Virility?” UF 7 (1975): 217-20. Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 136.
See also, W. F. Albright and George E. Mendenhall, “The Creation of the
Composite Bow in Canaanite Mythology,” JNES 1 (1942): 27-9; Yigael Sukenik,
“The Composite Bow of the Canaanite Goddess Anath,” BASOR 107 (1947): 11-
15. Wyatt also summarizes the debate between Hillers and Dressler in regard to the
bow. See Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” 251.
5 Literature regarding Anat’s gender and sexuality include: Alfred Wade Eaton,
“The Goddess Anat: The History of Her Cult, Her Mythology and Her Iconogra-
phy,” (Ph. D. diss. Yale University, 1964), 53, 64-74; A. S. Kapelrud, The Violent
Goddess Anat in the Ras Shamra Texts (Copenhagen: Universitets-Forlaget, 1969), 48-
109. U. Cassuto, The Goddess Anath: Canaanite Epics of the Patriarchal Age. Text, Hebrew
Translation, Commentary and Introduction (Jerusalem: Magnes; ET of Hebrew Edition,
1971). Although Cassutto’s work has “Anat” as part of its title, his discussions fo-
cus primarily on the philology of the Baal Cycle, and not on the character of Anat
nor the Story of Aqhat. E. Ashley, “The ‘Epic of Aqht’ and the ‘Rpum Texts’: A
PREVIOUS INTERPRETATION 29
study is built on this previous scholarship and makes use of their fruit. Since
this present study uses the text-oriented approach to the theme of violence
in the story, here we single out four works pertaining to the literary analysis
of the story as our focus of discussion.
Simon B. Parker. Building on his earlier work, “Death and Devotion:
The Composition and Theme of AQHT,”6 Parker’s The Pre-Biblical Narrative
Tradition provides a detailed analysis of the literary composition of the
story.7 He focuses on the discrete units of the narrative and demonstrates
how these units combine to produce a coherent whole. He adopts his
methods through identifying the story’s own internal evidence of literary
form and through the comparative evidence with the other ancient Near
Eastern literature. In addition, for each discrete unit of the narrative, Parker
raises the question of function, purpose, and effects.
Parker divides the story into five literary units based on the internal in-
dicators and comparative evidence:
1. The birth of Aqhat
2. The bow of Aqhat
3. The murder of Aqhat
4. Mourning - The acts of Aqhat’s father
5. Revenge - The acts of Aqhat’s sister
Taking the first unit as an example, Parker notes that there is a move-
ment from Dan’il’s need for a son to Baal’s intercession to El and to El’s
response back to Dan’il to relieve Dan’il’s need for a son. He thinks that
this section of the story shares its structural elements with other ancient
Near Eastern literature such as the Egyptian tale of The Doomed Prince and
Critical Interpretation,” (Ph. D. diss. New York University, 1977); C. H. Bowman,

“The Goddess ‘Anatu in the Ancient Near East,” (Ph. D. diss. Graduate Theologi-
cal Union, 1978); Loewenstamm, S. E. “Did the Goddess Anat Wear Side-Whiskers
and a Beard? A Reconsideration,” UF 14 (1982): 119-22; Peggy L. Day, “Why is
Anat a Warrior and Hunter? in The Bible and the Politics of Exegesis: Essays in Honor of
Norman K. Gottward on His Sixty-Fifth Birthday. Edited by D. Jobling et al (Ohio: Pil-
grim Press, 1991), 141-6; Peggy L. Day, “Anat: Ugarit’s ‘Mistress of Animals,’”
JNES 51 (1992), 181-90; and N. H. Walls, The Goddess Anat in Ugaritic Myth (Ga.:
Scholars Press, 1992), originally a dissertation.
6 The article appears in Love and Death in the Ancient Near East: Essays on Honor of
Marvin H. Pope (Edited by John H. Marks and Robert M. Good; Connecticut: Four
Quarters, 1987), 71-83. This article is a condensed version of his later work, The
Pre-Biblical Narrative Tradition.
7 Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative. His latest understanding of the story is re-
flected in “Aqhat” in Ugaritic Narrative Poetry (Edited by Simon B. Parker;

SBLWAW, Atlanta: Scholars, 1997), 49-80.
the Hurrian tale of Appu. Their common structures include: (1) the intro-
duction of the hero as childless; (2) the appeal to the god; (3) the god’s fa-
vorable response; and the (4) conception and birth.8 Parker also takes the
story of Hannah in 1 Samuel as belonging to the same basic narrative struc-
ture and points out the difference between the biblical account from the
other ancient parallels: The biblical account focuses on Hannah as the bar-
ren woman whereas the other ancient Near Eastern parallels focus on the
childlessness of a man.9
By comparing and contrasting each discrete unit of the Aqhat narrative
with their ancient Near Eastern parallels, Parker helps the reader to situate
the Story of Aqhat in the larger ancient Near Eastern narrative structures,
and at the same time, to accentuate its uniqueness. The drawback of this
comparative approach is that it allows little room for the narrative unit to
deviate from the conventional pattern. For example, because the ending of
the Story of Aqhat is broken, Parker assumes that Pughat succeeds in her
vengeance since other ancient literature, when speaking of a woman taking
vengeance against a male, always succeeds in doing so.10 However, it is pos-
sible that Pughat’s vengeance can be an exception to the general pattern.
Parker demonstrates how the narrator employs various literary tech-
niques such as repetition, speeches, ritual acts, and balances of theme and
motif to compose a unified literature. His efforts are commendable. How-
ever, the two literary devices “characterization” and “point of view” which
are inherent in the story are not Parker’s focus.
From the functional point of view, Parker is able to note the domi-
nance of the social roles in the story such as the dutiful son, the host and
the hostess, and the responsible father and daughter.11 However, he fails to
relate these social roles to the function of the story, and only leaves the
readers with questions and possibilities for the story’s various purposes.12
Last but not least, Parker interprets the death of Aqhat as a case of
murder.13 By choosing the word “murder,” Parker already betrays his point
of view regarding Anat’s violence as an unjust murder. This view obscures
the multi-faceted portrayal of Anat’s violence in the story.
In summary, Parker contributes to our understanding of the aesthetic
value of the story and helps us to see the literary coherence of the story as a
8 Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 102-04.

9 Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 105.
11 Parker, “Death and Devotion,” 83; The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 142-3; UNP, 51.
12 Parker, The Pre-Bibical Narrative, 143.
13 Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 112, 118.
whole. His study makes way for the reader to appreciate the ancient writer’s
artistry in composing this narrative poetry and in identifying those common
narrative themes such as the birth narrative, the marriage institution, and
the situation of desperation that the Story of Aqhat shares with the other
ancient Near Eastern literature.
Kenneth T. Aitken. Aitken’s study focuses on the structural analysis
of the story. He identifies three levels of themes in the story: ground theme
level, theme level, and theme texture level. According to Aitken, “Ground
theme level” is composed of the sum of the plot themes (i.e., themes which
are essential to the plot), but abstracted from their specific thematic content
and defined in terms of their function in the plot. “Theme level” is com-
posed of the entire sum of the actions and descriptions contained in the
narrative, but abstracted from their specific verbal expression. “Theme tex-
tual level” is composed of the entire sum of the poetic lines given by and in
the object language of the story itself, i.e., the text itself.14
Based on his analysis, “Lack” dominates the ground theme level, such
as the hero (Dan’il) lacks an object (a son), the villain (Anat) lacks an object
(the bow). The theme level is made up of both plot and non-plot themes.
The plot-themes include the fact that Dan’il has no son, and Aqhat has no
bow. Anat covets the bow, Pughat notices the withered crops, Dan’il de-
sires to bury Aqhat, and Pughat desires to avenge Aqhat. The non-plot
themes include repetition of the plot themes such as Aqhat’s twice refusal
of Anat’s offer and Dan’il’s twice failure to console the ear of corn.15 Aitken
argues that the theme texture level contains the particular verbal textures
which the themes have acquired in the course of telling the story. For in-
stance, the text verbalizes “Baal reveals himself to Dan’il” as “Baal took pity
and appeared to him” (KTU 1.17 I: 15-33).16
Aitken demonstrates the significance of the units of content as com-
positional units within the narrative itself. His multilayered structural analy-
sis of the story demonstrates the complexity of the story in its form and
theme. His structural analysis is indeed a much more elaborate and a much
more sophisticated work than Parker’s structural analysis, which remains on
the surface level of the major plot themes of the story. However, the com-
plex nature of Aitken’s multilayered structural analysis is also its drawback,
as it easily causes confusion. For instance, he subdivides the three levels of
themes into other sub-levels: initial, medial, and terminal levels. He also
14 Aitken, The Aqhat Narrative, 21-22.

15 Aitken, The Aqhat Narrative, 108-125, 142.
16 Aitken, The Aqhat Narrative, 21, 172.
employs many technical terms such as “the plot themes,” “the theme ker-
nel,” and “the theme links.”
Aside from focusing on the structures of the story, Aitken notes the
presentation of the characters in the story. He compares and contrasts vari-
ous characters in each unit of the story and observes the pattern of
“hero(ine) and villain.” For example, in the encounter between Anat and
Aqhat, Aitken describes Anat as the villain and Aqhat as the hero. In the
unit of Pughat’s vengeance, Pughat functions as the heroine whereas Yat-
pan acts as a villain.17 However, this clear categorization of the characters
obscures the ambiguity involved in the author’s portrayal of them.
Eugene C. McAfee. In his Harvard dissertation, McAfee adopts the
methodology of Claude Lévi-Strauss to interpreting mythology, by using the
structural analysis exhibited in ancient myths to determine their respective
meanings and functions. Thus, McAfee compares three ancient narratives,
the Abrahamic narrative, the Story of Kirtu, and the Story of Aqhat, and
discovers their common structure and theme. He observes that these three
narratives share one significant theme in common: the son does not fulfill
the expectations placed upon him by the narrative, but someone else does.18
He pays particular attention to issues of power, gender, and ethnicity
in these narratives. In the stories of Dan’il and Kirtu, McAfee notes that
their problem of sonlessness is resolved through a transformation of gender
roles: the daughter replaces the son. In the cases of Dan’il and Kirtu,
Pughat replaces Aqhat, and Kirtu’s youngest daughter replaces his sons. In
the case of Abraham, the problem of Ishmael’s ethnic and social status is
resolved through the birth of the promised son, Isaac, as a result of Abra-
ham’s union with Sarah.19
In his conclusion, McAfee raises the question of motive in composing
stories of ineffectual longed-for sons. Adopting Lévi-Strauss’ observation
of the purpose of all true myths – to provide a logical model capable of
overcoming a contradiction, McAfee proposes that, “the fundamental con-
tradiction in mythology in which the procurement of a son by a sonless pa-
triarch plays a central role is the contradiction of reproduction itself.”
Therefore, he concludes that the point of these stories is not about biologi-
cal reproduction but social reproduction. 20 By “social reproduction,” he
17 Aitken, The Aqhat Narrative, 95, 107.

18 McAfee, “The Patriarch’s Longed-for Son,” 53.
19 McAfee, “The Patriarch’s Longed-for Son,” 52-53.
20 McAfee, “The Patriarch’s Longed-for Son,” 54-55, 121.
means “the maintenance of social fabric through the innovative actions of a

dutiful daughter.”21
By comparing the thematic structures of these narratives, McAfee em-
ploys a text-oriented methodology. The identification of the common ele-
ments in the three stories aids the reader in understanding the major issue
raised by these stories and their possible meaning to the ancient societies.
Yet, for our purpose, the drawback of this seeking of common structure
undermines the uniqueness of each narrative and obscures the specific mes-
sages that each individual story intends to convey.
David P. Wright. Wright’s Ritual in Narrative, as its title suggests, stud-
ies ritual in the narrative of Aqhat. The contextual analysis of ritual not only
gives this study a literary orientation but also goes beyond the literary level
to the ideas of the history of religion and the practices of ritual in the an-
cient Near East.22 The focus on ritual as the overarching theme in the story
deserves our attention, particularly because our study also uses one single
theme, the acts of violence in the story, as the focus.
Wright attempts to see how ritual serves the need of the larger narra-
tives and to observe how different rituals interact with one another. The
previous studies on ritual have been externally oriented. They tend to con-
nect a particular ritual to an existing ritual in history. Wright’s approach, on
the contrary, is internally oriented. He looks at ritual within a story’s context
to see how it contributes to the “development of the story, advances the
plot, forges major and minor climaxes, structures and periodicizes the story,
and operates to enhance the portrayal of characters.”23
His approach is indeed groundbreaking and provides many insights
into the function of ritual within a narrative context. Of particular interest
to us is his argument that rituals in the story convey much about “the rela-
tionships of the characters, their emotions and ethics, their love and hatred,
their frustration and piety, and their sense of duty and honor.”24 All of the
portrayals of characters are viewed through their performances of rituals in
the story, a truly innovative perspective.
Wright sorts the rituals into four categories: feasts, blessings, mourning
rites, and retaliation rites. He organizes his topics around these four catego-
ries, comparing and contrasting the various ritual scenes and their elements,
and distinguishing two broad types of rituals: the felicitous and the infelici-

22 David P. Wright, Ritual in Narrative (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2001),
17.
23 Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 6.
tous rites (successful and unsuccessful rites). Wright inquires into the causes
for the infelicitous rites – that they are caused by the competing and con-
trary desires of the gods, by the ignorance of humans performing the rites,
or by the need to assert and acquire power.25 His observations concerning
infelicitous rites add understanding to the story as a reflection of “real-life”
experience, and not merely a literary construct.
For instance, Wright, from the ritual point of view, interprets the ban-
quet scene where Anat spots the bow, covets it, and negotiates with Aqhat
as a ritual infelicity because both Anat and Aqhat fail to reach a compro-
mise and establish a relationship during the process. Anat’s reaction of
mourning after she kills Aqhat also serves as an indication of the unsuccess-
ful feast. For the audience of the story, Wright notes that this infelicity
comes not as a surprise since they must have encountered this kind of ritual
infelicity in their real life experience.26
In regard to El and Baal’s points of view of Anat’s violence, Wright
thinks that El merely concedes to Anat’s plan to kill Aqhat and then leaves
El out of the picture.27 This view seems to make El exempt from the vio-
lence done to Aqhat. Wright notes the “theological cause” of the drought:
the absence of Baal.28 However, he fails to make the connection between
the drought and Baal’s disapproval of Anat’s violence and simply treats the
death of Aqhat as a case of murder.29 In regard to Anat’s violence, Wright
identifies with the point of view of the human characters of the story,
Dan’il and Pughat, but downplays the points of view of El and Baal.
Despite these caveats, Wright offers an interesting and stimulating
study on ritual within the Story of Aqhat. His study enhances our compre-
hension of the functions and dynamics of the rituals in the story, which in
turn deepens our understanding of the text and the interactions of various
characters as a whole.
These four works all contribute to the understanding of the Story of
Aqhat through different aspects of narrative poetics. This study intends to
develop further the employment of characterization and point of view as a
means to illuminate the author’s possible ethical understanding of violence
in the story.

26 Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 133-35.
PREVIOUS INTERPRETATION OF ANAT’S VIOLENCE

Modern interpreters tend to understand Anat’s violence in the Story of
Aqhat in two extremes or in a bipolar manner. On one end of the contin-
uum stand those who consider Anat’s violence against Aqhat as an evil
act.30 On the other end of the continuum stand those who regard Anat’s
violence as a positive act.31 These bipolar interpretations of Anat’s violence
obscure the text’s presentation of her violence in a multi-perspectival fash-
ion.
Anat’s Violence Is Negative

Dijkstra thinks that the Story of Aqhat is a tale not only of tender love,
blood-shed and blood vengeance, but also of a disturbed social order with
its concomitant effects on vegetation and fertility. Dijkstra maintains that
the root of all trouble lies in “Aqhat’s conflict with the goddess who is un-
committed to ethical norms.” 32 This interpretation reads the subjective
standard of “ethics” or the modern conception of “ethics” into the ancient
text. What were the ethical norms at Ugarit? The Baal Cycle, for example,
depicts the major gods as warriors who frequently have violent confronta-
tions with other deities. The ethical norm at Ugarit could be violence.
Dijkstra’s view of “Anat not committed to ethical norms” needs more justi-
fication from a study in the ethical norms of the ancient Near East in gen-
eral and Ugarit in particular.
Ashley considers the Rapiuma texts (KTU 1.20-22) as the sequel to the
Story of Aqhat. Thus, in the Story of Aqhat, she thinks that Anat is associ-
ated with death whereas in the Rapiuma texts, Anat is associated with life
30 The proponents for this view include A. Kapelrud, M. Dijkstra, E. Ashley, R.
Bowman, G. Del Olmo Lete, B. Margalit, S. B. Parker, N. Walls, and L. Handy. See
Kapelrud, The Violent Goddess, 82; Meindert Dijkstra, “Some Reflections on the
Legend of Aqhat,” UF 11 (1979): 199-210; Ashley, “The ‘Epic of Aqhat,’” ; Bow-
man, “The Goddess Anat,” 199, 263, Del Olmo Lete, Mitos, 354-64; idem., Canaan-
ite Religion (Maryland: CDL, 1999), 331; Margalit, UPA, 477; Parker, “Death and
Devotion,” 77; Walls, The Goddess Anat, 161-210; Lowell K. Handy, Among the Host
of Heaven: The Syro-Palestinian Pantheon as Bureaucracy (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisen-
brauns, 1994), 122.
31 The advocates for this latter view include H. L. Ginsberg, E. Amico, N.
Wyatt, M. S. Smith. See Ginsberg, “The North-Canaanite,” 15-23; E. A. Amico,

“The Status of Women at Ugarit,” (Ph. D diss. University of Michigan: 1989), 490-
91; Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” 234-258; Smith, The Origin of Biblical Monotheism,
31.
32 Dijkstra, “Some Reflections,” 208.
since in the latter texts, Anat and Baal work together to restore Aqhat to
life.33 However, the fragmentary nature of the Rapiuma texts does not sup-
port the notion of Aqhat’s resurrection. Ashley’s assumption that the
Rapiuma texts are a part of the original Story of Aqhat is based on insuffi-
cient evidence. The appearance of the name Dan’il in both texts does not
provide sufficient evidence to justify the connection of the texts. In addi-
tion, her statement that “Anat is associated with death” seems to render her
act of violence negative without acknowledging other competing points of
view.
Dijkstra and de Moor contend for the inclusion of the Rapiuma texts
because of the mention of Dan’il in both texts and the assumption that
Aqhat is restored to life, but this interpretation is not conclusive.34 Other
scholars are skeptical about the connection between the two texts. 35 For
example, both Parker and Wyatt think that the mention of Dan’il in KTU
1.20 may only mean that Dan’il was a well-known figure and a number of
stories may have used his name but it does not prove a link among those
stories. 36 The fragmentary nature of the Rapiuma texts prevents us from
making any definite conclusion regarding the relationship between the two
texts. For the present study, we think that the evidence justifies the exclu-
sion of the Rapiuma texts as part of the story.
Bowman interprets Anat’s violence in the Baal Cycle as a means of ad-
vancing Baal’s supremacy in the pantheon and his fertility on earth.37 Thus,
he maintains that Anat’s violence in Aqhat is out of her character. Bowman
downplays Anat’s violence in the Story of Aqhat and states that “we should
not take too seriously the inconsistency between Anat’s characterization in
33Ashley, “The ‘Epic of Aqhat,’” 309.

34See Meindert Dijkstra and Johannes C. de Moor, “Problematic Passages in
the Legend of Aqhatu,” UF 7 (1975): 171-2. Johannes C. de Moor, An Anthology of
Religious Texts from Ugarit (Nisaba 16, Leiden: Brill, 1987), 224.
35 John C. L. Gibson, Canaanite Myth and Legends (CML) (Edinburgh: T & T
Clark, 1977), 27, n. 2; Parker, “Aqhat,” 49; idem., The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 134-5.
Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” 237; David P. Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 6.
36 Parker, “Aqhat,” 197. Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” 237. One other example
where the name of Dan’il appears is in the biblical book, Daniel. Dressler is doubt-
ful whether Dan’il is the same Daniel in Ezekiel. See Harold H. P. Dressler,’s refu-
tation, “The Identification of the Ugaritic Dnil with the Daniel of Ezekiel,” VT 29
(1979b): 152-61. Day thinks that the evidence still favors the identification of the
Ezekielian Daniel with the Dan’il in the Story of Aqhat. See John Day, “Daniel of
Ugarit and Ezekiel and the Hero of the Book of Daniel,” VT 30 (1980): 174-84.
37 Bowman, “The Goddess Anat,” 51, 182, 195.
Aqhat and the Baal Cycle.” Bowman also states that the Baal Cycle offers a
more accurate picture of Anat’s character and purposes in the Ugaritic cult.
He adjudicates between the conflicting portrayals of Anat, that Anat’s im-
age in the Baal Cycle is primary and her image in Aqhat is secondary.38 This
view is puzzling because it is precisely because of the inconsistency of
Anat’s character in Aqhat and in the Baal Cycle that we should take her vio-
lence in Aqhat seriously.
Del Olmo Lete thinks that the function of the goddess Anat is special
and that her behavior provides the theme of the story. Later, Del Olmo
Lete specifies this “special” function as Anat’s “immoral behavior.” For Del
Olmo Lete, the encounter between Anat and Aqhat is not just a case of
divine punishment; it also describes a “typical situation” where male human
beings are exposed to “the whim of the gods and their amoral behavior.”39
Thus, Del Olmo Lete interprets Anat’s violence against Aqhat as a “com-
mon theology” in the ancient Near East and considers Aqhat as a Prome-
theus-like figure, thus embracing the “heroic” character and destiny.
In this sense, he thinks that the Story of Aqhat is related to similar ac-
counts in Greek literature and in the Israelite patriarchal tradition. Del
Olmo Lete, however, does not cite the Greek version of the Prometheus
text nor any Israelite patriarchal examples to demonstrate his point.40 His
description of the “typical situation” is based on a few out of thousands of
ancient texts. By perceiving Anat as an “immoral” goddess, Del Olmo Lete
suppresses other alternative points of view including El’s.
Margalit advocates the idea of morality and ethics in the story, espe-
cially on Anat’s killing of Aqhat. Margalit addresses the issue of right and
wrong, good and evil. He sees Anat as the evil goddess. He thinks that the
author, by portraying Anat in such violent ways, intends to give a “wake-
up” call to the “Raphaite” people not to be blindly devoted to this god-
dess.41 He pays attention to the characters and their antitheses: for instance,
he contrasts Anat and Pughat’s characters and describes them as the “polar-
opposite.” Moreover, Margalit adds:
Man’s existential Life-or-Death choices depend on a critical discernment
of Good and Bad, and on the selection of proper divine models of ethi-
cal and religious behavior; Raphaite society, by choosing Anat, has cho-
38 Bowman, “The Goddess Anat,” 199, 263, 265.

39 Del Olmo Lete, CR, 331.
40 Del Olmo Lete, CR, 332-333.
41 Margalit, UPA, 280 n. 49, 333, 347, 321, 347, 477, 491.
sen Evil. Sister though she be to Baal, Anat is actually more akin to Mot,
the god of Death.42
Margalit focuses on the moral aspect of the text far more than any of
his predecessors. His analysis of the various characters in the text provides
insight into their moral aspects. The major drawback of Margalit’s approach
lies in the lack of a basis for his judgment on Anat’s moral behavior.43 For
instance, he deliberately describes Anat as the immoral and wicked deity, yet
does not provide any rationale for his descriptions.44 Margalit also ignores
questions such as whether Anat only behaves according to her character as
a warrior and whether El is responsible for Aqhat’s death.
Apart from his interest in the literary analysis of the story mentioned
earlier, Parker also draws attention to the theme of social roles in the story.
For instance, he points out that the story is concerned with the dutiful son
in the refrain of the first two columns, the host and hostess in column five,
men and hunter as against gods and women, in the encounter between
Aqhat and Anat in column six, and the responsible father and daughter in
the last tablet.45 Parker thinks that the purpose of the story is to warn males
against “male pride and female treachery.” According to him, this “female
treachery” refers to someone “who knows no bounds, even in the divine
sphere.”46
By emphasizing various social roles in the story, especially Pughat’s
role as a dutiful daughter who avenges the death of her brother, Parker puts
Anat’s murder in a negative light, although he hesitates to mention this ex-
plicitly. This hesitation may be due to the fact that Parker considers the
character of Anat a “literary construct” and that her behavior and character
do not reflect any value of the people or the society in which the story is
situated.47 By separating literature or myths from their corresponding social
environment, Parker denies the social function of myths in ancient human
42Margalit, UPA, 363, 479, 485.

43Margalit remarks that Anat’s near-total eclipse in the first millennium BCE
suggests that the poem of Aqht may have played a part in this beneficent develop-
ment. This is the closest rationale given by Margalit in regard to Anat’s negative
behavior in the Aqhat story. However, this observation or conjecture is not based
on the text of Aqhat. See Margalit, UPA, 485.
44 For example, Margalit describes Anat as a wicked goddess in pages 49, 89,
280, 333, and 347 of UPA without giving any basis for his judgment.
45 Parker, UNP, 51. Cf. Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 142-3.
46 Parker, “Death and Devotion,” 77; Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 114.
communities. This denial seems to contradict his earlier remark on the pos-
sible functions of the story to its society.48
In The Rise of Yahwism, de Moor mentions Anat’s violence in the Story
of Aqhat. He sees that Anat’s violence represents the conflicting powers of
the pantheon. He therefore concludes that the pantheon of Ugarit is a
“pantheon of disillusion.” By that he means that the Ugaritic world of the
gods is “full of hate, violence, treason, weakness, greed, partiality, rashness,
blunders, drinking-bouts and orgies.”49 Thus, de Moor indirectly evaluates
Anat’s violence in Aqhat as a negative act.
De Moor’s view of Anat’s violence is based on the modern conception
that killing is wrong, but he fails to assess Anat’s character in the world in
which she lives. Does the author of the story explicitly indicate his evalua-
tion of Anat’s violence? What in the Story of Aqhat informs us of her vio-
lence as a negative act? The term “a pantheon of disillusion” seems to re-
flect a subjective interpretation.
Walls, like Margalit, contrasts Anat with Pughat, maintaining that
“Anat mediates the bipolar opposites of life and death, male and female,
social continuity and social disintegration.” He describes Anat’s character as
an untamed goddess who threatens the basic social fabric and the life of
Aqhat. He thinks that Anat is a symbol of ambiguity; she serves as a nega-
tive force in the Story of Aqhat, but a positive one in the Baal Cycle. Walls
attributes this ambiguity to Anat’s ambiguous gender, a maiden goddess
who rejects the traditional feminine categories of mother, wife, or depend-
ent daughter.50
Walls’ analysis of Anat’s character comes from a socio-scientific point
of view, which relates her gender and sexuality to the patriarchal society in
which she lives. The socio-scientific point of view illuminates our under-
standing of Anat’s gender dynamic within her world, yet it comprises some
subjectivity and uncertainty, running the risk of imposing modern concepts
into the ancient character and the ancient world.
Both Walls and Day state that the reason for Anat’s being a warrior
and a hunter lies in her status as a maiden (btlt).51 This interpretation poses
48 Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 143.

49 De Moor, The Rise of Yahwism: The Roots of Israelite Monotheism (Leuven: Leuven
University Press, 1990), 81, 97,
50 Walls, The Goddess Anat, 209, 218.
51 Cf. Ackerman thinks that the warrior image of Deborah and Jael is influenced
by the Anat tradition in the Ugaritic texts. See Susan Ackerman, Warrior, Dancer,
Seductress, Queen (New York, London, Toronto, Sydney, Auckland: Doubleday), 56-
73.
several problems. Day explains that Anat is in the stage of puberty, she
never crosses the threshold between puberty and the exclusively female
sphere of motherhood. She is caught in the liminality of adolescence, where
male and female are not yet fully distinct. Day, therefore, concludes that as
a btlt, there is no gender boundary to impede Anat, and so Anat can move
freely into what is normally defined as the male sphere.52
In Ugarit, the exact meaning of btlt is uncertain.53 We can be certain
that the word does not mean “virgin” in the strict sense since Anat has sex-
ual intercourse with Baal in KTU 1.10-12.54 Day assumes that marriage and
motherhood happened after the teenage years and that they cannot happen
at the same time. Yet, in ancient cultures, the distinction between these two
stages of life often coalesces. A btlt can be a young married woman as well
as a young mother. Moreover, women who are beyond adolescence can
hunt and fight. These activities are not limited to teenagers only.
In the Story of Aqhat itself, besides Anat we have another example of
a woman warrior – Pughat, the family girl. When Pughat asks for Dan’il to
bless her to take revenge against the slayer of her brother, Dan’il gladly
grants his permission.55 As Amico points out, there is no hint in the story
suggesting that it would be surprising for a woman to undertake such a
task.56
In his monograph, Among the Host of Heaven, Handy singles out Anat as
the deity who represents the “malfunctioning” of the divine bureaucracy.
Handy writes that “The most blatant example of abusive behavior accepted
by the highest authority without punishment was displayed by the goddess
Anat.” Handy thinks that Anat is “violent, vindictive, vengeful, self-
absorbed, insolent, and spoiled.” Handy interprets El’s indulging attitude
towards Anat’s offensive and threatening manner as a form of “nepotism at
its worst.”57 Handy’s interpretation and assessment of Anat’s character is
rather one dimensional because he singles out Anat’s behavior in Aqhat
with the assumption that killing human beings is wrong and ignores her role
in the Baal Cycle where she appears to be the heroine who takes vengeance
52 Day, “Why is Anat,” 145-6.

53Tsevat, “‫ ”בתולה‬TDOT 2:339-340.
54 A. Van Selms, Marriage and Family Life in Ugaritic Literature (London: Luzac &
Co., 1954), 69, 109; TWOT, 295. The interpretation of “btlt” as “grown up girl
without sexual experience with men” does not fit the person of Anat in the Ugaritic
texts. See the entry in HALOT, 166-167.
55 KTU 1.19 IV: 28-40.
56 Amico, “The Status of Women,” 155.
57 Handy, Among the Host, 122-25.
against Mot to bring her brother Baal back to the throne. Wyatt’s criticism
of Handy’s treatment of Anat as coming from a modern and Christian the-
ology rather than thinking of Anat in terms of ancient Ugaritic tradition is
warranted.58
The interpretation of Anat’s act of violence against Aqhat as an evil
behavior is a subjective and one-dimensional view. It imposes personal eth-
ics and the Hebrew Bible’s concept “Thou shall not kill” into the ancient
Ugaritic world. It is not certain that divine killing in ancient Ugarit was seen
as negative as it is in the modern world. As the social critic Walzer observes
that some things that we consider oppressive are not so perceived every-
where.59 This view presumes that killing is wrong regardless of its context,
culture, and time.
Anat’s Violence Is Positive

On the contrary, those who stand at the positive end of the continuum
consider Anat’s violence as an act that befits her character or role as the war
goddess. They view her power, courage, and strength as positive qualities.
Again, this view is one dimensional. Although the Ugaritic texts depict
Anat’s violence as positive in texts other than the Story of Aqhat, the Story
of Aqhat seems to give us a more complex side of her violence, involving
more than just one point of view.
Ginsberg attributes Anat’s killing of Aqhat to her character as a fero-
cious warrior. Her warlike character is evident in the two accounts (KTU
1.3 V: 19-25 and 1.18 I: 1-14) where Anat threatens El to achieve her ends.
Therefore, Ginsberg maintains that Anat’s dealing with Aqhat is quite in
line with her character.60 Ginsberg views the encounter between Anat and
Aqhat as a case of a goddess humbling a male’s pride. He thinks that since
Anat weeps after her killing of Aqhat, she regrets her action and intends to
restore Aqhat to life.61
However, the text does not explicitly indicate that Anat regrets her act
of violence. The text seems to use her weeping as a way to cast doubt on
her ability to get what she wants through violence. Additionally, the idea of
58 Nicoles Wyatt, Myths of Power: A Study of Royal Myth and Ideology in Ugaritic and
Biblical Tradition (UBL 13; Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996), 329, n. 184.
59 Michael Walzer, Thick and Thin: Moral Argument at Home and Abroad (Notre
Dame and London: University of Notre Dame, 1994), 16.

60 Ginsberg, “The North-Canaanite,” 3-10 and idem., “The North-Canaanite
Myth of Anath and Aqhat, II” BASOR 98 (1945): 15-23.

61 Ginsberg, “The North-Canaanite, I,” 7.
the restoration of Aqhat’s life cannot be certain due to the fragmentary na-
ture of the text.
Kapelrud thinks that since the Story of Aqhat has no moral condem-
nation against Anat’s violence, it was seen as “quite natural for the gods to
take whatever they wanted.”62 The fact that we have a reticent author does
not mean that he makes no moral condemnation against Anat’s violence. As
the text-oriented approach demonstrates, the author uses the portrayals of
various characters, their speech, action, and emotion to express his point of
view regarding Anat’s violence.
Kapelrud also thinks that Anat represents “the will of the gods and
that in her killing of Aqhat, she serves as an advocate and executioner for
the gods.”63 Kapelrud’s understanding of Anat’s violence contains two fal-
lacies. For one, he assumes that since the text has no condemnation of
Anat’s violence, Anat’s violence is an acceptable act. This assumption, how-
ever, does not take into account the fact that 51% of the text is missing.
The explicit or implicit condemnation may be in the gaps, though we can-
not know this.
The other fallacy is that he assumes that Anat is the representative of
the gods. The story clearly notes that Anat’s violence against Aqhat is con-
trary to Baal’s intention for Dan’il to have a son and in El’s granting of a
son. It is interesting that El later revokes his original intent by permitting
Anat to kill Aqhat. Baal, after the death of Aqhat, helps Dan’il recover the
remains of Aqhat.64 In this case, Baal acts contrary to both Anat and El.
Anat may represent El in killing Aqhat, but not Baal.
We have another incident in the Story of Kirtu concerning a goddess
doing something in apparent conflict with the gods. In this story, the gods
El and Baal help king Kirtu to acquire a wife in order to ensure Kirtu’s
progeny. The goddess Athirat, however, punishes king Kirtu for not fulfill-
ing his vows to her and inflicts upon him a fatal illness. In this case, Athirat
acts against the will of Baal, El, and the entire council who bring forth the
birth of Kirtu’s children.65 Kapelrud’s study is one dimensional and does
not provide any basis for his assessment of Anat’s violence in Aqhat.
Landy views Aqhat’s death as a result of his irreverence towards the
goddess, Anat.66 He thinks that “Aqhat’s fatalistic dignity is mingled with
all-too-human fallibility and youthful intemperance.” Anat, as a deity, can-
62 Kapelrud, The Violent Goddess, 71.

63 Kapelrud, The Violent Goddess, 70-71.
64 KTU 1.19 III: 138.
65 KTU 1.14 IV: 32-43; 1.15 III: 25-30.
66 Francis Landy, The Tale of Aqhat (London: The Menard Press, 1981), 11.
not stand being thwarted. Although this is true, it neglects Baal’s reaction
after the death of Aqhat and the human characters’ reactions toward Anat’s
violence.
Amico sees Anat’s role in the Story of Aqhat as that of a “self-centered
spoiled brat.” Similar to Ginsberg and Landy, Amico takes the episode of
Anat’s killing of Aqhat as a punishment for the latter’s arrogant attitude
towards Anat.67 This view is warranted on the basis that El does give Anat
the permission to kill. However, this view is only one among many perspec-
tives.68
Wyatt strongly rejects the idea of treating the Story of Aqhat as con-
veying moral values.69 He thinks that Anat’s behavior is “predictable and in
no way a reflection of inadequate or immoral theology.”70 Like Ginsberg
and Amico, he sees Anat as behaving according to her role as a hunter and
a war goddess. Wyatt asserts that there are no moral implications in Anat’s
violence. In speaking about Anat’s behavior as acting according to her char-
acter, Wyatt considers Anat’s violence as a reflection of her honesty and
being true to herself. He also sees her violence as a way to punish Aqhat’s
impiety.
Wyatt defends Anat’s honor against those who perceive her as an evil
goddess by saying that her character represents the vitality of realism. For
Wyatt, “realism” means that the “deities act out a drama in the myths which
involve the tensions and problems intrinsic to any society facing the stark
facts of history and environment.”71 In attributing Anat’s act as a reflection
of reality in human life, Wyatt downplays other evidence that points to the
negative portrayal of Anat’s violence such as the negative outcome of her
violence upon the earthly realm – human beings and nature.
Wyatt’s sensitivity and understanding of the ancient mentality, how-
ever, is commendable. He frequently speaks about the flaw of reading an
ancient text with a modern mindset.72 However, this position of defending
Anat’s honor, on the other hand, may create blind-spots and cause him to
lapse from his goal of being faithful to the ancient mindset.
Smith realizes Anat’s complexity. Like Ginsberg, Landy, and Amico,
Smith construes Anat’s violence in the Story of Aqhat as a case of human
67 Amico, “The Status of Women,” 465-66.

68 For a human perspective of Anat’s violence against Aqhat, see chapter five.
69 Wyatt, Myths of Power, 329, n.184; Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” in HUS, 237,
242, 254; Wyatt, RTU, 276, n. 117, n. 118.

70 Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” 254.
71 Wyatt, Myths of Power, 329, n. 184.
72 Wyatt, Myths of Power, 329, n. 184.
disobedience and divine punishment. He acknowledges that this case

counters the generally benevolent nature of the gods and is a rare exception
to the rule in Ugaritic mythic narratives.73 Smith, however, does not develop
further the argument regarding Anat’s violence in Aqhat as a case of divine
punishment. If Anat’s act toward Aqhat is an exception, then we have an-
other exception in the Ugaritic text: Athirat’s punishment of king Kirtu for
his failure to pay his vow to her.74 The view of divine punishment does not
take into account the role of human vengeance in the story. It is again one
of many points of view to assess Anat’s violence.
As this study will demonstrate, there is a high degree of complexity in
the portrayal of Anat’s violence in the Story of Aqhat that goes beyond ei-
ther negative or positive views. The various points of view regarding Anat’s
violence not only illuminate our understanding of the complexity and ambi-
guity of her violence but also force the ancient (and modern) audiences to
wrestle to establish their own ethical assessment of Anat’s violence in the
story. The reticence embedded in the story leaves the audiences to fill in the
blanks with regard to the understanding and implications of her violence.75
THE REVELANCE OF THE TOPIC AND ITS CONTRIBUTION TO

THE DISCIPLINE
In the first chapter of his book Engaging the Powers, Wink states at the outset
that “violence is the ethos of our times.”76 As true as this may be, however,
it is also true that violence is not just a modern phenomenon, but has its
roots in ancient civilizations, including Ugarit, Mesopotamia, and Palestine.
The violence expressed in the ancient literature such as in the Baal Cycle,
Enuma Elish, and the Hebrew Bible reflect the prevalence of violence in
the ancient world. In fact, Girard states that “every god or myth involves
violence.”77
Past scholarship tends to reduce the violence in the Story of Aqhat to
a one-dimensional picture, thus obscuring its complexity, ambiguity, and
sophistication. Since discovering the text’s ethical understanding of violence
in the story serves as a window into the ancient Ugaritians’ conception of
73 Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism, 31.

74 KTU 1.15 III: 25-30.
76 Walter Wink, Engaging the Powers: Discernment and Resistance in a World of Domina-
tion (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992).

77 Girard, Violence and the Sacred, 250. This statement may be exaggerating. Yet it
does reflect the prevalence and preoccupation of violence in ancient myths.

violence, this study attempts to recover this conception by investigating the

text through the method of characterization and point of view and through
the reconstruction of the hypothetical actual audiences to see how they
would view the acts of violence in the story.
THE SUMMARY OF THE STORY OF AQHAT78

The Story of Aqhat was preserved on three tablets (KTU 1.17-19) discov-
ered at ancient Ugarit (Ras Shamra) in 1930-31. It was stored along with all
the surviving myths from Ugarit in the High Priest’s House.79 The Story of
Aqhat is partially preserved. Approximately 430 lines from the original 840
lines (51%) are missing.80 This summary serves to provide a general idea on
the plot of the story and its gaps.81 We will provide a personal translation of
the important passages of the story in Part Two of this study.
The Story of Aqhat (KTU 1.17-1.19)
KTU
1.17 I
Ten lines missing.
78 For translations of the story, see H. L. Ginsberg, “The Tale of Aqhat,” in The
Ancient Near East: An Anthology of Texts and Pictures (ed. James B. Pritchard; Prince-
ton: Princeton University Press, 1958), 118-132; Th. Gaster, Thespis,Ritual, Myth and
Drama in the Ancient Near East (New York: Henry Schuman, 1950), 270-313; A.
Caquot et al, TO I, 419-458; Gibson, CML, 103-122; Michael D. Coogan, Stories
from Ancient Canaan (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978), 32-47; De Moor, ARTU,
224-266; Margalit, UPA, 143-166; Dennis Pardee, “The ’Aqhatu Legend,” COS
1.103: 343-356; Parker, UNP, 51-78; and N. Wyatt, Religious Texts from Ugarit (2nd
ed.; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002), 250-312.
79 Wyatt, “Ilimilku’s Ideological Programmes,” 779.
80 This estimation is based on the assumption that the text contains fourteen
columns of sixty lines each. See Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” 235.
81 The missing portions include the beginning of 1.17 column 1, columns 3 and
4, the beginning and the ending portion of column 6, the beginning lines of 1.18
column 1, 1.18 columns 2 and 3, some lines of 1.19 column 1, and the ending of
1.19 column 4. See Parker, “Aqhat,” 47-78; Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” 235-6.
The extant text begins with Dan’il performing a ritual 82 to the

gods. For six days, Dan’il repeats the same ritual. On the seventh
day, Baal draws near in compassion and discloses Dan’il’s desire
for a son. Then Baal intercedes El to grant Dan’il a son who
would fulfill a list of filial duties for his father. Baal voices the list
of filial duties. El then responds and promises to bless Dan’il
with a son. El repeats the list of filial duties.
Twenty lines missing.83
82 Gaster suggests the opening scene of the text as an incubation scene. i.e. The
supplicant lodges for a few days in the precincts of the sanctuary in order to entreat
the god and obtain the divine oracle in a dream or by some other manner. See
Gaster, Thespis, 270. Gray, Coogan, Aitken, and Parker also support this view. See
Gray, The Legacy of Canaan, 75; Coogan, Stories from Ancient Canaan, 28; Aitken, The
Aqhat Narrative, 81; Parker, “Death and Devotion,” 72. Margalit disagrees with
them. He sees no common points between the text of Aqhat and the incubation
theory which emerges from the Greco-Roman sources. See Margalit, UPA, 260-
266. Wyatt has a summarization of this debate. See Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,”
247-8.
83 These missing lines would contain the birth announcement delivered to
Dan’il on the basis of comparative evidence. The structure of birth narratives usu-
ally starts with a messenger’s pronouncement of the birth news, followed by the
joyful response of the father, then the spread of the news to the larger family or
community. This same structure appears in KTU 10 III: 36-8; Jer 20:15; Isa 9:5;
and Ruth 4:13-15. See Simon B. Parker, “The Birth Announcement” pages 133-149
in Ascribe to the Lord: Biblical and Other Essays in Memory of Peter C. Craigie (Edited by
Lyle Eslinger and Glen Taylor: JSOTSup 67; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1988).
Husser also devotes an article on birth narratives. He cites examples from the
OT such as the birth of Ishmael (Gen 16), of Isaac (Gen 18:1-15; 21:1-2, 7), of
Jacob and Esau (Gen 25:21-26), of Samson (Judg 13:2-24) and of Samuel (1 Sam 1-
2). Husser states that the following motif characterize these birth narrative: (1) the
child is born to a sterile couple; (2) an “initial prophecy” indicating the destiny of
the child is the key to reading the story which follows; (3) the naming of the new
born is endowed with particular importance such as define the mission of the child.
The extant text of Aqhat fits the first two motifs in the OT. See Jean-M. Husser,
“The Birth of a Hero: Form and Meaning of KTU 1.17 I-II,” in Ugarit, Religion and
Culture: Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Ugarit, Religion and Culture, Edin-
burgh, July 1994, Essays Presented in Honour of Professor John C.L. Gibson (Edited by N.
Wyatt, W.G.E. Watson and J.B. Lloyd; UBL 12; Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996), 85-
98.
1.17 II
A messenger of El sends the birth news to Dan’il and repeats the
list of filial duties for the third time. Upon hearing the news,
Dan’il’s face beams and he reiterates the list of filial duties for the
fourth time. Then Dan’il comes back to his house and dines with
the birth goddess Katharat for six days. On the seventh day, Katharat
leaves his house. Dan’il begins to count the months of his wife’s preg-
nancy.
Ten lines missing.84
1.17 III
Missing
1.17 IV
Missing
1.17 V
When the text resumes, Dan’il sees the coming of the craftsman
god, Kothar-wa-Khasis. Dan’il calls his wife Danatiya to prepare
a feast for the gods. Kothar-wa-Khasis presents the bow to Dan’il
who in turn presents it to his son, Aqhat.
Twenty lines missing
1.17 VI
The Goddess Anat sees the bow and longs for it. She first offers
Aqhat silver and gold in exchange for the bow. Then she offers
Aqhat immortality in exchange for the bow. Aqhat refuses both
and charges Anat with deceit. Then he asserts his own mortality
and adds that bows are for warriors, not for women. Outwardly,
Anat laughs out loud at Aqhat’s response. Inwardly, she begins to
plot evil against Aqhat. She rushes to the abode of El and vilifies
Aqhat.
Twenty lines missing.
84 The missing lines and the next two missing columns would have included the
account of Aqhat’s birth and the origin of the bow because both Aqhat and the
bow appear in the subsequent columns.
1.18 I
When the text resumes, Anat is threatening El to not rejoice be-
cause she would make his head run with blood and his old gray
beard with gore. El responds that he knows Anat, his daughter.
He gives Anat the permission to do what she desires and says,
“To resist you is surely to be crushed.” Upon obtaining the divine
permission, Anat sets her face to Aqhat and invites Aqhat to hunt
with her.85
Twenty lines missing.
1.18 II
Missing
1.18 III
Missing
1.18 IV
After the lacuna, Anat sets her face towards Yatpan, 86 the
henchman of Anat. She instructs Yatpan to kill Aqhat: She would
put Yatpan like a bird87 in her belt and they would circle above
Aqhat in the town of Abiluma (ABLM). Then Anat would aim at
85 In KTU 1.18 I: 24, Ginsberg translates: you are (my) brother and I am (your)
sister. Ginsberg, “The North-Canaanite,” 125. So do Gaster, Thespis, 290; Caquot,

TO I, 436; Gibson, CML, 111; Dijkstra and de Moor, “Problematic Passages,” 194;
Dijkstra, “Some Problems,” 207; de Moor, ARTU, 242; and Pardee, “The ’Aqhatu
Legend,” in COS, 348. This translation suggests the formal proposal of marriage in
the ancient Near East. Gordon adds that couples who were legally brother and
sister did not smack of incest in the ancient Near East as it would to us today. See
Cyrus H. Gordon, “Marriage in the Guise of Siblingship,” UF 20 (1988): 54. Parker
(1997, 64) and Wyatt refute the above translation. Wyatt suggests the reading:
“Come, brother, and I shall [ ].” See Wyatt, RTU, 279, n.132.
86 Watson suggests that the name Yatpan is associated with a trained bird of
prey. His name could be applied to a falcon, hawk or the like. See W.G.E. Watson,
“Puzzling Passages in the Tale of Aqhat,” UF 8 (1976): 371-8.
87 Parker remarks that the vultures are another prominent objects in the poem.
They consume Aqhat’s corpse, and later serve as one of the indicators of drought
and starvation for Dan’il and Aqhat. After the burial, they are the objects of curse.
Parker also notes that even though the vultures are a prominent theme, their ap-
pearance is limited in two (C and D) of the five sections of the poem as preserved.
See Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 136.
Aqhat and let Yatpan strike Aqhat twice on the head, three times
over the ear. Anat executes her plan and as a result, Aqhat’s
breath “goes off like a breath.” After her killing, Anat weeps.
1.19 I
The bow falls into the water and is broken. The text is unclear
about Anat’s reaction. She admits that she kills for the bow.
Meanwhile, Dan’il is doing his business as usual. Then he sees
that the barley on the threshing floor dries up. His daughter,
Pughat, perceives the ominous birds of prey circle over their
house. Then Pughat weeps in her heart. Dan’il tears his clothes
and adjures the cloud to send rain. Then he calls Pughat to lead a
donkey.
1.19 II
Pughat ropes up the donkey and lifts Dan’il up to the back of the
donkey. Dan’il then goes around to inspect the cracked earth. He
embraces and kisses the stalks. Then Pughat sees two messengers
coming.88 The messengers announce the news of Aqhat’s death.
At once, Dan’il’s body shakes and trembles.
1.19 III
Dan’il then imprecates the birds and asks Baal to break their
wings so that he can inspect their bellies to see whether there is
any remains of Aqhat. He repeats this act two times without suc-
cess. On the third time, Dan’il asks Baal to break ṣamal’s (the
mother of the birds) wings and finds Aqhat’s remains in her belly.
Dan’il weeps and buries Aqhat in MDGT. Dan’il then curses the
birds to not fly over the grave of Aqhat and deprive of his sleep.
1.19 IV
Dan’il curses the three towns near the site of Aqhat’s death in-
cluding the town of ABLM where Anat kills Aqhat. Then for
seven years, Dan’il performs the mourning rite for Aqhat. He
calls the mourners into his house. In the seventh year, he calls the
mourners away from his house. At this time, Pughat asks Dan’ilto
88 The manner of their walking is described in 1.19 II: 27-34. Gibson interprets
this manner as mime of Aqhat’s death by the two young messengers. See Gibson,
CML, 116, n. 3. So does de Moor, ARTU, 253; Margalit, UPA, 159; Pardee, “The
‘Aqhatu,” 352; and Wyatt, RTU, 300, n. 222.
bless her mission to slay the slayer of her brother. Dan’il gives his
blessing. Pughat then washes herself, puts on a hero’s outfit on
the inside, places a knife in her belt, and wears a woman’s outfit
on the outside. She then approaches the camp of Yatpan to
avenge her brother’s death. Yatpan’s servants perceive her as the
“woman we hired.” The text then tells us that Pughat drinks and
pours drinks to Yatpan. Under the influence of the alcohol, Yat-
pan boasts of his prowess in killing Aqhat. Then Pughat contin-
ues to give him drinks ... the text breaks off at this point.
CONCLUSION TO PART ONE

The goal of this study is to discover the ethical understanding of violence
implicit in the Story of Aqhat. To accomplish this, we adopt the combina-
tion approach: the text-oriented approach and the behind-the-text-oriented
approach. In addition, we place the focus on the aspects of characterization
and point of view within the text-oriented approach. The reasons for
choosing these two aspects are because of their significance and relevance
in the Story of Aqhat and the neglect of these aspects in past scholarship.
Past scholarship tends to view Anat’s violence in the Story of Aqhat as
a one-dimensional view without acknowledging the multiple points of view
which appear in the story. Since the author of the Story of Aqhat uses char-
acterization and point of view to influence the perception of his implied
audience concerning the violence in the story, we will explore the author’s
possible ethical understanding of violence through analyzing and question-
ing these two aspects.
Chapters 3 to 5 will present the characterization and the point of view
of the major characters in the story including El, Baal, Anat, Yatpan, Dan’il,
Pughat, and Aqhat. Chapter 6 will inquire into the perception of the hypo-
thetical actual audience about the violence in the story. We intend to deter-
mine whether the author’s employment of the two literary techniques has
its ethical influence upon the hypothetical actual audience’s perception of
violence.
PART TWO: IMPLEMENTATION
3 DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I):
EL AND BAAL
El occupies the highest tier in the Ugaritic pantheon. He is the Creator of

Creatures (bny bnwt) and the Father of Years (’ab šnm). Baal is the storm god,
the cloud rider (rkb ‘rpt), and the patron god of Ugarit. Both characters play
significant roles in the Ugaritic mythological texts. The tension and intrigue
between them has been a debated matter in past decades of scholarship.1
This tension is also reflected in their varied points of view concerning
Anat’s violence in the Story of Aqhat.
It is the purpose of this chapter to demonstrate how the author of the
Story of Aqhat uses El and Baal’s characterization and points of view re-
garding Anat’s violence to invite his implied audience to make ethical judg-
ments of her violence in the story. We will first investigate the author’s
characterization of El, El’s point of view concerning Anat’s violence, and
1 For instance, Marvin H. Pope maintains that El is the nominal head of the pa-
theon and his position is gradually replaced by Baal. See Pope, El in the Ugaritic
Texts (Leiden: Brill, 1955). The opposite view holds that El remains the supreme
head of the pantheon and Baal is subordinate to him. Those who share the view of
Pope include A. Kapelrud, Baal in the Ras Shamra Texts (Copenhagen: G. E. C. Gad,
1952), 64-93; Kapelrud, “The Relationship between El and Baal in the Ras Shamra
Texts,” in The Bible World: Essays in Honor of Cyrus H. Gordon (Edited by Gary A.
Rendsburg et al. New York: Ktav, 1980), 79-85; Cassuto, The Goddess Anat, 55-57;
U. Oldenburg, The Conflict between El and Ba‘al in Canaanite Religion (Leiden: E. J.
Brill, 1969), 101-163; Ashley, The “Epic of Aqht,” 291; Patrick D. Miller, The Divine
Warrior in Early Israel (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973), 48; Mar-
galit, UPA, 320-321; M. C. A. Korpel, “Exegesis in the Work of Ilimilku of Ugarit,”
in Intertextuality in Ugarit and Israel (ed. J. C. de Moor; Leiden: Brill, 1998), 108-110.
Those who take the second view include C. E. L ’Heureux, Rank Among the Ca-
naanite Gods (HSM 21, Missoula, Mo.: Scholars Press, 1979), 4, 5, 12; Frank M.
Cross, “The ‘Olden Gods’ in Ancient Myths,” in Magnalia Dei: The Mighty Acts of
God: Essays on the Bible and Archaeology in Memory of G. Earnest Wright (ed. F. M. Cross,
W. E. Lemke, P. D. Miller; Garden City New York: Doubleday, 1976), 331; Theo-
dore E. Mullen, The Assembly of the Gods: The Divine Council in Canaanite and Early
Hebrew Literature (HSM 24; Calif.: Scholars Press, 1980), 45, 84; J. C. L. Gibson,
“The Theology of the Ugaritic Baal Cycle,” Or 53 (1984), 207, 209.
53
El’s association with violence elsewhere in the Ugaritic texts. Then we will
investigate the author’s characterization of Baal, how he uses Baal’s reac-
tions after Anat’s violence to portray the latter’s violence, and then we will
explore Baal’s association with violence in other Ugaritic texts. The conclu-
sion will compare and contrast El and Baal’s points of view and their effect
upon the implied audience of the story.2
EL
The Characterization of El in the Story of Aqhat

The author’s point of view is bound up with the characters in the story.
How he portrays the characters influences his implied audience’s perception
of the story. Using Berlin’s character types, El is a type who displays limited
and stereotyped traits. He does not show a broad range of character traits
or a full spectrum of emotions and attitudes.
El first appears in the story as someone who responds to Baal’s inter-
cession for Dan’il to have a son.3 Then he appears in the scene when Anat
appeals to him to grant her wishes.4 In both accounts, El is not an initiator
of action but a responder. He does not show emotion and remains aloof
and passive. His dominant character trait is his father-like calmness. He
responds to his children’s needs, both in granting life and taking it away.
The author presents El as a deity of authority but also casts doubt on
his authority. On the one hand, El holds the ultimate authority. For exam-
ple, Baal needs to ask El to grant Dan’il a son.5 Anat needs to obtain El’s
permission in order to exact vengeance on Aqhat.6 In these two texts, El
appears to be both the life-giver and the life-taker. El’s authority is also re-
flected by his epithets. His epithet “Creator of Creatures” (bny bnwt) (KTU
1.17 I: 23) points to El’s creatorship. The epithet the “King” (mlk) (KTU
1.17 VI:49) reflects his kingship. The epithet “The Kind One, El the Good-
Natured” (lṭpn ’il dpid) (KTU 1.18 I:15) characterizes the attitude and the
experience of humankind in its relation to El. He seems to be in control of
2
A shorter version of this chapter entitled “Ethical Disparity of El and Baal in
the Story of Aqhat” in the Ugaritic Studies and Northwest Semitic Epigraphy sec-
tion, Annual Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature, Philadelphia, Penn., No-
vember, 21st, 2005.
3 KTU 1.17 I:34-48.
4 KTU 1.18 I:15-19.
5 KTU 1.17 I:15-33.
6 KTU 1.17 VI:46-55.
DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I) 55
the game and reserves the right to have the final say. In this respect, El’s
point of view seems to serve as the normative point of view of the story.
On the other hand, the author presents El’s authority in an ambiguous
manner. This is reflected in Anat’s appeal to El. As a subordinate deity to
El, Anat uses violent threats to exact the latter’s permission and suceeds.7
Her attitude toward El seems to raise questions about the nature of El’s
authority. When El gives in to Anat’s threat, is it calmness or rather impo-
tence? This ambiguity in the characterization of El’s authority reveals the
author’s ideological point of view: El’s authority is questionable. This ambi-
guity leaves his audience with a sense of perplexity about whether or not to
take El’s point of view as the normative point of view of the story.
In investigating El’s point of view of Anat’s violence, we will apply the
five levels of point of view set forth in our methodology section whenever
possible: perception, conception, interest, emotion, and contextualization.
The Perceptual Point of View

The author reveals El’s perception of Anat’s violence through his direct
speech to Anat. Below is the encounter between El and Anat.
The Encounter Between El and Anat. After Anat offers Aqhat
riches and immortality in order to possess the bow, Aqhat bluntly refuses.
He then adds a statement of afterthought insulting Anat for her gender.8 At
this point, the text tells us that Anat begins to plot evil against Aqhat. 9
However, she does not kill Aqhat immediately. Instead, Anat sets her face
toward El’s abode to obtain his permission to kill. Below is Anat’s speech
to El.
Anat Went to El (KTU 1.17 VI: 46-54)10

(46)’idk (47) [l ttn . p]nm . (46) Then (47) [she set her f]ace
‘m .’il .mbr11 . nhrm toward El at the source of rivers,
7 KTU 1.18 I:1-14.

8 KTU 1.17 VI: 16-41.
9 KTU 1.17 VI: 41-42
10 Unless otherwise indicated, the transcriptions in this study are taken from
Manfried Dietrich, et al, The Cuneiform Alphabetic Texts from Ugarit, Ras Ibn Hani and
Other Places (KTU) (Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1995), 47-62. Unless otherwise indi-
cated, the English translation in this study is my own.
11 KTU reads mbr. Based on the parallel passage in KTU 1.4 IV:20, I take the
word as mbk. Parker and Wyatt also correct to mbk. See Parker, UNP, 62; Wyatt,
RTU, 277, n. 122.
(48) [qrb . ’ap]q . (48) [in the midst of the strea]ms of the
thmtm . tgly . Äd ’il two deeps. She went in to the territory
of El,
(49) [w tbu . q]rš . (49) [and she came to the d]welling of
mlk . ’ab šnm the King, the Father of Years.
(50) [l p‘n . ’il . t]hbr . w tql . (50) [At the feet of El she]bowed and
fell.
tštḥ (51) [wy . w tkbd]nh . She prostrated her (51)[self and hon-
ored] him.
tlšn . ’aqht . Çzr She denounced Aqhat the hero,
(52) [tqll . kdd . dn]’il . mt . rp’i . 52) [Cursed(?)the child of Dan]’il, man of
Rapi’u.
w t‘n (53) [btlt . ‘nt . And (53) [Maiden Anat] spoke,
tšu . ]gh . w tṣḥ . hwt [she lifted up] her voice and she cried: “
(54) [xxxxxxxxxxxx] . (54) [ ]
’aqht . yšm[Æ] Aqhat rejoi[ced]
Anat, being a goddess herself, has the divine power to harm Aqhat, a
human being. Yet, she first seeks the permission of El, before taking her
vengeance. This fact suggests El’s supremacy in the Ugaritic pantheon. Anat
would not have killed Aqhat without El’s consent. Her gesture of bowing
down and prostrating herself to El further reinforces El’s exalted position
and reveals the fact that Anat is subservient to El in status.
The gap, unfortunately, interrupts the content of Anat’s speech. Based
on the context of the story, it is highly probable that the gap contains
Anat’s report of Aqhat’s offense and El’s first response to Anat since El’s
second response comes later in KTU 1.18 I: 15-19. El’s first response may
have included his reaction to Anat’s speech. This may have been of
amusement at Anat’s speech since when the text resumes, it describes
Anat’s response to El’s (first) speech, “do not rejoice...”
Anat Replied to El (KTU 1.18 I: 6-14)

(6) [xxxxxx] .w t‘n . [xxxxxxxx] And (16) [maiden Anat] replied:
(7)[xxxxxx]tk.y’ilm[. xxxxxxxx] “(17) [ ] your [ ], El (or
gods),
(8)[xxxxxx] ’al .tš[mÆ.xxxxxxx] (8) [ ] do not re[joice ]
(9)[xxxxx]’aÆdm .[xxxxxxxxxx] (9) [ ] I shall seize them [

]
(10)[xxxx. b] gdlt . ’ar[kty . xxxxx] (10) [ by] the strength of
[my long arm],
(11)[xl qdq]dk . ’ašhlk [. šbtk .dmm] (11) Your [skull], I shall make run
[with blood]
(12) šb[t . dq]nk . mm‘m . (12) The gr[ey hair of] your [be]ard
with gore. 12
w[ xxxxxxx] (13)’aqht.w yplṭk . And (13) let Aqhat [ ],
bn[ dn’il . xxxx] son of [Dan’il] to deliver you,
(14) w y‘Ärk . (14) And let him help you from
the
b yd .btlt . [‘nt . xxx]
hand of maiden [Anat].”
Due to the damaged condition of the tablet, it is impossible to restore
every single letter in Anat’s speech to El. We, however, can infer the main
idea of Anat’s speech in this text based on the parallel speech in the Baal
Cycle (KTU 1.3 V:19-25) where Anat threatens El with violence unless he
builds a house for Baal.
We can observe the similarity of the language by the juxtaposition of
the two texts.13 The only major difference between the two texts is in 1.18
I:13-14 where Anat asks El to seek help from Aqhat, a human being.
The Baal Cycle Aqhat

(KTU 1.3 V:19-25) (KTU 1.18 I:6-14)
(19) w t‘n . btlt . ‘n[t . bnt .] (6) [xxxxxx]. w t‘n . [xxxxxxxx]
bht (20) k . y’ilm . bnt [.] bh[t]k . (7)[xxxxxx]tk. y ’ilm [. xxxxxxxx]
’a[l . t]šmÆ (8) [xxxxxx]’al . tš[mÆ .
(21) ’al . tšmÆ . b rm [. h]kl[k] xxxxxxxxx]
(22) ’al . ’aÆdhm . b ymny . (9) [xxxxx]’aÆdhm.[xxxxxxxxxx]
x[xx]xx (23) b gdlt . ’arkty . (10) [xxxx . b] gdlt . ’ar[kty .
12 The commentators restore these opening lines of the column on the basis of
KTU 1.3 V: 20-25. For example, Gibson, CML, 110; de Moor, ARTU, 241; Parker,
UNP, 63, and Wyatt, RTU, 278.
13
Silimar languages are in bold print.
’amÆ [ṣ xxx] (24) qdqdk . xxxxx] (11) [x l qdq]dk .

’ašhlk . šbtk [. dmm] ’ašhlk [. šbtk . dmm]
(25) šbt . dqnk . mm‘m [.] (12) šb[t . dq]nk . mm‘m .
w[ xxxxxxx] (13) ’aqht . w yplṭk .
bn[ dn’il . xxxx]
(14) w y‘drk . byd . btlt . [‘nt .xxx]
In both incidents, Anat threatens to attack El with violence if El does
not comply with her requests. In both speeches, Anat employs violent
words to El - “I shall seize...” (’aÆd...), “I shall smash ... your skull” (’amÆṣ...
qdqdk), “I shall make your beard run with blood” (’ašhlk šbtk dmm). Being a
goddess of war, Anat means what she says and El knows that very well. El’s
refrain from confronting Anat with violence or punishing her for her irrev-
erence shows that he is either afraid to do so or incapable of doing so. In
speaking of using actions as an indirect way to shape a literary character,
Bar-Efrat indicates that, “the failure to act sometimes results from a delib-
erate decision to refrain from action and sometimes from weakness and
passivity.”14 In either case, the audience finds room to question El’s author-
ity as the supreme god of the pantheon.15
El’s reply to Anat does not draw attention to Anat’s violent words but
acknowledges that he knows her character. Then El gives Anat permission
to do what she wishes.
El Replied to Anat (KTU 1.18 I: 15-19)

(15) w y‘n . l¨pn . (15) Then the Kind One,
’il d p[id] El the Good-Natured, replied,
(16) yd‘tk . bt . (16) “I know you, daughter,
k ’anšt16 .w i[n . b ’ilht that you are like a man, and [among
goddesses]
14 Shimon Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art in the Bible (Sheffield: Almond Press, 1989),
82.
Longman, written communication.
15
Other translations include Coogan, “gentle,” in Stories from Ancient Canaan, 38;
16
Walls, “impetuous,” in The Goddess Anat, 192; Parker “desperate,” in UNP, 63;
Wyatt “pitiless,” in RTU, 278; Daniel Sivan, “meek,” in A Grammar of the Ugaritic
Language (Leiden, New York, Koln: Brill, 1997), 114. These renderings seem to
contradict Anat’s nature as a violent goddess. The word in the G stem means “to
(17) qlṣk . there is no (17) contempt like yours.

tb‘ . bt . Ænp . lb[k . Go, daughter, haughty of your [heart.
’aši . ’a] (18) Æd . d ’i¨ . b kbdk . (18) Sei]ze what is in your liver,
tšt . d[ i¨ b] (19) ’irtk . take w[hat is in] (19) your breast.
d¨ . yd¨ . m‘qbk Whoever resists you will surely be
crushed.”
In both accounts, El claims that he knows his daughter, that she is like
a man and that no contempt is like hers.17 The apparent difference between
the two accounts is in El’s decision. In the Baal Cycle, El refuses to grant
Anat’s desire to have a house built for Baal. In the Story of Aqhat, El gives
Anat complete freedom to do what is in her heart. El’s responses to Anat in
both texts point to his absolute freedom in exercising his authority. In this
sense, the decision of El in the Baal Cycle supports the notion of El’s su-
premacy and the refrain from action in the Story of Aqhat suggests El’s
questionable authority.18
El’s Permission. El’s permission to Anat serves as a window into his
perception of Anat’s violence. In El’s speech to Anat, the word “go (tb‘)”
(line 17) is in the imperative form. The verbs “seize and take (tÆd and
tšt)” also carry the same imperatival force since they follow after the initial
be like a man.” In the D stem, the word means “to be familiar” or “to be meek.”
The Akkadian equivalence is enēšu “to become weak,” in the context of physical
weakness, CAD, E, 166. The Hebrew cognate is ‫”אנוּשׁ‬unhealthy” or “weak,” BDB,
60.
The word occurs 6 times in the Ugaritic texts. Only in one occurrence (KTU
1.169:15) does the word mean “man.” In other occurrences (KTU 1.6 V:21; 1.15
V:27; 1.16 VI:36, 51), the word connotes different meanings including “furious”
(KTU 1.6 V:21) and “company” (KTU 1.16 VI:36, 51). If El intended the meaning
to be “you are like a man,” this may indicate Anat’s warrior-like nature. See Man-
fried Dietrich and Osward Loretz, Word-List of the Cuneiform Alphabetic Texts from
Ugarit, Ras Ibn Hani and Other Places (KTU: Second, enlarged edition) (Munster: Ugarit-
Verlag, 1996), 10. For a survey of the uses of ’anšt, see M. Dietrich and O. Loretz,
“ANŠ(T) Und (MIN¤T) im Ugaritischen,” UF 9 (1977): 47-50.
17 For the ambiguity in Anat’s gender, see Walls, The Goddess, 112-15159; Day,
“Why is Anat,” 141-146.

18 Korpel’s study shows that Ilimilku wrote the Baal Cycle before he wrote the
Story of Aqhat. Based on the internal evidence provided in these texts, El’s su-
premacy goes downhill in the Story of Aqhat. His refrain from action serves as one
of the indications of El’s decline in authority. See Korpel, “Exegesis in the Work,”
103-109.
imperative. The context suggests that El’s use of the imperatives expresses
permission.19 As Wyatt maintains, El merely concedes Anat’s autonomy.20
This is not exactly the same as giving Anat the specific order to kill.21 In-
deed, there is a fine distinction between El’s command and El’s permission.
If El commands Anat to kill, then he is the one who initiates the thought of
killing. On the contrary, if El permits Anat to kill, Anat is the one who initi-
ates the thought and El merely plays the role of giving consent.
On the one hand, El’s permission for Anat to kill softens the image of
El as a violent god more than effectively in the case of El commanding
Anat to kill. On the other hand, the difference between El’s permission and
El’s command is marginal because their results are the same – the death of
Aqhat. As the supreme god in the pantheon, El’s permission equals to his
command. Like a king, “to speak is to command.” 22 Though technically
speaking, El does not issue a specific command, in essence, he does. His
permission equals his authorization. By his consent, Anat obtains the li-
cense to kill. Thus, El’s permission provides a legitimate framework for
Anat’s violence. Anat’s threats force El to give in to her. Thus, both Anat
and El are responsible for the death of Aqhat.
We may compare El’s permission for Anat to kill with king Ahasu-
erus’s permission for Haman to kill (Esther 3:11). After Haman proposes to
king Ahasuerus to exterminate the Jewish race, king Ahasuerus gives Ha-
man the permission to do what he sees fit. Though Ahasuerus is not di-
rectly involved in the annihilation of the Jews, his permission makes him
culpable for the violence done to the Jews.
19 E. Kautzsch ed. Gesenuis’ Hebrew Grammar (2nd ed; trans. A .E. Cowley; Ox-
ford: Clarendon Press, 1910), 324b; Bruce K. Waltke and M. O’Connor, An Intro-
duction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1990), 571-573.
This use of the imperative also appears in 2 Sam 18:23, 2 Kgs 2:17, and Isa 21:12.
In 2 Sam 18:23, Ahimaaz said to Joab, “I am going to run anyway.” Joab replied,
“Then run (impv.).” In 2 Kgs 2:17, the disciples of the prophets at Jericho pressed
Elisha for a long time until he said, “’Send them’ (impv.), so they sent ...” In Isa
21:12, the watchman replied, “Morning came, and so did night. If you would in-
quire, inquire (impv.). Come back again.”
20 Wyatt, RTU, 279, n. 129.
21 Compare this non-specific “instruction” with El’s specific instruction to king
Kirtu about how to acquire a wife and El’s instruction to Yamm to attack Baal.
22 George E. Mendenhall, Law and Covenant in Israel and the Ancient Near East
(Pittsburgh: The Presbyterian Board of Colportage of Western Pennsylvania, 1955),

31.
Understanding the nature of El’s permission is the key to understand

his perception of Anat’s violence against Aqhat. By granting Anat his per-
mission, El takes Anat’s point of view regarding the encounter with Aqhat
since he is unable to perceive the event from Aqhat’s point of view. Infer-
ring from the context, El perceives Anat’s request as a case of an offended
deity seeking vengeance from a human offender. El’s granting of permis-
sion is also directly linked to El’s concept of divine-human order.
The Conceptual Point of View

A concept is the character’s worldview, attitudes, or ideology regarding an
event. The author reveals El’s concept of divine-human order through his
speech. After El’s permission, Anat is free to do good to Aqhat or to harm
him. Knowing Anat’s character, El apparently anticipates the latter. At the
end of his speech, El declares: “To resist you is surely to be crushed” (d¨ .
yd¨ . m‘qbk).23
The personal pronoun “you” is in the second person feminine singular
form (“k”) indicating the intended referent is Anat. 24 This phrase occurs
only here among all the surviving Ugaritic texts. 25 El’s point of view on
Anat’s violence hinges on the meaning of this phrase.
The word “crush” (d¨) comes from the root d¨¨. 26 The word d¨,
“thresh,” or “crush,” or “trample,” functions as an agricultural metaphor of
total annihilation.27 The Akkadian writers also use the word “dâšu” (tram-
ple) in the same sense as the Akkadian literature.28 The Hebrew uses the
word “‫( ”דושׁ‬thresh) to denote acts of destruction and annihilation. 29 We
23 KTU 1.18 I: 19, emphasis mine.

24 The “k” cannot refer to the second person masculine singular form since the
context indicates Anat as the reference of the personal pronoun. The second per-
son feminine plural form is “kn” and the second person masculine plural form is
“km.”
25 See Richard E. Whitaker, A Concordance of the Ugaritic Literature (Massachusetts:
Harvard University Press, 1972), 190; Dietrich and Loretz, Word-List, 64.
26 Sivan, A Grammar of the Ugaritic, 174.
27
CAD, D, 121.
28 E.g. māssu kīma rīmi adiš, “I trampled down his country like a wild bull;” daiš
muštarÆī, “he who crushes the haughty.” CAD, D, 121. Caquot and Sznycer think
that this word corresponds to Arabic da¨ä “to crush.” See TO I, 436, n. f. Margalit
adds that the infinitive absolute is not by chance. The author intends to invoke an
association with mtm ’amt, “the death of all I shall die” in KTU 1.17 VI: 38. See
Margalit, UPA, 322, n. 6.
29 E.g. “I will thresh your bodies upon desert thorns and briers,” (Judg 8:7),
may paraphrase El’s statement this way: “to resist you (Anat) is surely to die
a violent death.”
Since the phrase “to resist you is surely to be crushed” occurs only
once in the Ugaritic texts, its precise meaning is obscure to us. The phrase
may carry at least three levels of meanings:
1. El refers to Aqhat’s rebellion against Anat. Since Aqhat resists
Anat, he is surely to die a violent death;
2. The phrase refers to El’s response to Anat. If El resists Anat’s re-
quest, El will be crushed;
3. The phrase refers to both of the above. It is a general reference to
anyone who resists Anat including both Aqhat and El: whoever
resists Anat will die, both human and divine.
The phrase itself indicates El’s comment on Anat’s nature. It not only
reflects El’s perception of Anat’s violence and his concept of the divine-
human order but also offers the reason why El permits Anat to do violence.
If the first meaning is what El intended, then El thinks that Aqhat de-
serves to die because he rebels against Anat. For El, a human being like
Aqhat cannot challenge a deity. The statement “to resist you is surely to be
crushed” therefore reflects El’s perception of the divine-human order in the
universe.30 The statement points to the place of Aqhat in the larger drama
of the world. Humanity is vulnerable and in subjection to the gods. In this
sense, by putting Aqhat’s life at Anat’s disposal, El decrees Aqhat’s death.
If this is the case, this decree seems to counter El’s initial decree for
Aqhat’s birth. It also seems to contradict Baal’s intercession and the birth
goddess Katharat’s work in bringing about the birth of Aqhat. El’s relation-
ship to human beings reveals that El is a benevolent god.31 Why would El
want to “undo” his decree?
“Up and thresh, Fair Zion!” (Mic 4:13), “You tread the earth in rage, you trample
nations in fury,” (Hab 3:12).
30 This is not the same as saying that El allowed basic rules of morality to be
suspended in order to fulfill Anat’s whims as Handy maintains. For El, the basic
rule of morality is, “to resist Anat is to die,” not, “you shall not kill.” See Handy,
Among the Host, 125.
31 Three epithets of El bear witness of El’s relationship with human beings. The
first one is “Father of Humankind (’ab ’adm) (KTU 1.14 I: 37, 43; III: 32, 47; V: 43;
VI: 13, 32). This epithet reveals that El is the creator of human beings. The second
epithet “Creator of Creatures (bny bnwt) (KTU 1.17 I: 23) also points to El’s
creatorship. The third epithet “The Kind One, El the Good-Natured (lṭpn ’il dpid)
(KTU 1.4 IV: 58; 1.6 III: 4; 1.15 II: 14; V: 26; 1.16 IV: 9; V: 10, 23; 1.18 I: 15)”
characterizes the attitude and the experience of humankind in its relation to El.
This seeming contradiction between divine favor and divine retribu-

tion reveals El’s supremacy in the Ugaritic pantheon. El has the power to
decide on birth, so too he has the power to decree death.32 El indeed is the
one who controls the game board of the divine and human realms.
Other examples of deity as a giver and taker of life include Genesis 22
and Job 1:21. In Gen 14:4, Yahweh promises Abraham a son. However, in
Gen 22, Yahweh asks Abraham to offer this very son, Isaac, as a burnt of-
fering. Yahweh has the power to grant life and so he has the power to take
it away. Abraham’s role is to obey.
Job knows this concept quite well. When Yahweh causes Job to lose
all his children and wealth, Job responds in worship and said:
‫ויּאמר ערם יצתי מבשטן אמי וערם אשׁוב שׁמה‬
‫יהוה נתן ויהוה לקח יהי שׁם יהוה מברך׃‬
And he said, “Naked I came out from my
mother’s womb, and naked shall I return there;
YHWH has given, and YHWH has taken away;
May the name of YHWH be blessed (Job 1:21).33
In his response, Job acknowledges Yahweh as the one who gives life.
Because of that, Yahweh also has the right to take everything back. And the
job of Job is to obey.
If the second meaning is what El intended, then if El refuses Anat’s
request, he will suffer the consequences. In this case, making peace with
Anat takes precedence over preserving the life of Aqhat. At this juncture,
Aqhat and El stand at opposite ends of the hierarchy. El is the supreme god
Regarding El as the creator of mankind, see De Moor, “El, the Creator” in The Bible
World: Essays in Honor of Cyrus H. Gordon (ed. G. Rendsburg et al; New York: KTAV
Publishing House, 1980), 171-187; W. Herrmann, “El” in DDD, 524-525; Smith,
The Origins of Biblical Monotheism, 137.
32 Ackerman thinks that Baal is the one responsible for Aqhat’s birth. The gods
have a claim on one’s birth and death. Since Anat and Baal are closely related, Anat
has the right to take what Baal has granted. Ackerman’s argument assumes that
Baal and Anat’s relationship in the Story of Aqhat is the same as that in the Baal
Cycle. Also, she downplays the role of El in the birth episode of Aqhat. Baal serves
as the intercessor, but El is the actual life-giver. See Ackerman, Warrior, 197.
33 The Hebrew text is taken from K. Elliger and W. Rudolpg, Biblia Hebraica
Stuttgartensia, 5th ed. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1997). Unless otherwise

indicated, the English translations of the Hebrew text in this study are my own.
and Aqhat is a mere mortal.34 Again, the supreme god holds the destiny of
the mortal. From El’s point of view, asserting the gods’ superior position is
far more important than preserving the lives of human beings, especially a
disobedient human being. For El, it is not worth his effort to offend Anat
over a human rebel. This also reflects El’s non-omnipotent nature and
Anat’s exaltation. He has to weigh the options before he gives permission
to Anat. If El was omnipotent, he could have saved Aqhat’s life and at the
same time not worried about Anat’s threats.
Wyatt thinks that El’s concession to Anat’s autonomy does not reflect
a “morally bankrupt theology, but a realistic theology constructed on hu-
man experience.”35 This is a valid argument because such a judgment im-
poses one’s subjective point of view into an ancient mindset. Aqhat himself
is well aware of the reality of human life, particularly his mortality, and that
he will never become like one of the gods, possessing immortality.36 What
Aqhat does not realize is that his death will come the moment he challenges
the divine authority. This, too, is an unquestionable reality in the ancient
world.
In the Gilgamesh Epic, Gilgamesh, along with his friend, Enkidu,
challenges the authority of Ishtar by killing the Bull of Heaven. Later, Gil-
gamesh realizes the deadly consequences of such an act when Enkidu pays
with his life.37 Parker summarizes it well “it is the rules of the gods’ world
by which the game of life is played.”38 It is by the rule of El that Aqhat pays
the price of resistance against Anat. In fact, all of the human players in the
mythological texts need to obey the same rules or suffer the deadly conse-
quences.
It is possible that El intends the third meaning: whoever resists Anat
will surely be crushed including both divine and human beings. Since Anat’s
request is to crush Aqhat, it is logical to assume that El permits her to crush
Aqhat with violence. However, we cannot exclude the second meaning re-
garding El himself. El does take Anat seriously by granting her wishes. This
may indicate that El does not want to offend Anat over a human being.
When taking El’s concept of the divine-human order into consideration, his
permission for Anat to kill serves as a means to punish Aqhat and to assert
Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 126.

34
Wyatt, RTU, 279, n. 129; 409, n. 30.

35
36 KTU 1.17 VI: 34-38.
37 “The Epic of Gilgamesh” (Stephanie Dalley, Myths from Mesopotamia [Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1991], 77-90.

38 Parker, UNP, 11.
her authority as a goddess who is intolerable to rebellion in any way or

form.
El’s view of Aqhat as someone who resists Anat justifies an otherwise
questionable act of killing. Anat’s killing becomes an “authorized punish-
ment” in light of El’s proverbial view of the divine-human order in the uni-
verse.
The pattern of a male human beings’ refusal to show proper respect to
a goddess and the goddess’ subsequent punishment of him appears in sev-
eral ancient Near Eastern texts.39 For instance, in the Gilgamesh Epic, Gil-
gamesh refuses Ishtar’s proposal and the latter punishes him with the Bull
of Heaven. In the Story of Kirtu, king Kirtu fails to fulfill his vow made to
Athirat and Athirat causes him to contract a fatal illness. In the Story of
Attis, the goddess Cybele kills Attis for his unfaithfulness to her. In light of
El’s phrase “To resist Anat is surely to be crushed,” his permission for Anat
to kill is consistent with the broader ancient Near Eastern perception of the
divine-human relationship.40
This hierarchal relationship between divine and human beings is also
reflected in the creation accounts of ancient Mesopotamia.41 In Atrahasis,
the gods create human beings to work for them. When the human beings
become overpopulated, the gods solve the problem by killing them with a
flood.42 In Enuma Elish, the gods create human beings in order to lessen
their burdens. The purpose of human lives is to serve the gods’ agenda. In
both accounts, human beings are subordinate to the gods since their exis-
tence and are disposable. This divine-human order gives no room for hu-
man beings to question the deeds of their gods.
In the Story of Aqhat, El justifies Anat’s violence against Aqhat be-
cause, from his point of view, violence serves as a means to punish a dis-
obedient human being and at the same time to elevate Anat’s authority as a
goddess to be feared, including El himself.
The Interest Point of View

The interest vantage of the characters such as their well-being, profit and
loss, and the positive and negative outcomes of their actions reflects the
39 Amico, “The Status of Women,” 466.

40 Morton Smith, “The Common Theology of the Ancient Near East,” JBL 71
(1952): 144.
41 See S.G.F. Brandon, Creation Legends of the Ancient Near East (London: Hodder
& Stoughton, 1963), 104-8.

42 Tablet VI: 5-8. See “Epic of Creation,” translated by Benjamin R. Foster
(COS 1.111:400).
story’s evaluation of their actions. From this point of view, El saves himself
from Anat’s violent threats by permitting her to do what she desires. El
does not suffer from a broken skull by giving in to Anat’s threats. There is
an element of self-interest involved in El’s permission. Because of this self-
interest, it undermines the objectivity of El’s permission and raises the
question on the mind of the audience: “Does El’s decision really represent
the normative point of view of the story?”
The Emotional Point of View

Since the author portrays El as a type with limited character traits, there is a
lack of emotion attributed to him. Based on his conversation with Anat in
the story, we do not know whether El is furious or sad or feeling powerless
or simply indifferent. This lack of El’s emotional state creates a distance
between him and the audience of the story. As we shall observe in chapter
six, this emotional distance is associated with El’s status in the Ugaritic
mythological texts and the Ugaritians’ general perception of him as a re-
mote and inactive god.
The Contextual Point of View: El And Violence in Other Ugaritic

Texts
The contextual point of view investigates El’s view on violence in texts
other than the Story of Aqhat. As we see in the Story of Aqhat, El does not
oppose violence. He allows a third party to punish a human rebel through
an act of violence. This pattern of El using a third party to do violence also
occurs in other Ugaritic texts.
For instance, in the Story of Kirtu, El instructs king Kirtu to use force
in order to acquire a wife.43 First, king Kirtu has to prepare sufficient food
for the army, then they are to march for six days.44 On the seventh day,
when they arrive at the kingdom of Udum, king Kirtu is to ask the army to
attack (gr) its outlying towns and assault (šrn) the surrounding villages, and
to sweep away (š‘t) the men and women who are working in the towns.
They are then to stay silent for six days. On the seventh day, king Pabuli
will not be able to sleep and he will send messengers to king Kirtu to tell
them not to harass the Udumites. Then, king Kirtu will ask for Lady
Huraya, the daughter of king Udum, to be his wife.45
43 KTU 1.14 II:6-50-III:49.

44 KTU 1.14 II:30-III:1-3.
45 KTU 1.14 III:6-49.
The verbs “to attack” (root gry),46 “to assault” (root šr), and “to sweep”
(root š‘t), all connote the idea of force and violence. For El, it is totally ac-
ceptable and reasonable to use force or violence as a means to an end. In
other words, in his instructions to king Kirtu, El legitimizes the use of force
and violence. It is worth noting that in all his instructions to king Kirtu, El
himself never directly engages and participates in violence. He leaves this to
the other gods and human beings, yet we can still trace the source of this
legitimization of violence back to El.
In the Baal Cycle, El instructs Yamm to attack Baal.47 El also decrees
that Baal will be the slave of Yamm.48 Due to the fragmentary nature of the
tablet, we do not have an exact picture of the first conflict between Yamm
and Baal. 49 Their battle for supremacy, however, does break out when
Kothar wa-Khasis fashions two weapons for Baal to use against Yamm. At
the end of their battle, Baal emerges as the victor. Two deities then pro-
claim Baal’s kingship.50 Here in the battle between Yamm and Baal, El ob-
viously prefers Yamm to Baal, yet El himself never becomes a direct par-
ticipant in the combat between the two gods, which may show his ineffec-
tiveness as a supreme head of the pantheon. Although not a direct partici-
pant, El is one step removed from the conflict between the cosmogonic
deities.
Two incidents, however, may show El’s non-violent side. They both
also appear in the Baal Cycle. When Baal and Mot battle for supremacy,
their fighting is fiercely intense. At the point where the battle reaches a
stalemate, El intervenes on Baal’s behalf through Shapshu. El declares that
Baal is the winner. Baal will remove the throne of Mot and overturn Mot’s
kingship. Mot is afraid of the verdict issued by El and then acknowledges
Baal as the king and recedes to the background.51 Again, in the battle of
46 The root for (w)gr is gry meaning “attack.” Wyatt takes the root as gry based on
the Akkadian (gerû) and Hebrew (‫ )גרה‬cognates. See Wyatt, RTU, 193, n. 81. In Ak-
kadian, gerû means “to be hostile,” “to make war,” which occurs in the context of
hostility and fighting between two parties. See CAD, G, 61. In Hebrew, ‫גרה‬means
“to engage in strife,” “wage war.” See BDB, 173.
47 KTU 1.1 III: 24-5.
48 KTU 1.2 II: 36-38.
49 Mark S. Smith, Ugaritic Baal Cycle (UBL), vol 1 (Leiden, New York, Koln: E. J.
Brill, 1994), 117-18.

50 KTU 1.2 IV: 7-40. Since other gods assist Baal in attaining supremacy, Baal’s
kingship is a limited one. See Smith, UBL, 361.

51 KTU 1.6 VI: 9-32.
supremacy, El is not directly involved in any form of fighting or violence.

He even intervenes to stop the battle from going further.
Another incident appears when Anat approaches El to grant Baal a
palace. She uses violent words “I will seize you, I will smash your crown, I
will make your beard run with blood” to threaten El.52 The text reveals that
El does not become infuriated nor intimidated by Anat’s violence. 53 El
could have responded with violence or at least used violent words to curse
or scold Anat. Instead, El responds in calmness and acknowledges that he
knows his daughter. Through all her violent threats, El remains non-violent
in refusing Anat’s request. This method of dealing with Anat reflects El’s
reluctance to do violence.54 This reluctance may be also due to the fact that
he is too weak to use violence to respond to Anat’s threats.
However, we may not construe El’s reluctance to do violence as re-
flecting El as a non-violent deity. Although El is seldom a direct participant
in violence, at least in two incidents, he directs others to do so. This indirect
involvement in violence suggests that El does not want to “get his hands
dirty.” He uses intermediaries such as other gods to achieve his ends.
This use of a third party to do violence is not uncommon in ancient
literature. In the Gilgamesh Epic, neither Anu nor Ishtar fights against Gil-
gamesh and Enkidu directly. Instead, the Bull of Heaven plays the role of
the intermediary. It kills several hundred people before Gilgamesh and En-
kidu subdue it.55 In The Descent of Ishtar to the Underworld, Ereshkigal
uses her vizier, Namtar as the intermediary to send Ishtar sixty diseases.56 In
the Hebrew Bible, David orders his general Joab to put Uriah in the front
line of the battle so that Uriah may be struck down and die.57 Although
David is not the direct killer of Uriah, Yahweh and the prophet Nathan
think that he is. Therefore when Nathan later confronts David, he specifi-
cally points to David as the murderer, “You are the man!” (‫)אתה האישׁ‬.58 In-
52KTU 1.3 V: 22-25.

53KTU 1.3 V: 25-29.
54 El’s consort, Athirat, in the same way, never engages herself in violence di-
rectly. She does it with subtlety. Therefore, when king Kirtu fails to pay his vow,
Athirat inflicts him with a fatal disease. See KTU 1.15 III: 25-30.
55 See Gilgamesh Epic, Tablet VI: 117-156.
56 “The Descent of Ishtar to the Underworld,” translated by Stephanie Dalley
(COS 1.108: 382).

57 2 Sam 11:14-15.
58 2 Sam 12:7.
terestingly, when Anat attempts to kill Aqhat, she uses an intermediary,

Yatpan, to do the work.59
Pope thinks that El is peaceful and non-violent like the Mesopotamian
Enki/Ea.60 However, Ea is violent when he kills Apsu in Enuma Elish.61
This view is not tenable in light of the material concerning El we have ad-
duced above. Gibson describes El in this way: El is still very much active,
but active in diplomacy rather than in war, in settling disputes rather than in
welcoming conflict.62 Such interpretation, however, dissociates the source
of violence from the actual act of violence.
The epithets of El such as his own name “El” and “Bull” also reflect
him as a warrior associated with violence.63 Albright asserts that the name
“El” is an adjectival formation from the stem ’wl meaning “the strong pow-
erful one.” The substantive denotes “strength, force, power, might, mana.”
If so, this would parallel the meaning of “Bull.”64 The name “Bull” has the
meaning of strength, might, and fighting prowess.65
The later identification of El with Yahweh also suggests El’s warrior
nature.66 One cannot separate the warrior image from acts of violence. An
apparent example occurs in Exodus 15 where Moses and the Israelites
praise Yahweh’s military might against the Egyptian army. They praise
Yahweh as “Yahweh, man of war” (‫)יהוה איש מלחמה‬.
Though El seldom directly engages in violence, he is only one step re-
moved from it like a military general calling shots from safety while the sol-
59 KTU 1.18 IV: 27-37.

60 Pope, El in the Ugaritic Text, 45.
61 “Epic of Creation,” translated by Benjamin R. Foster (COS 1.111:391).
Longman, written communication.

62 Gibson, “The Theology of the Ugaritic Baal Cycle,” 210. Also Caquot and
Sznycer, Ugaritic Religion (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1980), 12.

63 Patrick D. Miller, Jr., “El the Warrior,” HTR 60 (1967): 418. Pope has sug-
gested the connotation of “fertility” or “the procreative power” of this word. See
Pope, El in the Ugaritic Text, 35-42. As Miller indicates, the word “Bull” has a dual
symbolism: fertility and strength, but primarily a symbol of strength since Baal, not
El, is the “fertility” god at Ugarit. See Miller, The Divine Warrior, 55. For other epi-
thets of El that reflect his nature as a warrior, see Miller, The Divine Warrior, 54-58.
64 The word can also be an original Semitic noun meaning “chief, god.” See W
Herrmann, “El,” in DDD, 274.

65 Miller, “El the Warrior,” 418-9.
66 For instance, the epithets of Yahweh “‫ ”יהוה צבאות‬and “‫ ”אל גבור‬may be El’s
epithets that reflect him as a warrior. See Miller, “El,” 425. For a historical study of
the theme “Divine Warrior” in the Bible, see Tremper Longman III and Daniel G.
Reid, God is a Warrior (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1995).
diers engaged in actual combat. Therefore, El is closely associated with vio-

lence elsewhere in the Ugaritic text. His permission for Anat to kill is not
out of his character.
BAAL
The Characterization of Baal in the Story of Aqhat

The author’s characterization of Baal is fraught with ambiguity because he
describes Baal primarily through “showing” – through indirect shaping of
his character, rather than through his direct speech or through his inner
thoughts and feelings or through the author’s evaluation of him. This indi-
rect shaping of the character requires a mental effort on the part of the au-
diences (both the implied audience and the historical audience), thus in-
creasing the active participation in the unfolding events.67
At the beginning of the story, Baal draws near to El in compassion
(ḥnt) and intercedes for Dan’il to have a son.68 This is the only explicit reve-
lation of Baal’s emotion or attitude in the extant text. Then he disappears
from the scene. When he reappears, it is after the death of Aqhat. At this
point of the story, the author records no speech or word nor any emotion
or inner thoughts of Baal. Instead, the author describes the diminished
condition of nature and the absence of rain.69 Since Baal is the storm god
who exercises power over vegetation and rain, the author attributes the ef-
fects of Anat’s violence upon nature directly to Baal through his aside given
in KTU 1.19 I:46, “no goodness of the voice of Baal” (ṭbn ql b‘l).
This absence of direct speech could be a purposeful device of the au-
thor to express Baal’s silent protestation against Anat’s violence. The author
uses the actions of Baal after the death of Aqhat to present the point of
view of Baal regarding Anat’s violence. After Dan’il realizes the death of his
son, he asks Baal to break the wings of the birds that have swallowed his
son’s remains. Baal does accordingly in silence.70 Although little is revealed
concerning Baal’s perception of Anat’s violence, his action after the death
of Aqhat speaks directly to the audience of the story. Ryken notes that
whenever a storyteller decides to let a character’s action do the talking, he
places the burden of interpretation on the audience.71 Because of this room
67 Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art, 64.

68 KTU 1.17 I:15-33.
69 KTU 1.19 I:28-33, 38-46.
70 KTU 1.19 III:1-38.
for interpretation, there leaves room for ambiguity. Is Baal sad? Is he angry
with Anat? What does he think of Aqhat’s death?
In these portrayals of Baal, there is a development in his characteriza-
tion. Before Anat’s violence, Baal appears to be a type with limited or
stereotypical traits. After Anat’s violence, Baal’s manifold actions make him
a full-fledged character. In the following section, we explore Baal’s percep-
tion and conception of Anat’s violence through the story’s description of
his actions.
The Perceptual Point of View72

The author spends one column describing the consequences of Anat’s vio-
lence upon nature (KTU 1.19 I:28-46). Since there is no direct speech of
Baal about his thoughts and inner feelings of Anat’s violence, these conse-
quences upon nature serve as an indirect reflection of Baal’s perception of
Anat’s violence. The author leaves room for the audience to build his or her
hypothesis about Baal’s perception of Anat’s violence.
Baal Causes Nature to Diminish. Upon perceiving the failure of
vegetation and the birds of prey hovering over her father’s house,73 Pughat,
the daughter of Dan’il, observes several phenomena occurring in the land.
Vegetation Diminished (KTU 1.19 I: 28-37)

(28) [bn]ši (29)‘nh . (28) Upon lifting up (29) her eyes,
w tphn74 [. š‘rm] and she saw [the barley]
(30) b grn . yÆrb (30) on (the) threshing floor dried up,
[ . xxxx]75 (31) yÇly . [ ] (31) drooped,
yÆsp . ’ib76 . krmm shriveled is the fruit of the vine.
72 An earlier version of this section entitled “How Ethical is Anat and How Do
We Know It? A Teleological View at Anat’s Violence in the Story of Aqhat” was
presented at the Pacific Coast Region of the SBL. Whittier, Calif., March 22, 2004.
73 KTU 1.19 I: 29-33.
74 From the root PHY, means “to see.” Sivan, A Grammar of the Ugaritic, 99.
75 Margalit (UPA, 132, 158) reconstructs the missing word as “gb‘l” which
means “fleece,” followed by Wyatt, RTU, 294. Dijkstra and de Moor think that the
“barley” [š‘rm] on the threshing floor dried up. They reason that at the time of the
year, when there is still grain on the field, the only crop which could be on the
threshing floor is the barley. They also note that a more general term “mrm”
(sheaves) is equally possible. See Dijkstra and de Moor, “Problematical Passages,”
200; de Moor, ARTU, 249, n. 170.
In a series of parallel statements, the narrator describes the effects of

Anat’s violence upon the land. First of all, the barley on the threshing floor
dries up (KTU 1.19 I: 29).77 Then vegetation droops (KTU 1.19 I: 30) and
the fruit of the vine shrivels (KTU 1.19 I: 31). In this passage, the three
subjects (š‘rm “barley”, [xxxx] on line 30, and yÆsp . ’ib . krmm, “the fruit of
the vine”) are synonymously referring to vegetation. The three verbs (yÆrb
“dried up,” yÇly “drooped,” and yÆsp “shriveled”) convey the idea that
Anat’s violence causes a progressive degradation in the condition of the
vegetation.
These three verbs form a semantic and conceptual link to the Hebrew
word ‫“ אבל‬withered.” In Akkadian, the word “abālu” means “to dry up.” It
appears in the context of the drying up of canals, water, fields and vegeta-
tion.78 Since ‫ אבל‬is sometimes paired up with ‫“ יבש‬dried up” in the Hebrew
Bible, their meanings coalesce. 79 In Hebrew, the words ‫אבל‬, ‫נבל‬, and ‫בלה‬
originate from one common root ‫ בל‬meaning “to diminish.” 80 Thus,
nature diminishes as a result of a misdeed.
In the Hebrew Bible, the word ‫ אבל‬often occurs in the context of the
withering of nature due to the wickedness of the inhabitants of the land
such as someone’s commitments of a murder or adultery.81 Rarely does the
76 Gordon thinks that the word ’ib perhaps is derived from the common noun
’ibb- “fruit.” See Cyrus Gordon, Ugaritic Textbook (Analecta Orientalia 38; Rome:
Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1965) (UT), 348.
77 The descriptions in this passage seem to take place around May, when the
rains have ended and dew becomes a source of water for certain plants. The cool
nights and moist air lead to the deposit of dew on the threshing floor. See J. C. De
Moor, The Seasonal Pattern in the Ugaritic Myth of Ba‘lu According to the Version of Ilimilku
(AOAT 16; Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag,
1971), 99. See also Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 160, where he compares this incident
with that of Judg 6: 36-40.
78 CAD A, 29-30.
79 G. R. Driver, “Confused Hebrew Roots,” in Occident and Orient: Being Studies in
Semitic Philology and Literature, Jewish History and Philosophy and Folklore in the Widest
Sense in Honour of Haham De. M. Gaster’s 80th Birthday (Edted by Bruno Schindler and
A. Marmorstein; London: W. C. L., 1936), 73, 75.
80 Ernst Kutsch, “‘Trauerbrauche’ und ‘Selbstminderungsriten’ im Alten Testa-
ment,” in Drei Wiener Antrittsreden (Edited by Kurt Luthi et al; ThSt 78, Zuruch:
EVZ-Verlag, 1965), 36. The German word for “to diminish” is vermindern. For the
meaning of these two words in Amos 1:2, see Shalom M. Paul, Amos: A Commentary
on the Book of Amos (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991), 40, n. 65.
81 For instance, Isa 24:4, 33:9; Jer 12:4, 23:10; Hos 4:3; Amos 4:7.
word indicate the mourning for a dead person.82 Assuming that the Uga-
ritian shares similar culture, language, and thought world with the Hebrews,
the suffering of nature in the Story of Aqhat can be seen as a reflection of
an unjust murder, not as mourning for the death of Aqhat.83
The motif of the effect of a misdeed as exemplified by the suffering of
nature is well-known in ancient Near Eastern literature.84 For instance, in
the Baal Cycle, after the death of Baal, there is the absence of rain as im-
plied by El’s speech (KTU 1.6 III: 1-9). The first forty lines are missing in
this column. Based on the remaining portion of El’s speech, the missing
lines include El’s reading of nature: If the rains have not returned, it indi-
cates that Baal is dead. The following lines record the alternative possibility
that if the rains return, then Baal is alive.
Nature Diminished after Baal’s Death (KTU 1.6 III:2-9)

(2) w hm . ḥy . ’a[liyn . b‘l] (2) But if Mi[ghtest Baal] lives,
(3) w hm . ’i¨ . zbl . b‘[l .’arṣ] (3) and if the Prince, Lo[rd of the Earth]
exists,
(4) b ḥlm . l¨pn . ’il . d pid (4) in the dream of the Kind One, El,
the Good-Natured,
(5) b Ärt . bny . bnwt (5) in the vision of the Creator of Crea-
tures,
(6) šmm . šmn . tmṭrn (6) let the heavens rain oil,
(7) nÆlm .tlk . nbtm (7) let the wadis run with honey.
(8) w ’id‘ . k ḥy . ’aliyn. b‘l (8) And I will know that Mightiest Baal
lives,
(9) k ’i¨ . zbl . b‘l . ’arṣ (9) the Prince, Lord of the Earth exists.
82 2 Sam 21:1-2 is a rare occurrence of land mourning for the death of a person
in the Hebrew Bible.

83 Additionally, the context of Aqhat does not suggest a judgment motif as in
the Hebrew Bible. The words ‫ אבל‬and ‫ יבשׁ‬in the Hebrew Bible carry the force
of judgment. In Amos 1:2, it reads: “Yahweh roars from Zion, and from Jerusalem,
he utters his voice. And the pastures of the shepherds wither (‫)אבל‬, And the top of
Camel dries up (‫)יבש‬.” Other passages which indicate a judgment context include
Isa 15:6, 19:7, 27:11; Jer 4:28; Joel 1:10-12.
84 Gibson and Walls also interpret the failure of vegetation following Aqhat’s
death as belonging to unjust murder and blood revenge. Gibson, “Myth,” 66.
Walls, The Goddess Anat, 206.
El then asks Shapshu through Anat to search the wells of the field
since they are parched (KTU 1.6 IV: 1-5). Anat begins,
Drought Appeared after Baal’s Death (KTU 1.6 IV:1-5)

(1) pl 85. ‘nt . šdm . y špš (1) Search the wells of the fields, O
Shapshu,
(2) pl . ‘nt . šdm [.] ’il . (2) Search the wells of the fields.
yštk (3) b‘l . ‘nt . mḥr¨t (3) Baal has stopped the wells of the
ploughed land.
(4) ’iy .’aliyn . b‘l (4) Where is Mightiest Baal?
(5) ’iy . zbl . b‘l . ’arṣ (5) Where is the Prince, Lord of the
Earth?”
(6) ttb‘ . btlt . ‘nt (6) Maiden Anat departed.
(7) ’idk . l ttn . pnm (7) Then she set her face
(8) ‘m . nrt . ’ilm . špš (8) toward the Luminary of the gods,
Shapshu.
(9) tšu . gh . w tṣḥ (9) She lifted up her voice and she cried,
(10) tḥm . ¨r . ’il . ’abk (10) “Word of Bull El, your Father,
(11) hwt . lṭpn . ḥtkk (11) decree of the Kind One, your Be-
getter:
(12) pl . ‘nt . šdm . y špš (12) ‘Search the wells of the fields, O
Shapshu,
(13) pl . ‘nt . šdm . ’il [.] (13) Search the wells of the fields of El.
yštk (14) b‘l . ‘nt . mḥr¨th (14) Baal has stopped the wells of the
ploughed land.
(15) ’iy . ’aliyn . b‘l (15) Where is Mightiest Baal?
(16) ’iy . zbl . b‘l . ’arṣ (16) Where is the Prince, Lord of the
Earth?’
In the Story of Kirtu, King Kirtu contracts a fatal illness because he
fails to fulfill his vow to the goddess, Athirat. As a result, his illness leads to
85 I am following Wyatt’s understanding of the root ply or plh “to search” be-
cause the word “search” echoes Shapshu’s word in line 20, “I will search...” See
Wyatt, RTU, 137 n. 91.
a drought in the land.86 In KTU 1.16 III: 1-16, after king Kirtu is sick, an
individual addresses another individual (possibly El addresses another god)
to investigate the extent of the drought:
Famine Appeared after Kirtu’s Illness (KTU 1.16 III:1-16)

(1) yṣq . šmn . b ṣ‘ . w y (1) He pours oil in a bowl and he (said):
(2) ‘n . tr . ’arṣ . w šmn (2) “Look, explore earth and heaven,
(3) sb . l qṣm . ’arṣ (3) travel to the ends of the earth,
(4) l ksm . mhyt . (4) to the edge of mhyt.
‘n (5) l ’arṣ . mṭr . b‘l Look (5) to the earth for the rain of Baal,
(6) w l šd . mṭr . ‘ly (6) and to the field for the rain of the
Most High.
(7) n‘m . l ’arṣ . mṭr . b‘l (7) Pleasant to the earth (is) the rain of
Baal,
(8) w l šd mṭr . ‘ly (8) and to the field (is) the rain of the
Most High.
(9) n‘m . l ḥṭt . b‘n (9) Pleasant to the wheat in the furrow,
(10) bm . nrt . k smm (10) (to) the emmer in the ploughed field,
(11) ‘l . tlm k . ‘ṭrṭrt (11) to the tlmk on the ridge.
(12) nšu . riš . ḥr¨m (12) The plowmen raised their heads,
(13) l `r . ‘bd . dgn . (13) up towards the Servant of Dagon.
kly (14) lḥm . b ‘dnhm . (14) “The food is spent from its storage,
kly (15) yn . b ḥmthm . (15) the wine is spent from its wineskins,
k[l]y (16) šmn . b q[b‘thm] (16) the oil is spent from its c[asks].”
In Genesis 4: 1-12, after Cain kills his brother, Abel, Yahweh says to
Cain,
‫ואמר מה עשׂית דמי אשחיך צעקים אלי מן־האדמה׃‬
‫ועתה ארור איה מן־האדמה אשׁר פציה את־פיה לקחת‬
‫את־דמי אחיך מידך׃ כי תעבד את־האדמה לא־תסף תת‬
‫כּחה לך נע ונד תהיה בארץ׃‬
86 See KTU 1.16 III: 1-16.

And he (God) said, “What have you done? The voice of the
blood of your brother is crying out to me from the ground.
And now, you are cursed from the ground, which has opened
its mouth to take the blood of your brother from your hand.
When you cultivate the ground, it will not yield its strength
To you, you will be a fugitive and a wanderer in the land.”
Another example is in 2 Samuel 21:1-2 where Israel suffers a famine
because of Saul’s murder of the Gibeonites.
ׁ ‫ויהי רעב בימי דוד שׁלשׁ שׁנים שׁנה אחרי שׁנה ויבקש‬
‫דוד את־פני יהוה ס ויאמר יהוה אלֹ־שׁאול ואל־בית הדמים‬
‫על־אשׁר־המית את־הגבענים׃‬
And there was a famine in the days of David (for) three years,
year after year. Then David sought the face of YHWH and
YHWH said, “(It is) to Saul and to his bloody house, because
He put the Gibeonites to death.”87
On the other hand, a good and righteous reign brings fertility to the
land. In the Prologue of the Code of Hammurabi, Hammurabi introduces
himself as a good and righteous king who heaps high abundance and plenty
and perfects every possible thing for the city of Nippur; who revitalizes the
city of Uruk and provides abundant waters for its people; who enlarges the
cultivated area of the city of Dilbat.88
In the Baal Cycle, after Baal revives from his death, El dreams “the
heavens rain oil, the wadis run with honey.”89
The opposite is true. In the Erra Epic, Erra, the god of plague and
lord of the underworld challenges Marduk’s reign and causes a reversal for
the city of Babylon from its supremacy to its ruin (Tablet IV: 40-42). The
text reads:
Woe to Babylon, which I made as lofty as a
date-palm’s crown, but the wind shriveled it.
87 See also Jer 12:4.

88 See “The Laws of Hammurabi,” translated by Martha Roth (COS 2.131:336).
89 KTU 1.6 III: 6-7.
Woe to Babylon, which I filled with seeds like

a Pine-cone, but whose abundance I did not bring
to fruition. Woe to Babylon, which I planted like a
luxuriant orchard, but never tasted its fruit.90
The difference in the consequences of a misdeed and a good deed is
also reflected in the covenantal curses and blessings in Deut 28. Some ex-
amples of the blessings of adhering to Yahweh’s commandments include:
the produce of the ground will be blessed (28:4), and the heavens will give
rain to the land in its season (28:12). The curses of disobedience to God’s
commandments include: the produce of the ground will be cursed (28:18),
Yahweh will make the rain of the land powder and dust (28:24), and an un-
known people will eat up the produce of the ground (28:33).
Thus, the misdeeds or good deeds of deities and human beings have
direct bearings on the condition of nature. Since Baal is in control of nature,
the drying up of the vegetation reveals Baal’s protestation against Anat’s
violence.
Baal Withholds Rain. The author attributes the lack of rain to the
absence of Baal. In so doing, he connects the suffering of nature to Baal.
This is an “aside” he provides to the audience. The author writes,
Drought Appeared (KTU 1.19 I. 44-46)

(44) bl . ṭl . bl rbb (44) No dew, no rain,
(45) bl . šr‘. thmtm . (45) no surging of the deeps,
bl (46) ṭbn91 . ql . b‘l . no (46) goodness of the voice of Baal.
In each line, bl (“no” or “without”) introduces the subsequent phrases.
The effect of Anat’s violence results in a progressive absence of water: no
dew (soft dropping of water), to no rain, to no surging of the deep (flood),
to no thunder.92 This absence of water in turn results in a cracked and dried
up earth.93 This indicates that a drought has come upon the land – a sure
negative effect on nature.94
90“Erra and Ishum,” translated by Stephanie Dalley (COS 1.113: 412-413).

91The word comes from ṭb, “good.”
92 Dr. Hunt, verbal communication.
93 KTU 1.19 II: 19-20.
94 This is true even if not a seasonal pattern as de Moor suggested. De Moor
suggests a seasonal relationship that this untimely drought takes place in late spring
when the sirocco, an extremely dry and hot desert wind, threatens to destroy the
From the author’s aside, he provides hints to the audience that Baal is
behind the vegetation and the drought problem. This diminishing of nature
points to Baal’s disapproval of Anat’s violence. The audience, however,
remains ignorant of Baal’s inner thoughts and feelings. Why does Baal dis-
approve of Anat’s violence?
Not only does Baal protest indirectly through causing nature to dimin-
ish, he also retaliates directly by helping Dan’il to retrieve the remains of
Aqhat.
Baal Helps Dan’il to Retrieve Aqhat’s Remains. After realizing the
death of his son, Dan’il invokes Baal to break the wings of the birds that
might have devoured Aqhat’s remains.95 Baal responds by helping him to
recover the remains of Aqhat as described in the following lines.96
Baal Helped Dan’il to Recover Aqhat’s Remains (KTU 1.19 III: 1-14)
(1) [gh .]w yṣḥ [.] (1) [He raised his voice] and he cried:
kn[p. nšrm] (2) b‘l . y¨br<r> (2) “May Baal break [the wings of the ea-
gles],
b‘l . y¨br [. Äiy . hmt] may Baal break [the birds’ pinions],
(3) tqln . tḥ<t> p‘ny . (3) Let them fall under my feet!
’ibq‘ [. ûbdthm . w] I will tear open [their livers]97 and
(4) ’aḥd. ḥm . ’i¨ . šmt (4) I will look whether there is any fat,
ḥm . ’i[¨] (5) ‘`m . whether there is any (5) bone.
’ab[p]ky . w . ’aqbrnh I will weep and I will bury him.
(6) ’ašt . b Ært . ’ilm .’arṣ98 (6) I will place him in the hole of the gods
of the earth.”
(7) b ph . rgm . l y[x]ṣa (7) The words have not left his mouth,
bšpth . hwt[h] nor his speech his lips,
future crops. De Moor, “The Seasonal Pattern in the Legend of Aqhatu,” SEL 5
(1988): 67; De Moor, The Seasonal Pattern, 175.
95 KTU 1.19 III: 1-39.
96 KTU 1.19 III: 1-45.
97 This could be referring to the stomach or innards. See Wyatt, RTU, 304, n.
238; Pardee, “The ’Aqhatu,” 353.

98 The Ugaritians consider the deceased as deified beings. See Pardee, “The
’Aqhatu,” 353, n. 109.

(8) knp . nšrm . b‘l . y¨br (8) Baal breaks the wings of the eagles,
(9) b‘l . ¨br . diy hmt . (9) Baal breaks the birds’ pinions.
tqln (10) tḥt . p‘nh . They fell (10) under his feet.
ybq‘ . kbdthm . w[yḥd] He tore open their livers and [he looked]:
(11) ’in . šmt . (11) There was no fat,
’in . ‘`m . There was no bone.
yšu . gh (12) w yṣḥ . He raised his voice (12) and he cried:
knp . nšrm . <b‘l> ybn “May <Baal> mend the wings of the ea-
gles,
(13) b‘l . ybn . diy . hmt . (13) may Baal mend the birds’ pinions.
nšrm (14) tpr . w du . Let the eagles (14) flee and fly away.”
Lines 7-9, “the words have not left his mouth, nor his speech his lips,”
serve as another “aside” or clue provided by the author to Baal’s perception
of Anat’s violence. Before Dan’il finishes his imprecation, Baal already
breaks the wings of the birds as if he cannot wait until Dan’il finishes his
words. This hasty response indirectly reveals to the audience of the story
that Baal dislikes Anat’s violence against Aqhat and is in a hurry to remedy
the situation.
Baal’s actions after the death of Aqhat reflect his perception of Anat’s
violence. Rather than siding with his fellow divine beings El and Anat, Baal
chooses to side with Dan’il, a human king. Baal’s threefold reaction towards
Anat’s violence – causing the infertility of the land, withholding rain, and
helping Dan’il to recover the remains of Aqhat, suggest Baal’s disapproval
of Anat’s violence against Aqhat.
Although the author is reticent in exposing Baal’s inner thoughts on
Anat’s violence, elsewhere in ancient literature the diminishing of nature
reflects an unjust act. We may presume that this reflection represents the
perception of Baal. For Baal, Anat’s violence against Aqhat is unjustified.
Therefore, Baal’s silent protestation against Anat’s violence finds its expres-
sion in his threefold reaction after the death of Aqhat.
Baal’s counter point of view of Anat’s violence forms a stark contrast
to El’s permission for Anat to kill. This disparity presents an apparent dis-
harmony in the divine realm. Therefore, it is difficult for the audience of the
story to perceive El and Baal as a unit. This disparity leaves the audience in
perplexity about the story’s ethical judgment of Anat’s violence. Whose
point of view is normative? El’s? Or Baal’s?

Although Baal is a god, his actions prove that he identifies with the human
characters more than with his fellow divine beings. Baal’s loyalty to Dan’il
before and after the death of Aqhat obviously puts him on the same side
with the human characters of the story. From the interest point of view,
this identification with the human characters draws the audience closer to
Baal. This closeness is in direct contrast to El’s siding with (or yielding to)
the divine character Anat and giving in to her threats. Yet, at the same time,
Baal’s silence seems to reflect his limited power in altering the situation. He
can only protest, but is unable to bring Aqhat back to life. This also reflects
the interest point of view that Baal’s point of view may not be the norma-
tive point of view of the story.
Relationship and Interest. The conflicting points of view between
the gods appear also in the Story of Kirtu. In this text, Athirat afflicts king
Kirtu with a fatal illness because of his failure to fulfill his vow made to
her. 99 El later creates a healer to remove Kirtu’s illness.100 El’s action di-
rectly conflicts with Athirat’s intent to punish Kirtu. Why does El want to
act against Athirat by showing favor to Kirtu?
The relationship between Kirtu and El may provide an answer. Being a
king, Kirtu enjoys a special relationship with El. The text describes Kirtu as
the “lad of El, (Çlm ’il)”101 and El as Kirtu’s “father (’ab).”102 When Kirtu
cries for his lack of progeny, El takes the initiative to come down to Kirtu
and inquire into his welfare.103 El not only instructs Kirtu about how to find
a wife, but also blesses Kirtu with eight children.104 El functions as a patron
or a personal god to Kirtu and often attends Kirtu’s needs. This is a special
relationship that causes El to show special favor to Kirtu and to act against
his own consort, Athirat.
The same question can be applied to Baal. Why does Baal show favor
to Dan’il and act contrary to El’s will in the Story of Aqhat? A closer look
at the relationship between Baal and Dan’il reveals that Baal is the patron
god or the personal god of Dan’il.
99 KTU 1.15 III: 25-30.

100 KTU 1.16 V: 25-28.
101 E.g. KTU 1.14 I: 41, 9.
102 E.g. KTU 1.4 I: 41, II: 6, IV: 6.
103 KTU 1.14 I: 35-43.
104 KTU 1.14 II: 6 - 1.15 II: 28.
This relationship is shown in the beginning of the story. The Story of

Aqhat begins with Dan’il’s six day sacrifice to the gods. On the seventh day,
Baal draws near in compassion and speaks to him:
Baal Interceded to El (KTU 1.17 I: 16-33)

(16) ’abyn at (17) [d]n’il . mt . rp’i (16)“The misery of (17) Dan’il, man of
. Rapi’u,
’anÆ . Çzr the sigh of the hero,
(18) mt . hrnmy . (18) man of Harnemite.
d ’in.bn .lh (19) km . ’aÆh . There is no son to him (19) like his brothers,
w . šrš . km . ’aryh and no scion like his kinsmen.
(20) bl. ’i¨. bn. lh. wm105 ’aḥh . (20) There is no son to him like his brothers,
w šrš (21) km . ’aryh . and no scion (21) like his kinsmen.
uzrm. ’ilm . ylḥm Girded, he feeds the gods,
(22) uzrm yšqy .bn . qdš (22) Girded, he gives drinks to the sons of
(the) Holy.
(23) l tbrknn . l ¨r .’il ’aby (23) Bless him, Bull, El, my father,
(24) tmrnn . l bny . bnwt (24) strengthen him, Creator of Creatures.
(25) w ykn106 . bnh . b bt .šrš . b (25) And let him beget his son in (his) house,
qrb (26) hklh scion within (26) his palace.”
nṣb107 . skn108 . ’ilibh109 . Who sets up a stela for his divine ancestors,
105 KTU notes that this word should be emended to km. See KTU, 47, n. 5.
106 Wyatt understands the word as from the root kwn “beget.” Wyatt, RTU, 255.
107 The structure of the following verses makes nṣb a participle. See Dijkstra and
de Moor, “Problematic Passages,” 175, n. 39; Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 49.

108 De Moor’s study shows that the function of the stela is to commemorate the
dead ancestors. See J. C. de Moor, “Standing Stones and Ancestor Worship,” UF

27 (1995): 1-20.
109 The term ’ilībh means “God of his father,” i.e. the appellation of the family
deity. This word is also attested in Akkadian as ’ilābi. See Avishur, “The ‘Duties,’”
51. Theodore Lewis argues that this word parallels in meaning to “Dingir a-bi” in
Ug V.18. The translation “divine ancestor” would fit both the pantheon lists and
this verse. See Theodore J. Lewis, Cults of the Dead in Ancient Israel and Ugarit (HSM
39; Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars, 1989), 58. Van der Toorn also identifies “’ilīb” as the
deified ancestors for the same reason as Lewis. He adds that the son sets up a stela
when the father is alive. Van der Toorn also notes that “setting up the stela of the
b qdš (27) ztr110 . ‘mh . in the sanctuary (27) a monument (for) his
clan;
l ’arṣ111 .mšṣu. qṭrh112(28) l ‘pr . Who brings out his smoke from the earth,
Ämr . ’a¨rh . (28) Who protects his step from the dust;
ṭbq . lḥt (29) niṣh . Who closes the mouth of (29) those who
revile him;113
grš . d . ‘šy . lnh Who drives out those who disturb him;
(30)’aÆd . ydh . b škrn114 . (30) Who takes hold his hand in drunken-
ness,
ancestor” is a set expression for the cult of the ancestors, which need not to be
taken literally. See Karel van der Toorn, Family Religion in Babylonia, Syria and Israel
(Leiden. New York. Koln: E.J. Brill), 160.
It is uncertain whether setting up a stela for one’s divine ancestors is performed
when one is alive. We only know of one incident in the Hebrew Bible where Absa-
lom erects a stela for himself while he is alive because he has no sons to do so for
him after his death (2 Sam 18:18).
110 The word ztr has no cognate in any of the Semitic languages. See Gray, The
Legacy of Canaan, 76, n. 1. Its translation varies. Gray takes ztr as a dialectic form of
Hebrew ‫“ סתר‬refuge,” see Gray, The Legacy of Canaan, 76; Gibson translates “sun-
emblem,” CML, 104, n. 4; Coogan renders, “a family shrine,” Stories from Ancient
Canaan, 33; Boda translates “thyme,” in “The List,” 10; van der Toorn translates
“symbol,” in Family Religion, 155; Parker translates “sign,” UNP, 53; Wright trans-
lates “ztr-object?” Ritual in Narrative, 48, and Wyatt translates “cippus,” RTU, 256.
Based on the parallelism to line 26, ztr represents some kind of symbol or sign
which parallels the word skn “stela” in line 26. Segart takes the word as “monu-
ment.” See Stanislav Segert, A Basic Grammar of the Ugaritic Language (Berkeley, Los
Angeles, London: University of California, 1984), 185.
111 Based on the context, the word denotes the “underworld.” See Wright, Rit-
ual in Narrative, 59.

112 “His smoke” is a metaphor for a man’s last breath. See Wyatt, RTU, 257, n.
31. This word also occurs in KTU 1.18 IV: 37 describing Aqhat’s death, “His life
went off like a breath, his soul like a sneeze, from his nose like smoke.”
113 This duty may appear as in the context of mortuary rite. See McAfee, “The
Patriarch’s,” 72. The dead does not necessarily indicate the cultic aspect of the act.
The son may simply defend the honor of his father whether he is alive or dead.
114 The image of a drunkard father is not unfamiliar in the ancient Near East.
Cf. In Genesis 9, Noah is drunk and his sons have to cover him. In another Uga-
ritic text “El’s Mrzḥ,” El has a hangover and two people have to carry him. See
Parker, UNP, 193-196. Eissfeldt is the first scholar who makes the connection of a
father’s drunkenness in this text to the cultic institution of Mrzḥ. See Eissfeldt,
m‘msh (31) [k ]šb‘ . yn Who carries him when (31) (he is) sated with
wine;
spu . ksmh115 . bt . b‘l Who eats his portion in the house of Baal,
(32) [w ] mnth . bt . ’il . (32) and his share in the house of El;
ṭÆ . ggh . b ym(33) [ï]ṭ . Who plasters his roof on the day of (33)
mud,
rḥṣ . npṣh . b ym . r¨ Who washes his garment 116 on the day of
mire.”
Then El responds to Baal’s intercession and pronounces his blessing
of progeny to Dan’il.117 After realizing his son’s death, Dan’il invokes Baal,
not any other deity, to break the wings of the birds to look for Aqhat’s re-
mains.118 It is this special relationship between Baal and Dan’il that most
likely causes Baal to act contrary to Anat’s violence. In fact, Baal’s loyalty to
Dan’il dominates his character before and after Anat’s violence.
“Sohnespflichten,” 268. For information about the Marzeah in the Ugaritic Texts,
see Lewis, Cults of the Dead, 80-94; Smith, UBC, 140-144.
115 Interpreters understand the word ksm in two senses. One is “emmer” or
“spelt.” The other option is “portion” or “share.” Since the latter rendering fits the
parallelism (mnth “share”) of the following line, therefore, I take the second option.
116 Pope suggests that the activities of repairing the roof and doing laundry are
related to funerary rituals. The roof may refer to the tomb or funerary feast. The
washing of the garment may refer to the orgiastic character of the celebration. See
Marvin H. Pope, “The Cult of the Dead at Ugarit,” in Ugarit in Retrospect: Fifty Years
of Ugarit and Ugaritic (Edited by G. D. Young; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns,
1981), 160 n. 6. The washing of garments is an act belonged to the feminine sphere
as suggested by El (KTU 1.4 IV: 61-62). Margalit suggests that the washing of the
garment is a cultic act. Thus, he links the word npṣ “garment” to npṣ gzr “the war-
rior’s garment” (Pughat’s garment) in KTU 1.19 IV: 44. He also cites 1 Sam 21:6
where David said to the priest of Nob that his men have abstained from women
and the clothing of the soldiers is ritually clean.
It is uncertain how the (sexual) contact of women is related to the ritual cleanli-
ness of the soldiers’ garment. Margalit’s observation offers the possibility to inter-
pret this act of washing as more than just a familial act. See Margalit, UPA, 279.
Wright and Wyatt are dubious about Margalit’s interpretation. Wright reasons that
since mud is the object being washed and not blood, therefore the cleansing is a
profane nature and not a cultic one. See Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 67. Wyatt states
that there is no need to see this garment as a military garment. He, however, does
not provide reasons for his statement. See Wyatt, RTU, 259, n. 39.
117 KTU 1.17 I: 34-48.
118 KTU 1.19 III: 1-41.
El’s action in the Story of Kirtu and Baal’s action in the Story of
Aqhat both show divine favor to their respective human devotees at the
expense of their fellow divine marriage partners.119 Smith’s insight may help
explain this phenomenon. Smith notes that some deities when functioning
as patrons of one group, may undertake the destruction of others. Smith
considers this phenomenon as an expression of blessing for humans. 120
Smith’s observation is interesting because it brings out an important princi-
ple: one’s loyalty influences one’s point of view.
This principle leads to its ethical significance: one’s perception of vio-
lence is directly contingent upon one’s relationship with the perpetrator (i.e.
the one who does violence) and with the victim of the violence. For El, his
commitment to king Kirtu causes him to act contrary to Athirat’s will. For
Baal, his loyalty to Dan’il accounts for his silent protestation against Anat’s
violence.
It is worth noting that El is the supreme god and Baal is his subordi-
nate. In the divine realm, El’s decisions determine the course of events.
Although Baal silently protests against Anat’s violence, he is unable to re-
voke El’s permission and alter the fate of Aqhat. This outcome reflects
Baal’s limited power. However, the author’s inclusion of Baal’s point of
view serves its critical function to the audience of the story. It makes room
for the audience to raise questions and to struggle to decide whose point of
view is the normative point of view.

In the beginning of the story, the text indicates Baal’s compassion toward
Dan’il for his lack of a son.121 After the death of Aqhat, no single word is
recorded of Baal’s emotional state. The audience can only infer Baal’s emo-
tion from his various actions. This indirect portrayal of Baal’s emotion puts
the task of interpretation on the part of the audience and creates an emo-
tional distance for the audience to gain assess into Baal’s thought world and
feelings.
119 Van Rooy thinks that there is an estrangement between Anat and Baal in the
Story of Aqhat. See H. F. van Rooy, “The Relationship between Anat and Baal in
the Ugaritic Texts,” JNSL 7 (1979): 85-95. However, a disagreement between two
parties is not necessarily an indicator of an estranged relationship. For example, in
the Baal Cycle, Anat opposes Baal when the latter attempts to challenge the verdict
of El regarding Yamm’s kingship (KTU 1.2 I), yet later she defends Baal’s kingship
by killing Mot (KTU 1.6 II).
120 Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism, 30-31.
121 KTU 1.17 I:16.
The Contextual Point of View: Baal And Violence in Other Ugaritic

Texts
Does Baal’s protestation against Anat’s violence mean that he opposes vio-
lence? The answer from both the iconographical and textual information is
negative. I. Cornelius’ study on the iconography of Baal has shown that
Baal is depicted as a menacing god and a serpent slayer in reliefs in the Late
Bronze and Iron Age I periods (1500-1000 BCE). As a menacing god, Baal
appears to raise his fist or lift his weapon threateningly over his head. As a
serpent slayer, Baal is depicted as someone holding a long spear attacking a
serpent.122 Both images involve violence.
The seals discovered in Anatolia and Syria also bear witness to the as-
sociation between the storm god and weapons, often the weapons are a
lance in the form of a shaft of lightening or a spear pointed toward the
ground. A battle-mace also accompanies the weapons. The image of Baal as
the storm god who associates with weapons and violence is depicted in the
sixteenth-fifteenth century relief of the “Great Stele of Baal.” This relief
presents Baal brandishing a battle-mace over his head in his right hand and
in his left hand, he carries a thunderbolt with a spearhead ending pointing
toward the ground. He wears a two-horned helmet and is depicted as a
“vigorous, young, graceful, athletic deity marching forward.123
From the textual aspect, Baal’s manner of obtaining kingship through
acts of violence suggests that Baal does not oppose violence. In the Baal
Cycle, Baal fights against Yamm, who symbolizes chaos, and Mot, who per-
sonifies death.124 He also annihilates the sea monsters, Leviathan (ltn) and
the Serpent (b¨n), who may be associated with Yamm.125
Baal’s weapons against Yamm are called “ygrš ” (may he drive) and
“’aymr ” (may he expel all).126 Both names are in accord with their func-
tions to defeat Yamm. Baal indeed uses the first weapon to strike the trunk
of Yamm and the second weapon to strike his skull. In this respect, Baal
serves as a protector against forces of destruction. His victories over these
powers portray him as a benefactor to the Ugaritians.
122 For descriptions and pictures, see Izak Cornelius, The Iconography of the Ca-
naanite Gods Reshef and Ba‘al: Late Bronze and Iron Age I Periods (c 1500-1000 BCE)
(OBO 140; Switzerland: Vandenboeck & Ruprecht Gottingen, 1994), 134-142, 161-
167.
123 Alberto R. W. Green, The Storm-God in the Ancient Near East (Winona Lake,
Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2003), 154-165.

124 KTU 1.2 IV:11-41; 1.6 VI:16-22.
125 KTU 1.5 I:27-31.
126 KTU 1.2 IV:11, 19.
Several incantation texts also point to Baal’s role as a protector and

benefactor of his people. For instance, in KTU 1.82:1-3, the author invokes
Baal to smite Tnn (a serpent) and to destroy the arrows of Reshep who
seems to be associated with the girl’s problem in the text.
People Invoked Baal to Smite the Destructive Beings (KTU 1.82:1-3)

(1) [x]mÆṣ . b‘l [. šx]y . tnn . (1) (May) Baal smite [ ] Tnn,
w ygl . w ynsk . ‘d[x] and may he arrive and pour [ ]
(2) [x]xy . l ’arṣ (2) [ ] to the land.
[. ’i]dy . ’alt . l ’aḥš . [A]lready, the curse I do not feel,
’idy . ’alt . ’in ly already, the curse does not exist in me.
(3) [x]b/dt . b‘l . ḥ` . ršp . (3) [Destroy],127 O Baal, the arrows
of Reshep,
bn . km . yr . klyth wlbh take note how he fires at his kid-
neys and his heart (?)
In KTU 1.119:28-36, people invoke Baal to drive away the enemies
that attack the city.
People Invoked Baal to Protect the City (KTU 1.119:28-36)

(28) y b‘lm . [’a]l [.]tdy ‘z (28) “O Baal, drive the strong one
l ¨Çrn (29) y . from (29) our gates,
qrd [l]ḥmytny . the warrior, [from] our walls.
’ibr y (30) b‘l . nšqdš . A bull, O (30) Baal, we shall consecrate,
mÄr b‘l (31) nmlu . a vow, Baal, (31) we shall fulfill,
dkr b‘l . nš[q]dš a ram, Baal, we shall con[se]crate,
(32) ḥtp b‘l [.] nmlu . (32) an offering, Baal, we shall fulfill,
‘šrt . b‘l . n[‘] (33) šr . a feast, Baal, we shall (33) feast.
qdš b‘l . n‘l . (The) sanctuary of Baal, we shall go up.
ntbt bt [. b‘l] (34) ntlk . the path of the house of [Baal], (34) we
shall go,
Presume the root is šbt “destroy,” which seems to fit the context of shoot-
127
ing arrows.
w šm‘ [. b]‘l . l . ṣlt[km] and [B]aal will hear [your] prayer.

(35) ydy . ‘z . l ¨Çrkm [. (35) He will drive the strong one from
your gates,
qrd] (36) l ḥmytkm[ ] the warrior, (36) from your walls …”
Other examples include KTU 1.100:9 and 1.107:39. In these texts, Baal
is among the gods invoked to cast a spell against the snakebite and to gather
the venom of the snake. In KTU 1.169, Baal is called upon to expel de-
mons. If the Rapi’u in KTU 1.108 refers to Baal, then the author adores
Baal’s strength, power, and rule.128
In all these texts, the ancient audiences perceive Baal’s military image
and thus his violence as a positive attribute. For them, Baal is a god who
intervenes in human history in humanity’s interest. The word “might”
seems to be a better representation of Baal’s violence.
Additionally, Baal’s epithets “’aliyn b‘l ”(Mighty Baal), 129 “’aliy
qrdm”(Mightiest of the Heroes), 130 and “dmrn ”(the powerful, excellent
one)131 all reveal his warrior image. This image is inseparable from victory
and violence. The epithet “Mightiest of the Heroes” testifies to the theme
of conflict among rival deities.132
128 The identity of Rapi’u is uncertain. L’Heureux, Avishur, and Loewenstamm
think that Rapi’u is El. Lowenstamm maintains that El bears the epithet of “mlk”
and only El fits the title “mlk ‘lm” (King of Eternity). See Samuel E. Loewen-
stamm, Comparative Studies in Biblical and Ancient Oriental Literatures (AOAT 204;
Neukirchen-Vluyn, Verlag Butzon & Bercker Kevelaer, 1980), 322. Dietrich and
Loretz consider Rapi’u as referring to Baal because Baal is associated with “healers”
(rp’u), “King of Eternity” (mlk ‘lm), and “the Strong” (g¨r). See M. Dietrich and O.
Loretz, “Baal RPU in KTU 1.108; 1.113 Und Nach 1.17 VI 25-33,” UF 12 (1980a):
179. For translations, see de Moor (who sees the text as an incantation), ARTU,
187-190; Yitzhak Avishur, Studies in Hebrew and Ugaritic Psalms (Jerusalem: The Mag-
nes Press, 1994), 280-81; Wyatt, RTU, 395-398. R. M. Good thinks that Rapi’u is an
independent deity since there is no evidence suggests that Rapi’u is a healer god.
For past survey of KTU 1.108, see Robert M. Good, “On RS 24.252,” UF 23
(1991):155. Because of Baal’s connection with the Rapiuma texts in KTU 1.20-22,
it is possible that Rapi’u can be identified with Baal.
129 KTU 1.4 V:59; 1.5 V:17; 1.6 V:10; 1.101:17-18.
130 KTU 1.3 III:14; IV:7-8; 1.4 VIII:34-35; 1.5 II:10-11, 18.
131 KTU 1.4 VII:39.
132 For analysis of these epithets, see Miller, The Divine Warrior, 39-45; M.
Dietrich and O. Loretz, “Die Ba‘al-Titel B‘l Arṣ und Aliy Qrdm,” UF 123 (1980c),
392-93; N. Wyatt, “The Titles of the Ugaritic Storm-God,” UF 24 (1992):403-424,
esp. 405. For the epithet “’Aliyn b‘l,” see Peter J. van Zijl, Baal: A Study of Texts in
Baal has his followers. Baal is commanded to take his clouds, his
winds, his bolts, his rains, together with his seven boys (šb‘t Çlmk) and eight
attendants (¨mn Ænzrk) and descend to the underworld.133 The Rapiuma text
mentions “the soldiers of Baal” (mhr b‘l).134 Another text also notes “the
divine helpers of Baal” (’il t‘Är b‘l).135 These groups of Baal’s devotees reflect
Baal’s role as a leader of his groups. The latter two texts point to Baal’s mili-
tary followers.
Baal’s violence is not only revered but also feared. When Athirat per-
ceives the coming of Baal and Anat, she reacts in fear and trembling as
shown in her speech,
Athirat Feared Baal and Anat (KTU 1.4 II:21-26)

(21) tšu . gh . w tṣḥ . (21) She raised her voice and she cried,
’ik (22) mÇy ’aliyn . b‘l “Why (22) has Mightiest Baal come?
(23) ’ik . mÇyt . b[t]lt (24) ‘nt . (23) Why has Mai[d]en (24) Anat come?
mÆṣy . hm [. m]Æṣ (25) bny . Would you murder me or [mur]der (25)
my sons,
hm [. mkly .ṣ]brt (26) ’aryy[.] Or [finish the g]roup of (26) of my rela-
tives?”
Athirat’s reaction reflects her perception of Baal and Anat both as
“murderers” (mÆṣ). However, this text provides a rare indication that Baal’s
violence can be viewed as a negative trait. The majority of the Ugaritic texts
portray Baal’s violence positively. Thus, his frequently invoked epithet
“Mighty Baal” fits the portrayal of his violence in the Ugaritic texts.136
Although Baal’s warrior image dominates his character, it is not por-
trayed as invincible. For instance, when Baal sees Mot, he shows fear and
immediately announces his surrender.137 His descent to the throat of Mot
proves his non-omnipotent nature. He obtains his kingship only through
Anat’s help. Even at the end of the Baal Cycle, it is Shapshu’s intervention
Connection with Baal in the Ugaritic Epics (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Verlag Butzon &
Bercker Kevelaer, 1972), 341-45.
133 KTU 1.5 V:6-9.
134 KTU 1.22 I:9.
135 KTU 1.47:26.
136 This epithet occurs 68 times and is the most common designation for Baal.
137 KTU 1.5 II:6-12.
that stops the stalemate between Baal and Mot. In his struggle to suprem-
acy, Baal fails to defeat Mot.138
Additionally, in KTU 1.12, Baal is described as being consumed by
“the Devourers.” The fragmentary nature of this text prevents us from
grasping its entire context, yet it is clear in this text that Baal does not
emerge as an invincible victor.139
In view of Baal’s association with violence, his protestation against
Anat’s violence is not so much due to his opposition to the idea of violence
but more because of his relationship with the victim of the violence.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

In the beginning of the story, both El and Baal agree to grant Dan’il a son.
Yet, later in the story, El revokes his decision and permits Anat to kill the
son. El’s divine favor becomes divine retribution. He then disappears from
the scene and Baal reappears. Baal’s reappearance is characterized by his
actions of protestation: causing the infertility of the land, withholding rain
and helping Dan’il to retrieve Aqhat’s remains. Thus, the story presents a
disparity of Anat’s violence in the divine world between El and Baal.
Both El and Baal do not object to acts of violence since both of them
are closely associated with violence elsewhere in the Ugaritic texts. In Anat’s
violence against Aqhat, El permits and Baal protests. El permits through
direct speech. Baal protests through direct and indirect actions. A major
premise that underlies El and Baal’s different points of view is the matter of
loyalty. Conflicting loyalties cause conflicting points of view. In the Story of
Aqhat, El’s commitment to Anat, his daughter, exceeds that of Aqhat, a
human rebel. Baal’s commitment to Dan’il, his devotee, takes precedence
over Anat, his sister and consort. Their points of view on Anat’s violence
differ because their relationships with the victim in the story vary.
The difference in the concept of divine-human order also helps ex-
plain the disparity between El and Baal’s point of view. El thinks that,
“whoever resists Anat will be crushed.” From El’s point of view, the divine
holds the rules of the game of life and the duty of human beings is to obey.
Therefore, for El, Anat’s violence is a case of divine punishment. However,
Baal’s silent protestation after Anat’s violence points to his disagreement of
El’s divine-human order. Since the diminishing of nature is often a reflec-
KTU 1.6 VI:16-35.

138
For translations, see de Moor, ARTU, 128-34; Parker, UNP, 188-91; Wyatt,
139
RTU, 162-68.
tion of an unjust deed, this most likely represents Baal’s point of view on
Anat’s violence.
The author presents two conflicting points of view in the divine realm
“divine punishment” and “unjust killing” to reflect the complexity and am-
biguity of Anat’s violence. For the audience of the story, El’s concept of
divine-human order seems to be the normative point of view since the au-
thor records it through direct speech. However, Baal’s silent protestation
through various actions serves as a critique of El’s “normative” point of
view.
The two conflicting points of view are also tied to the author’s charac-
terization of El and Baal. The author portrays El as a remote deity and por-
trays Baal as a personal god of Dan’il’s family. He establishes El’s authority
as the life-giver and life-taker, yet he also casts doubt on his authority
through Anat’s threats. He characterizes Baal as a compassionate god who
is only able to protest in silence. By leaving these ambiguities and tensions,
the author invites his implied audience to struggle to establish his or her
own point of view regarding Anat’s violence.
4 DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (II)
– ANAT AND YATPAN
Not only do El and Baal’s points of view of Anat’s violence show disparity,
the author also reveals the shift in Anat’s own point of view of her violence
before and after her act of killing. This apparent dissonance adds to the
multidimensional portrayal of Anat’s violence in the story.
The purpose of this chapter is to investigate how the author of the
story uses the characterization and points of view of Anat and Yatpan to
influence his implied audience concerning Anat’s violence. We will first de-
scribe the author’s characterization of Anat, then we will determine Anat’s
point of view of her own violence by comparing the nature and motive of
her violence before her act of killing with her reaction after the killing. Then
we will examine her violence against Aqhat in the light of her violence else-
where in the Ugaritic texts.
Lastly, we will unfold the characterization and the point of view of
Anat’s henchman, Yatpan, regarding Anat’s violence. The conclusion inves-
tigates the author’s possible intention in using Anat’s shift in point of view
and the outcome of her violence as a means to influence the perception of
his implied audience of Anat’s violence.
ANAT
The Characterization of Anat in the Story of Aqhat

The author portrays Anat as a “full-fledged” character since she displays a
broad range of traits, and about whom the audience knows more than is
necessary for the plot.1 In the Story of Aqhat, Anat is presented as a god-
dess who shows a wide range of emotions. For instance, she laughs when
hearing Aqhat’s insult and when she is about to kill him. She expresses an-
1 Berlin, Poetics and Biblical Interpretation, 23, 32.

91
ger and rage when she appeals to El to make him acquiesce to her request.
She also weeps after killing Aqhat.2
Not only does Anat display a wide range of emotions, she also pos-
sesses a variety of character traits such as covetousness, deception, and vio-
lence. She engages in multiple activities including negotiation, plotting,
hunting, and killing. Anat appears to be a “real” character with both virtues
and vices, like a real person living in the real world.
The Perceptual Point of View Before Anat’s Violence

Since the major characters in the story, whether divine or human, have a
point of view concerning Anat’s violence, it would be interesting to explore
her own point of view of her violence as a way to discover the nature of her
act. The author reveals Anat’s point of view through her confrontation with
Aqhat before her act of killing and through her own speech after the killing.
Before her act of killing, the story places Anat in a banquet scene. In
the banquet, Anat spots and covets Aqhat’s bow.3 Immediately, Anat begins
her plan to possess the bow. She first suggests the offering of silver and
gold in exchange for it. When that fails to persuade Aqhat, Anat offers im-
mortality. Below is a description of Anat’s offers and Aqhat’s refusal.
Anat Offered Wealth (KTU 1.17 VI:15-25)

(16) tšu . gh . ]w tṣḥ . (16) [She lifted up her voice] and she
cried,
šm‘ . m‘ (17) [l ’aqht . Çzr . “Hear, now, (17) [Aqhat the Hero],
i]rš . ksp . w ’atnk ask for silver and I will give (it) to you.
(18) [Ærṣ . w ’aš]lḥk . (18) [Gold, and I will send] (it) to you.
w tn . qštk . ‘m (19) [btlt . ] ‘n[t .] But give your bow to (19) [Maiden Anat],
qṣ‘tk . ybmt. limm4 your arrows to the Sister-in-law of the
peoples.”
KTU 1.17 VI:41; 1.18 I:7-14, 22, IV:39.

2
KTU 1.17 VI: 10-14.

3
4 The exact meaning of the phrase “ybmt limm” baffles the commentators. Gib-
son translates the “Sister-in-Law of Peoples,” CML, 108; Coogan translates the
“Mistress of the Peoples,” Stories from Ancient Canaan, 36; De Moor translates “Wan-
ton Widow of the Nations,” ARTU, 237; Margalit has the “Levirate-Wife of (DN)
Lim,” UPA, 150; Pardee has “Sister-in-Law of Li’mm,” “The ’Aqhatu,” 346; Parker
has “Sister of LIMM,” UNP, 60; Wyatt has the “Beloved of the Powerful one,”
RTU, 237. The meaning of the phrase is obscure. See Walls’ analysis of the term.
DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (II) 93
(20) w y‘n . ’aqht . Çzr . (20) Then Aqhat the hero replied,
’adr5 . ¨qbm (21) b lbnn . “The strongest trees (21) from Lebanon,
’adr . gdm . b rumm the strongest sinews from the wild ox,
(22) ’adr . qrnt . b y‘lm . (22) The strongest horns from the Moun-
tain goats,
<‘adr>mtnm (23) b ‘qbt . ¨r . <the strongest> tendons (23) from the
bull’s heels,
’adr . b Çl il . qnm the strongest reeds from the great marsh,
(24) tn . l k¨r . w Æss . (24) give to Kathar-wa-Khasis,
yb‘l . qšt . l ‘nt let him make a bow for Anat,
(25) qṣ‘t . l ybmt . limm . (25) arrows for the Sister-in-law of the
peoples.”
Anat ignores Aqhat’s suggestion and then offers Aqhat immortality in
exchange for the bow.
Anat Offered Immortality (KTU 1.17 VI:25-33)

(25) w t‘n . btlt (26)‘nt . (25) And Maiden (26) Anat answered,
irš . ḥym . l ’aqht . Çzr “Ask for life, Aqhat the hero,
(27) ’irš . ḥym . w ’atnk . (27) ask for life, and I will give (it) to you;
bl mt6 (28) w ’ ašlḥk . immortality, (28) and I will send (it) to
you.
’ašsprk . ‘m . b‘l I will cause you to count years with Baal;
(29) šnt . ‘m . bn ’il . tspr . yrÆm (29) With the son of El, you shall count
the months
Walls, The Goddess Anat, 94-107. The word “ybmt” is associated with Hebrew “‫”יבמת‬
(Deut 25:5-9, Ruth 1:15). This meaning refers to “sister-in-law.” “Limm” may be
linked to “hmlt” (the multitudes) based on the parallelism of KTU 1.5 VI: 23-4.
This parallelism also reflects that “Limm” may be associated with Baal. In view of
Anat’s kinship relationship with Baal, it makes sense to think that the epithet “Sis-
ter-in-Law of the Peoples” is related to Baal.
5 The author uses the word ’adr “strong,” at least four times, one is missing in
line 22. These materials suggest that the bow is a composite bow. Pardee takes ’adr
as a verb meaning “I will vow,” “The ’Aqhatu,” 346. This, however, makes Aqhat
the one to supply the materials, not Anat. See Wyatt, RTU, 272.
6 From bl and mt “without death.”
(30) k b‘l . k yḥwy . y‘šr . (30) Like Baal, he shall live indeed.
ḥwy . y‘š (31) r . w yšqynh . He shall be feasted, alive, (31) The min-
ybd . w yšr .‘lh strel shall chant and sing concerning him.”
(32) n‘m[n . w y]‘nynn . (32) [And she] said to him,
’ap ’ank . ’aḥwy (33)’aqht [. “Surely I will revive (33) Aqhat the
Ç]zr . [he]ro.”
The fact that Anat offers wealth and immortality reveals her inner
thought that possessing Aqhat’s bow may not be a “rightful” act in the first
place. If Anat thinks that she has the right to possess Aqhat’s bow, she
would have done so without making any offers in exchange for it.
We find a similar situation in the story of Naboth’s vineyard (1 Kgs
21). In this story, king Ahab covets Naboth’s vineyard and offers to ex-
change for it with a better vineyard or for money. Naboth refuses on the
basis that the vineyard is the inheritance of his fathers. So Ahab becomes
sullen and loses his appetite for food. Since the Law commands that one’s
land cannot be sold permanently because the land belongs to Yahweh (Lev
25:23), it explains Ahab’s sullenness. If Ahab thinks that as a king he has
the right to possess Naboth’s vineyard, he would not have asked to use
something else in exchange for it.
For Anat, the response of Aqhat catches her in surprise.
Aqhat Refused (KTU 1.17 VI:33-38)

w . y‘n . ’aqht . Çzr But Aqhat the hero replied,
(34) ’al . tšrgn . y btltm . (34) “Do not lie,7 O Maiden,
dm . l Çzr (35) šrgk . ÆÆm . to a hero (35) your lie is rubbish.
mt . ’uÆryt . mh . yqḥ What does a man get in the end?
(36) mh . yqḥ . mt . ’a¨ryt . (36) What does a man get as his destiny?
spsg . ysk (37) [l] riš . Glaze will be poured (37) [upon] the
head,
ḥrṣ . l `r . qdqdy gold on the top of the skull.
(38) [’ap ]mt . kl . ’amt . (38) [Surely] the death of all I shall die,
7 Spronk translates “Do not distort things” drawing upon the Hebrew
word ‫“שׂרץ‬to be intertwined.” See Klaas Spronk, Beatific Afterlife in Ancient Israel
and in the Ancient Near East (AOAT 219, Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker; Neukirchen:
Neukirchener Verlag, 1986), 152.
w ’an . mtm . ’amt and I shall die indeed.”

Aqhat bluntly refuses Anat’s offers of wealth and immortality. Some
commentators interpret Anat’s offer of immortality as a deception on the
basis that she has no power to do so.8 Others maintain that what Anat of-
fers is not immortality in the strict sense but a revivified life like Baal.9 Since
the text clearly indicates what Anat offers is a “life without dying” (blmt),
and not a revivified life, the second interpretation is dubious. Based on
Aqhat’s response of charging Anat with deceit, he apparently thinks that
Anat lies to him by making a promise she cannot deliver – the promise of
immortality.
At the conclusion of his speech to Anat, Aqhat adds the following
words as an after thought, further provoking Anat’s fury:
Aqhat Insulted Anat (KTU 1.17 VI:39-41)

(39) [’ap.m]¨n . rgmm . ’argm . “(39) [Also, anoth]er thing I will say:
qštm (40) [k l . ]mhrm. Bows (40) [are for] warriors!
ht . tṣdn . tin¨t (41) [b h g]m . Will women now hunt (41) [with it]?”
These last words of Aqhat betray his male superiority and gender
stereotype. Anat perceives Aqhat’s refusal to surrender his bow as inten-
tional rebellion (pš‘) and his insult of Anat’s gender role as an expression of
pride (gan). She replies to Aqhat:
Anat Intended to Punish Aqhat (KTU 1.17 VI: 42-45)

(42) ¨b . ly . l’aqht . Çzr . (42) “Come to me, Aqhat the Hero,
8 See Ashley, “The ‘Epic of Aqht,’” 371; Margalit, “Death and Dying in the Ug-
aritic Epics,” in Death in Mesopotamia (Edited by B. Alster; CRRAI 26; Copenhagen:
1980b), 243-254; Mullen, The Assembly of the Gods, 233-235; M. Pope, “Rezensionen:
Klaas Spronk, “Beatific Afterlife in Ancient Israel and in the Ancient Near East.”
UF 19 (1989): 452-63, esp. 457; Paolo Xella, “Death and the Afterlife in Canaanite
and Hebrew Thought,” in CANE vol. III, 2062-3; Wyatt, RTU, 275-276, n. 116.
9 The advocate for this view include Hendel and Spronk. See Ronald S. Hendel,
The Epic of the Patriarch: The Jacob Cycle and the Narrative Traditions of Canaan and Israel
(HSM 42; Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1987), 80. Hendel draws upon Tzvi Abusch,
“Ishtar’s Proposal and Gilgamesh’s Refusal: An Interpretation of the Gilgamesh
Epic, Tablet 6, Lines 1-79,” HR 26 (1986): 143-187. Spronk, Beatific Afterlife, 152.
Cf. Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 130, n. 21.
¨b ly w lk (43) [a¨b . ]hm . come to me and to you (43) [I will

come].10
l ’aqryk . b ntb . pš‘ If I meet you in the path of transgres-
sion,
(44) [xxxxx]x . b ntb . gan . (44) [ ] in the path of pride,
’ašqlk . tḥt (45) [p‘ny . ’a] I will fell you under (45) [my feet],
tk . n‘mn . ‘mq . nšm O you, gracious one, strongest 11 of
men.”
From Anat’s point of view, Aqhat, as a human being, should trade his
bow for her offering of wealth or immortality, whether in accordance with
his wishes or against his will. Aqhat’s refusal and his male pride challenge
the authority of Anat. Since Anat perceives Aqhat’s refusal as a transgres-
sion – transgression by rejecting her offer of exchange and transgression by
insulting her gender role, the killing of Aqhat serves as a divine punishment
for his rebellion.

In ancient Near Eastern thinking, values are directly associated with the
perception of the divine-human order, their violation being a transgression
because it breaches the harmony of this cosmic order.12 For the ancients,
piety involves surrendering to the divine realm and participating appropri-
ately in the divine-human order.13 Aqhat, by refusing to give up the bow
and by insulting Anat’s gender role, crosses the line of a divinely ordained
order. By killing Aqhat, Anat reasserts the divinity that Aqhat attempts to
challenge. Her killing accomplishes this objective and teaches human audi-
ences of the story to submit to the divine.14
10Other translations: “Attend to me and [I will tell] you (what I will do),” Gib-
son, CML, 109; “Return to me, and I shall return to you!” de Moor, ARTU, 240;
“Come back to me, [I will warn(?)] you,” Parker, UNP, 62; “Leave me and go away
[ ],” Wyatt, RTU, 277.
11 Or “wisest,” “cleverest.” See Segert, BGUL, 196.
12 Giorgio Buccellati, “Ethics and Piety in the Ancient Near East,” in CANE
3:1691.
13 Buccellati, “Ethics and Piety,” 1686, 1693.
14 Anat’s vengeance against Aqhat is carried out in the sense of retributive
vengeance which aims to punish the enemy. Words associated with this kind of
retributive vengeance include “blood (dm)” and “rebellion (pš‘).” See H.G.L. Peels,
The Vengeance of God: The Meaning of the Root NQM and the Function of the NQM-Texts
Anat’s conception of Aqhat’s rebellion echoes El’s conception of the

divine-human order. This perception of Aqhat’s rebellion and the concep-
tion of the divine-human order apparently justify Anat’s violence.15
Anat’s Motive Behind Her Act of Violence

Is divine punishment Anat’s primary motive to kill? In the encounter be-
tween Anat and Aqhat, the whole confrontation centers on the bow. The
punishment occurs later when Aqhat refuses to surrender the bow, but not
before. Therefore, Anat’s primary motive for killing Aqhat is to fulfill her
desire to possess the bow.16 For Anat, violence is the means to get what she
wants. Her own words confirm this motive.
In KTU 1.17 VI: 10, the text reads, “Upon raising her eyes, Anat sees
the bow.” The text explicitly tells the reader that from the very first sight,
Anat covets the bow.
Anat Coveted the Bow (KTU 1.17 VI:13)

(13) tṣb17 . qšt . bnt (13) She coveted the bow.
After her act of murder, she repeatedly says that she smites Aqhat for
his bow.
in the Context of Divine Revelation in the Old Testament (Leiden, New York, Koln: E.J.
Brill, 1995), 266. Both terms appear in Anat’s killing of Aqhat. The word “dm” oc-
curs in KTU 1.18 IV: 24 and “pš‘” in 1.17 VI: 43.
15 However, what complicates the portrayal of Anat’s violence is that Anat also
crosses the normal order expected of a deity. In the previous rituals in the story
such as the ritual done by Dan’il in the beginning of the story, the feast that Dan’il
offers to Katharat, and the feast for Kothar-wa-Khasis (KTU 1.17 I: 1-15, II: 24-
46; V: 9-39), humans have been making requests. Now Anat the deity is making a
request. Anat also violates the ritual process by making it threatening to Aqhat’s
life. Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 114-117.
16 Gaster thinks that the bow is of divine character since it was made by the
craftsman god and belongs to Anat originally. Therefore, Anat is anxious to recover
the property that is rightfully hers. The context of the story, however, does not
support this interpretation. Nowhere in the text does it suggest that the bow be-
longs to Anat originally. See Gaster, Thespis, 283.
17 The cognate in other ancient Near Eastern languages suggests this meaning
“covet.” Cf. Akkadian “ṣabu,” Aramian “ṣeba,” both mean “desire,” Arab “ṣaba,”
meaning “aspire to.” See Caquot and Sznycer, TO I, 430, n. m; Wyatt, RTU, 271, n.
98.
Anat Killed for the Bow (KTU 1.18 IV:40-41)

(40)’abn . ’ank . w ‘l . q[štk . mÆṣtk . [ (40) And for your bow, I smote you.
]
‘l] (41) qṣ ‘tk . ’at . l ḥ[ytk . For (41)Your arrows, you ceased to live.
xxxxxx]
Anat Killed for the Bow (KTU 1.19 I:14-16)

(14)‘l . qšth . (15)’imÆṣh . (14) For his bow, (15) I smote him;
‘l . qṣ‘th . hwt (16) l . ’aḥw . For his arrows, (16) I did not let him live.
Ginsberg states that it is not frustrated love that prompts Anat’s vio-
lence, but as repeatedly stated in the text, Anat kills for Aqhat’s bow.18 Oth-
ers also interpret Anat’s objective as a case of divine covetousness. 19 As
Ginsberg maintains, the text has repeatedly stated Anat’s objective of kill-
ing.
Based on the evidence supplied by the text, it is apparent that Anat
kills for the bow apart from any modern psychologizing. Her primary ob-
jective is to possess the bow. Being a goddess of war, it is not surprising
that the bow catches her attention. The punishment of Aqhat for his refusal
comes after Anat’s initial motive to possess the bow. For Anat, taking
Aqhat’s life is the means to bring him (and perhaps the human audience of
the story) into submission to her will – to surrender the bow. At the same
time, she wants to assert her authority as a goddess and warn him of not
rebelling against a deity.
The Perceptual Point of View After Anat’s Violence

Surprisingly, Anat’s reaction after her act of violence is not characterized by
joy and fulfillment, but by sorrow and unfulfillment. After Anat kills Aqhat
in KTU 1.18 IV: 27-37, the text continues:
Anat Wept (KTU 1.18 IV:38-42)

(38)‘nt . b ṣmt . mhrh20 . [xxxxx]21 (38) Anat in the slaying, her soldier [ ]
18Ginsberg, “The North-Canaanite,” 19, n. 41.

19Gaster, Thespis, 283; Kapelrud, The Violent Goddess, 66; Driver, CML, 8; Wyatt,
“The Story of Aqhat,” 251.
20 Parker translates “warrior” instead of “soldier,” UNP, 66. Margalit reads mprh
(his convulsions) based on line 26 of the same column rather than KTU’s mhrh,
UPA, 156. So does Wyatt, RTU, 287. The gap following this word makes either
translation irrelevant to our understanding of the lines.
(39) ’aqht . w tbk . yl[d . dn’il xxx]22 (39) Aqhat, and she wept. [ ]
(40) ’abn . ’ank. w ‘l . q[štk . mÆṣtk . (40) “and for [your bow, I smote you.
‘l] (41) qṣ ‘tk .’ at . l ḥ[ytk . xxxxxx]23 for] (41) your arrows, you ceased to live.”
(42) w Ælq. ‘pt . m [Æṣk . xxxxx] (42) And perished [ ]
The text indicates Anat’s response to her killing of Aqhat: she weeps!
Most scholars interpret Anat’s emotional outbreak as her remorse about her
slaying of Aqhat.24 In line 12 of the same column (KTU 1.19 I), Anat says
twice, “How bitter! How bitter!” (kmr, kmrm)25 – an expression of her emo-
tional state which accounts for her weeping as that of sadness rather than
one of joy.
Not only that, after her weeping, the text includes the description of
the loss of the bow.
21 Margalit reconstructs this lacuna into [wt‘n . bmt (.)] which is a mere conjec-
ture. Margalit, UPA, 332.
22 Gibson reconstructs this lacuna into yl[k . ’aqht.] and he translates “woe to
[(you). Aqhat]! See Gibson, CML, 113; Margalit reconstructs this lacuna into yl[d. ‘l.
umt] and translates “she bewept the chi[ld, a mother’s suckling,” UPA, 156, 332;
Parker gives up on the reconstruction and leaves the space blank. See Parker, UNP,
67. Due to the uncertainty of the text, I take this latter position.
23 Ginsberg, Gibson, Pardee, and Margalit all have a reconstruction different
from that of KTU ’s. They reconstruct lḥ[ytk . xxxxxx] as lḥ[wt. aqht] in which
Margalit translates “you did not l[ive (enough), O Aqhat.” See Margalit, UPA, 156,
332. Ginsberg, Gibson, and Pardee have similar translation: you did not live. In-
stead of lḥ[ytk], Parker has lḥ[wtk] and translates “I took your li[fe]” rather than
having “your life” as the subject. Parker, UNP, 67.
24 For example, Gaster, Margalit, Walls, and Wyatt. See Gaster, Thespis, 294;
Margalit, UPA, 337; Walls, The Goddess Anat, 196; Wyatt, RTU, 287. Gaster even
goes so far as to say that Anat does not intend to kill Aqhat. She means to revive
him afterwards. See Gaster, Thespis, 294. Margalit refutes Gaster’s interpretation.
See Margalit, UPA, 33. The seven-year period of death seems too long for Aqhat to
be revived again.
25 KTU restores line 7 (kmr [kmr]) on the basis of line 12. See KTU, 56. Also
see the translation of de Moor followed by Wright. De Moor, ARTU, 247; Wright,
Ritual in Narrative, 141-2. De Moor adds that this phrase occurs also in Isa 33:7, Ez
27: 30, Esth 4:1.
Anat Lost the Bow (KTU 1.19 I:1-5)26

(1)[l]’aqht (2)tkr27 . x[xxxxx]x . (1) [Concerning] Aqhat (2) [ ]
l qrb[ . x]mym (3) tql . into the midst of waters (3) it fell.
‘[nt xxxxxx]x lb . t¨br (4) qšt . [ ] broken was (4) the bow.
w[ xxxx]nr. y¨br (5) ¨mn28. [ ] broken were (5) eight.
The bow that Anat desires is broken during her actions. At the end of
her action, she does not get what she desires. Anat’s reaction of weeping
after the violence forms an ironic confirmation of her prior perception that
she has no right to possess Aqhat’s bow. The bow does not belong to her,
and after resorting to violence, she still does not get it. If the bow symbol-
izes Aqhat the person, then the loss of the bow equals to the loss of Anat’s
desire – Aqhat. If the bow symbolizes power, then the loss of the bow
represents Anat’s failure to obtain that power. Her weeping also makes an
interesting twist to her prior perception of her violence as one of divine
punishment.
Is Anat weeping for the death of Aqhat or is she weeping for her lost
bow? If Anat weeps for the death of Aqhat, this would contradict her initial
intention to kill Aqhat. Based on Anat’s motive in killing Aqhat, it is likely
that she weeps for the broken bow since Anat has put so much effort into
acquiring it, yet in the end does not succeed in winning the expected object
of her attention. Instead she feels failure, anger, embarrassment, and loss.
These unhappy emotions suggest that Anat’s violence against Aqhat does
not bring the expected satisfaction to her.
26 Cooper thinks that the beginning of KTU 1.19 is among the most difficult
passages in Ugaritic literature. Alan Cooper, “Two Exegetical Notes on AQHT,”

UF 20 (1988): 19.
27 Gibson reads wtrd rather than KTU’s tkrb. He translates “and (the bow) came
down.” See Gibson, CML, 113; Wyatt suggests that the original reading of the first
seven lines of this column is indistinct, with a square of text missing from the mid-
dle. Wyatt, RTU, 288, n. 167. Del Olmo Lete, followed by Cooper, both leave the
word untranslated because the root krb does not exist in the Ugaritic language. Del
Olmo Lete, Mitos, 345-6 and Cooper, “Two Exegetical Notes,” 20. Since the read-
ing is indistinct, any attempt to restore the word runs the risk of conjecture.
28 Pardee translates “... the eight [...] were broken ... Pardee takes this word as
the subject of the verb in the previous line based on the parallel construction in
lines 3 and 4. His interpretation makes the most sense. Pardee, “The ’Aqhatu,” 350.
Gibson also understands this word as “eight.” His translation, however, is too
vague to tell whether this word is the subject or the object of the verb in line 4.
Gibson, CML, 133.
Before her act of violence, Anat shares the same view with El that
whoever resists her should surely be crushed. She justifies her violence by
perceiving Aqhat as a transgressor. After her act of violence, the extant text
does not indicate Anat’s inner thoughts. Yet her weeping and the loss of the
bow seem to suggest the futility of her violence. This outcome reflects that
Anat does not perceive that the use of her violence in this context has been
an effective means to achieve her goal. This outcome may also reflect the
author’s ideology: Violence is not always justified as the means to an end.

Unlike other divine characters in the story, Anat’s emotion is unreservedly
expressed and emphasized by the author. Anat displays a wide range of
emotions including laughing, raging, and weeping. These emotions depict
her as a “real” character. Her weeping after killing Aqhat is highly instruc-
tive to the audience’s perception of her violence. Her weeping for the lost
bow does not add credibility to her violence, but serves to undermine it.
Her unrestrained emotion also puts her credibility in question.

It is no accident that the author includes Anat’s weeping and the loss of the
bow as the result of her violence as a part of the story. The author seems to
use her weeping and her failure to possess the bow to contrast with her
previous perception before her violence and casts doubt on her ability to
obtain the object of her desire. This outcome does not reflect positively on
Anat’s character nor on her competency. The failure of getting the bow
leaves an imprint on the mind of the audience more strongly than Anat’s
previous perception of Aqhat as a transgressor since the failure is the out-
come of her violence. This interest point of view shapes the audience’s re-
sponse toward Anat’s violence as a negative act.
THE CONTEXTUAL POINT OF VIEW: ANAT AND VIOLENCE IN

OTHER UGARITIC TEXTS
Does the outcome of weeping and losing the bow suggest that violence may
not be an effective means to accomplish Anat’s goals in all circumstances?
To what end does Anat employ violence in other contexts? A glimpse of
Anat’s association with violence elsewhere in the Ugaritic texts throws light
onto these questions.
Many commentators have noted Anat’s close affinity with violence.29

Anat’s violence is related to her image as a warrior. This image is reflected
in both iconography and texts. 30 Kang considers Anat as one of the
“mythic-historic warriors” who were also known to other cultures. Her ico-
nography depicts her as a divine warrior.31 Based on Keel and Uelinger’s
study on the images of the goddesses in ancient Syria,32 the prevalence of
political and warrior deities characterizes the period of the Late Bronze
Age.33 Most of Anat’s appearance during this period depicts her as a warrior
goddess wearing an atef-crown,34 standing on a war horse, or sometimes
striding over a fallen enemy.35
In another stele, Anat is shown in a sitting pose, brandishing a branch
in her right hand and holding a shield and a spear in her left. Her pose re-
sembles the enthroned male gods, but her weapons and the posture of her
arms are identical to those of the male god Reshep as shown in the Egyp-
tian stelae of the New Kingdom.36 In this sense, Anat is the female version
of a male warrior god.
Wyatt maintains that Anat’s warlike character is essentially the heroic
quality of a king. Her participation in the head smashing role is a stereotypi-
cal image of royal power as reinforced by her fourfold epithets “Mistress of
29 For example, Kapelrud, The Violent Goddess, 48-82; Ashley, “The ‘Epic of
Aqht,’” 309-315; Bowman, “The Goddess Anat,” 195-200; Amico, “The Status of
Women,” 455-492; Margalit, UPA, 477; Walls, The Goddess Anat, 161-210. Handy,
Among the Host, 122-126.
30 Eaton, “The Goddess Anat,” 104-128; N. Wyatt, “The ‘Anat Stela from Uga-
rit and Its Ramifications,” UF 16 (1984): 327-337.

31 Sa-Moon Kang, Divine War in the Old Testament and in the Ancient Near East
(Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1989), 78-9.

32 Othmar Keel and Christopher Uelinger, Gods, Goddesses, and Images of God in
Ancient Israel (trans. Thomas H. Trapp; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1998), 49-108.

33 Keel and Uelinger, Gods, Goddesses, v.
34 The atef-crown represents royalty. Urs Winter, Frau und Gottin: Exegetische und
ikonographische Studien zum weiblichen Gottesbild im Alten Israel und in dessen Umwelt
(OBO 53; Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht Gottingen: Universitatsverlag Freiburg
Schweiz, 1983), 228.
35 Keel and Uelinger, Gods, Goddesses, p. 67, fig. 71; p. 87, fig. 107, 108, 109;
p.88, fig. 110; p. 141, fig. 164a, 164b, 164c. In the Late Bronze Age, the horse was
used to convey exclusively military connotations, Keel and Uelinger, Gods, Goddesses,
68.
36 Ora Negbi, Canaanite Gods in Metal (Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, 1976), 85.
kingship, Mistress of dominion, Mistress of high heavens and Mistress of

the royal crown” in KTU1.108:6-8.37
The Exaltation of Anat (KTU 1.108:6-8)

(6) w tšt . ‘nt . g¨r . (6) And may Anat of g¨r38 drink,
b‘lt . mlk . the Lady39 of kingship,
b‘ (7) lt . drkt . L(7)ady of dominion,
b‘lt . šmm . rmm Lady of high heavens,
(8) [b‘]lt . kp¨ (8) Lady of the royal crown.40
The textual evidence also reflects Anat’s warrior image. For example,
in KTU 1.10, Baal describes Anat as follows:
Baal Praised Anat (KTU 1.10 II:20-25)

(20) ḥwt . ’aÆt . wnark (20) Life, sister, and longevity be yours!
(21) qrn . dbatk . btlt . ‘nt (21) The horns of your power, maiden
Anat,
(22) qrn . dbatk . b‘l . ymšḥ (22) The horns of your power, let Baal
anoint,
37 Wyatt, “The ‘Anat,’” 331-333.

38 Ug. g¨r. Spronk translates “Anat of Gathar,” see Beatific Afterlife, 178; Tarragon
translates “Anat de Gathar,” see TO II, 115; Good translates “Anat the Geshur,”
see “On RS 24.252,” 159, all take g¨r as a geographical name and interpret the epi-
thet as a local manifestation of Anat. Dietrich and Loretz translate “Anat des
Starken,” see “Baal,” 174; Wyatt has “Anat the Powerful,” RTU, 396; both take g¨r
as the word for “strong.” Both interpretations are possible. Cf. L’Heureux under-
stands the word as “aged wine,” see Rank Among the Canaanite Gods, 170.
39 The commentators often translate b‘lt as “mistress,” e.g. Spronk, Beatific After-
life, 178; De Moor, ARTU, 188; Good, “On RS 24.252,” 158; Avishur, Studies, 280;
Wyatt., RTU, 396. The translation “mistress” is misleading because of its associa-
tion with the meaning of the “second wife.”
40 Ugaritic kpt refers to headdress or turban. See Gibson, CML, 149. Thus
L’Heureux translates “diadem,” Rank Among the Canaanite Gods, 178. Dietrich and
Loretz and Avishur translate “turban, ” see “Baal,” 174 and Studies, 280. Spronk
and de Moor have “royal cap,” Beatific Afterlife, 178; ARTU, 188; Tarrigon translates
“huppe (tuft),” TO II, 116; Good has “kupšu hat,” “On RS 24.252,” 158; Del Olmo
Lete has “firmament (?)” CR, 187.
(23) b‘l . ymšḥ.hm . b‘p (23) Let Baal anoint them against weari-
ness.
(24) nṭ‘n . b ’arṣ . ’iby (24) In the earth, let us gore my foes,
(25)w b‘pr . qm . ’aÆk (25) and in the dust, those arise against
your brother!
The “horn” in the Hebrew Bible often symbolizes physical might and
power.41 By anointing her horns, Baal prepares Anat to engage in battles
with him to fight against his enemies.
In the Baal Cycle, Anat appears as a warrior. KTU 1.2 II first intro-
duces us to Anat’s warrior image.42
Anat Fought in the Valley (KTU 1.3 II:3-16)

(3) klat . ¨Çrt (4) bht . ’nt . (3) (4) Anat closed the gates of (her) house
w tqry . Çlmm (5) b št . Çr . and she met the boys (5) at the foot of the
mountain
w hln . ’nt . tm (6) tÆṣ . b ‘mq . And behold, Anat (6) fought in the valley,
tÆtṣb . bn (7) qrytm she battled between (7) the two towns.
41 L. J. Coppes, “Qeren,” pages 815-6 in TWOT II. This war-like image of Anat
also appears in KTU 1.13, 1.83.

42 Much literature has discussed Anat’s double massacre. For instance, John
Gray, “The Blood Bath of the Goddess Anat in the Ras Shamra Texts,” UF 11
(1979): 315-24. Gray thinks that Anat’s massacre of human soldiers has a ritual
background. Good sees Anat’s killing as a harvest metaphor. See Robert M. Good,
“Metaphorical Gleanings from Ugarit,” JJS 33 (1982): 55-59. Walls thinks that
Anat’s purpose and motivation for the slaughter of humans are unknown. He sug-
gests that this episode may not play an important role in the mythic narrative but
may simply provide a thematic introduction to the goddess herself. See Walls, The
Goddess Anat, 15-65.
Smith questions whether Anat’s killing of human soldiers involves consumption
of them as a way of ingesting the enemy’s strength and virtue. See M. S. Smith,
“Anat’s Warfare Cannibalism and the West Semitic Ban,” in The Pitcher is Broken:
Memorial Essays for Gosta W. Ahlstrom (Edited by Steven W. Holloway and Lowell K.
Handy; JSOTSup, Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995), 368-386. Lloyd inter-
prets Anat’s double massacre as killing the prisoners of war first in reality and then
in Anat’s palace as a ritual performance. See J. B. Lloyd, “Anat and the ‘Double’
Massacre of KTU 1.3 II,” in Ugarit, Religion and Culture, 151-165. For a semantic
analysis of KTU 1.3 II:23, see Josef Tropper, “‘Anat Kriegsgeschrei (KTU 1.3 II
23),” UF 33 (2001): 567-571.
tmÆṣ . lim . Æp y[m] She fought the people of the [se]ashore,43
(8) tṣmt . ’adm . ṣat . špš (8) she killed humans of the sunrise.
(9) tḥth . k kdrt . riš (9) Beneath her, like balls, (are) heads,
(10) ‘lh . k ’irbym . kp . (10) Above her, like locusts, (are) palms,
k . qṣm (11) Çrmn . like grasshoppers (?), (11) (are) mountains
kp . mhr . of palms of soldiers.
‘tkt (12) rišt . l bmth . She fixed (12) heads to her back,
šnst (13) kpt . b ḥbšh . she attached (13) palms to her belt.
brkm . tÇl[l] (14) b dm . Ämr . Her knees she glea[ned] (14) in warrior’s
blood,
ḥlqm . b mm‘ (15) mhrm . her thighs,44 in the gore of (15) soldiers.
mṭm . tÇrš (16) šbm . With staffs, she drove away (16) the old
men,
b ksl . qšth . mdnt with the string of her bow, the opponents.
After her fighting, Anat is not satisfied. So she goes down to her
house, arranges her furniture, and immediately engages in another battle.
Since the context is lost, we are uncertain of Anat’s motive in fighting and
what Anat intends to achieve in her slaying of human soldiers. However,
her warrior and violent image emerges in this graphic and bloody scene.
This scene is described not in general terms but in detail with grue-
some images. For instance, it describes specific body parts both for the
human soldiers (heads [riš] and palms [kp]) and for Anat (knees [brkm] and
thighs [hlqm]). It mentions the specific weapons of Anat “the staffs (mtm)
and the string of her bow (ksl qšth) (line 16). Additionally the text also em-
ploys simile (k), “heads like balls,” “palms like locusts (lines 9-10)” to aid in
the audience’s visual perception of this graphic scene. The word “blood,”
dm (line 14) is also mentioned to add “color” to this scene – bloody red.
This graphic scene raises the possibility that the author may intend to use
the detailed and colorful description for a visual purpose: to form a visual
image of Anat’s violence against the human soldiers in the audience’s mind.
43 The sea-shore is the west and the sunrise refers to the east. This bicolon
means “all men from east to west.” See Wyatt, RTU, 73, n. 18.
44 The word ḥlqm is a dual from the root ḥlq “to divide.” The meaning of
“thighs” forms a parallel image to “knees.”

Anat not only fights against human enemies but also divine enemies,
including El’s beloved Yamm and his divine animals as we will discuss
shortly.
Athirat’s reaction when she sees the coming of Baal and Anat (KTU
1.4 II:21-26) also reveals her perception and fear of these two “murderers”
(see chapter 3).
Several examples show that Anat prefers to use violence as a means to
her ends. This is evident in the Baal Cycle but not clear in other genres of
the Ugaritic texts such as the prayers and hymns since we do not know the
context of these texts. In the Baal Cycle, when Anat assists Baal to gain his
kingship, she fights against Baal’s enemies. 45 The context suggests that
Anat’s motive for fighting Baal’s enemies is to defend Baal’s kingship. In
KTU 1.3 III:32 - IV: 4, the text describes Anat’s response after she per-
ceives the coming of Baal’s messengers:
Anat Fought the Enemies of Baal (KTU 1.3 III:32 – IV:4)

(32) hlm. ‘nt. tph. ’ilm. (32) There, Anat perceived the gods,
bh. p‘nm (33) tṭṭ . below, her feet (33) trembled,
b‘dn . ksl . t¨br behind, (her) loins cracked,
(34)‘ln . pnh . td‘ . (34) above, her face sweated.
tÇṣ . pnt (35) kslh . Shook were the joints of (35) her loins.
’anš . dt . `rh . Weak were those of her back.
tšu (36) gh . w . tṣḥ . She lifted (36) up her voice and she
cried,
’ik . mÇy . gpn . w ugr “Why Gpn and Ugr come?
(37) mn . ’ib . yp‘ . l b‘l . (37) What enemy rose against Baal?
ṣrt (38) l rkb . ‘rpt . (What) foe (38) against the Cloudrider?
l mÆšt . mdd (39)’il ym . Surely I smote the Beloved of (39) El,
Yamm;
l klt . nhr . ’il . rbm Surely I destroyed River, the Great
God;
45 See text and translation above. KTU 1.3 V: 38-47.

(40) l ’ištb46 . tnn . ’ištm . lh (?) (40) Surely I lifted up Tnn 47 and de-
stroyed him.
(41) mÆšt . b¨n . ‘qltn (41) I smote the writhing serpent,
(42) šlyṭ48 . d . šb‘t . rašm (42) the tyrant of seven heads.
(43) mÆšt . mdd ’ilm . ’arš (43) I smote the Beloved of El, Arsh.
(44) ṣmt . ‘gl . ’il . ‘tk (44) I destroyed the Calf of El, Atk.
(45)mÆšt .k{.}lbt . ’ilm . ’išt (45) I smote the Dog of El, Fire.
(46) klt . bt . ’il . (46) I destroyed the daughter of El,
Äbb . ’imtÆṣ . ksp Flame that I might fight for silver
(47)’itr¨ . Ærṣ . (47) (and) inherit gold.
ṭrd. b‘l rev. iv (1) b mrym . ṣpn . Has Baal banished (1) from the heights
mšṣṣ . k . ‘ṣr of Saphon, knocking him like a bird
from his perch,49
(2)’udnh . gršh . l ksi . mlkh (2) (Who) drove him from the throne of
his kingship,
(3) l nÆt . (3) From the resting place,
l kḥ¨ . drkth from the siege of his dominion?
(4) mnm . ’ib . yp‘ . l b‘l (4) What enemy rose against Baal,
ṣrt . l rkb . ‘rpt (What) foe against the Cloudrider?”
46 The root šbm “lifted him up bodily” indicates Anat’s superior strength. Wyatt,
Pardee and Smith translate “bound.” See Wyatt, RTU, 79, Pardee, “The ’Aqhatu,”
252, and Smith, UNP, 111.
47 Another fragmentary text, KTU 1.83, seems to relate to Anat’s fighting with a
dragon (tnn). For translation, see Wyatt, RTU, 368-369.

48 The Akkadian cognate šalaṭu (authority, in authority) favors the translation of
“tyrant.” CAD, Š: 238. See Gibson, CML, 50; Smith, “Baal,” 111. Based on the
Hebrew cognate ‫( לוט‬to wrap up), BDB, 532. Margalit proposes the meaning of
“encircling.” This is an image of a dragon encircling his treasures and prey. The
verb is a š stem of lyṭ (enwrap, envelop). See B. Margalit, A Matter of Life and Death:
A Study of the Baal-Mot Epic (CTA 4-5-6) (AOAT 206; Kevekaer: Butzon &
Bercker/Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukircherner Verlag, 1980a), 90. Both Pardee and
Wyatt take this meaning. See “The Ba‘lu Myth,” translated by Dennis Pardee (COS
1.86:252); Wyatt, RTU, 79, n. 49.
49 This translation follows Wyatt’s who sees this line as an idiom which survives
as a Hebrew variant in Prov 27:8 and 1 QH 4:8. See Wyatt, RTU, 80.
Anat’s first response after perceiving the coming of Baal’s messengers

is a fearful cry, “What enemy rose against Baal?” (KTU 1.3 III:37). After
recounting her past victories over the enemies of Baal including Yamm, the
Serpent Tnn, and El’s animals, Anat seems to regain the confidence and
strength to defend Baal again. At the end of her speech, she repeats her
initial inquiry, “What enemy rose against Baal?” (KTU 1.3 IV:4). By repeat-
ing the questions before and after her speech and by enclosing the descrip-
tions of fighting Baal’s enemies in the past within the envelope structure,
the text highlights Anat’s concern with Baal’s safety and kingship. Later,
when Mot arises to challenge Baal’s kingship, he causes Baal to descend to
the underworld. Anat again comes to Baal’s rescue with violence.50
The negative portrayal of Mot forms a striking contrast to the heroic
image of Anat. The Ugaritic texts depict Mot as a monstrous deity who
threatens human lives. For instance, in the Baal-Mot section of the Baal
Cycle (KTU 1.5 and 1.6), the text repetitively describes visually Mot’s limit-
less appetite to devour deities and humans (KTU 1.5 I:6-8, 14-27; II:2-6; 1.6
II:15-19; V:19-25; VI:10-16) as the following texts shown.
Mot Described His Own Appetite (KTU 1.5 I:14-22)

(14) p np{.}š . npš . lb’im (15) thw. (14) My appetite51 is the appetite of the
lion in (15) the wasteland,
ḥm . brlt . ’anÆr (16) b ym . or the desire of the whale (16) in the sea.
ḥm . brky . tkšd (17) rumm . or go to pools like (17) wild oxen,
‘n . kÄd . ’aylt or to a spring (like) a hind.
(18) hm . ’imt . ’imt . npš . (18) Or, truly, does my appetite
blt (19) ḥmr . consume (19) (like) a donkey?
p ’imt . b kl’at (20) ydy . ’ilḥm . So truly, I will eat with (20) both my
hands,
hm . šb‘ (21) ydty b ṣ‘ . or (my) seven portions (21) are in the
bowl,
hm . ks . ymsk (22) nhr or (my) cup contain (22) a river?
Mot Threatened Baal to Give Up His Brothers (KTU 1.6 V:19-25)
50 KTU 1.5 I-V, 1.6 II:30-35.

51 Or “throat.”
(19)tn.’aḥd(20) b . ’aÆk . ’isp’a . (19) Give one of your brothers (that) I

may eat,
w y¨b (21) ’ap . d ’anšt . and (21) the anger I feel will go away.
’im (22) ’aḥd . b ’aÆk . l ttn If (22) one of your brothers you do not
give,
(23) w hn . ’aḥ`x[xxx]l/ṣ (23) then I will seize [xxx],
(24) [x]xx . ’akly[ . bn nšm] (24) [x]xx, I will finish [humans],
(25) ’akly . hml[t . ’arṣ] (25) I will finish the multitu[des of the
Earth].
The fact that no cult is devoted to Mot and that no offering list in-
cludes him supports his negative image in Ugaritians’ lives. 52 In light of
Mot’s negative image, Anat’s annihilation of him is presented in a positive
light – she is a heroine. Anat first asks Mot to give up Baal.53 When the lat-
ter refuses, Anat resorts to violence. The following lines describe Anat’s
killing of Mot:
Anat Annihilated Mot (KTU 1.6 II:30-35)

(30) tiÆd (31) bn . ’ilm . mt . (30) She seized (31) Divine Mot,
b ḥrb (32) tbq‘nn . (31) With a sword, (32) she split him,
b Æ¨r . tdry (33) nn . With a sieve, she winnowed (33) him,
b ’išt . tšrpnn With a fire, she burned him,
(34) b rḥm . tṭhnn . (34) With a mill-stone, she grinded him,
b šd (35) tdr‘.nn In a field, (35) she sowed him.
It is worth noting that the author describes Anat’s violence against
Mot in graphic detail again including the weapons she uses (sword [Ærb] and
sieve [Ætr]) and the manner of killing (winnow [dry], burn [šrp], grind [thn],
and sow [dr‘]). This emphasis supports the notion that the author intends to
impress Anat’s violent image firmly in the mind of the audience.
In the Baal Cycle, Anat often employs violence to attain her goal
(KTU 1.3 III:38-47; V:19-25; 1.6 II:30-37). All three incidents are related to
Baal. These texts show that for Anat, violence serves as an effective means
52 See KTU 1.39, 1.41, 1.43, 1.46, 1.102, 1.104, 1.109, 1.119, 1.130, 1.148, 1.162,
1.168.
53 KTU 1.6 II:11-12.
to defend Baal. If Baal is perceived as a benevolent warrior god, then Anat’s

violence in defending him can also be perceived as something positive.
There is a rare exception in the Baal Cycle where Anat uses other
means to achieve her objective in defending Baal. This incident appears in
the House of Baal section of the cycle. After Anat fails to obtain El’s con-
sent to build a house for Baal, she and Baal then go to Athirat to entreat her
to ask El on their behalf.54 In this event, Anat does not resort to violence as
means to her end. Instead, she offers gifts of silver and gold to Athirat.55
Anat also entreats Athirat nicely.56
In the Story of Aqhat, when Anat perceives Aqhat’s refusal and insult
as a threat to her authority, she immediately plots to harm him. This image
is consistent with her perception of threats in the Baal Cycle. The differ-
ence, however, that in the Baal Cycle, Anat’s violence helps her to attain her
goal in protecting Baal, whereas in the Story of Aqhat, her violence fails to
accomplish her goal in possessing the bow. For Anat, violence is not always
the most effective means to her ends.
One common element connecting the violence of Anat in the Baal Cy-
cle and in the Story of Aqhat is the graphic depiction of Anat’s violence
(KTU 1.3 II:3-16; III:38-47; V:19-25; 1.6 II:30-37; 1.18 IV:16-37). The au-
thor does not mention Anat’s violence by simply stating the fact but he
elaborates and paints a visual picture in the audience’s mind. This common
element suggests that the author purposely intends the audience to associate
Anat with violence and might.
YATPAN
The Characterization of Yatpan in the Story of Aqhat

The character Yatpan occurs only in the Story of Aqhat. The name “Yat-
pan” does not appear in the god lists (KTU 1.47; 1.118; and RS 20.24).57
Whether he is a lesser deity or a human being remains unknown. If Yatpan
is a divine being, he occupies the lowest rank in divinities as a servant of
54 KTU 1.4 III: 23-44.

55 KTU 1.4 II: 26-28. These gifts are made by Kothar-wa-Khasis which include
a canopy and a couch, a grand dais, a grand throne and footstool, and grand laced
sandals, a grand table filled with figures, a grand bowl, all made by silver and gold.
See KTU 1.4 I: 20-43.
56 KTU 1.4 III: 32-36.
57 For texts and translations, see Del Olmo Lete, CR, 72-73; Wyatt, RTU, 360-
362; Pardee, Ritual and Cult, 14-15.

Anat.58 Del Olmo Lete considers Yatpan as a deity and places his name un-
der the category “gods not in the (god) list but known.”59
In the Story of Aqhat, Yatpan plays a minor but indispensable role. He
first appears as “an agent.” According to Berlin’s definition, “an agent” is
someone who is passive, whose feelings and thoughts are not revealed by
the story, and nothing is known about the character except what is neces-
sary for the plot.60 This definition fits the role of Yatpan. In his first ap-
pearance, the author does not bother to remark on Yatpan’s feelings and
thoughts about Anat’s violence. Yatpan merely concedes to Anat’s plan.
His function as an agent is evident: Anat needs a helper, an intermedi-
ary to carry out her violence. Yatpan assumes that role. The author designs
this role on purpose since later in the story, Pughat needs an object for
vengeance. Since a human being cannot kill a deity like Anat, Yatpan serves
as the substitute. Nothing more about his character is mentioned apart
from his function as an agent.
In his first appearance, Yatpan is presented as the henchman of Anat,
one who merely follows her plans. After Anat succeeds in exacting El’s
permission, she enlists Yatpan to carry out the violence.
Anat Enlisted Yatpan to Kill Aqhat (KTU 1.18 IV:5-15)

(5) [t]tb‘ . btlt . ‘nt [. (5) Maiden Anat departed.
’idk . l ttn . pnm] [Then she set her face]
(6) ‘m . yṭpn61 . mhr . š[t . (6) toward Yatpan, the warrior of the
La[dy].62
58 See Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism, 57.

59 See Del Olmo Lete, CR, 80. Other names under this list include Gapnu and
Ugaru, the messengers of Baal.
60 Berlin, Poetics and Biblical Interpretation, 27, 32.
61 Watson has noted the etymology of the name “Yatpan.” The meaning of his
name parallels the part he plays in the attack on Aqhat. Since Anat uses Yatpan in
the manner of a trained bird of prey, it is possible that his name is associated with a
falcon, or a hawk. Watson proposes the meaning “Render” or “Ripper.” The Ak-
kadian word naṭāpu supports this meaning. See CAD, N II:128. See Watson, “Puz-
zling Passages,” 373.
62 The translation “the warrior of the Lady” fits Yatpan’s role in the story as the
henchman of Anat. The title št as Anat’s epithet also occurs in KTU 1.13:7 “your
warriors” referring to Anat’s warriors and KTU 1.22 I:9 “the warriors of Anat.”
This epithet of Anat will help to explain Pughat’s disguise as Anat. Cf. Wright, Rit-
ual in Narrative, 211-213.
tšu . gh] (7) w tṣḥ . [She raised her voice] (7) and she cried,
y¨b63 . yṭp . x[xxxxxxxxxx] “Let Yatpan turn [ ]
(8) qrt . ’ablm . (8) the town of ABLM,
’ablm . [qrt . zbl . yrÆ] ABLM, [the city of the prince of YariÆu.
(9) ’ik . ’al . yḥd¨ .yrÆ . (9) How will YariÆu not be renewed?
b q[rn . šm’alh] in the ho[rn of his left],
(10) b qrn . ymnh . (10) in the horn of his right.
b’anšt[.xxxxxxxxx](11) qdqdh . in the weak [ ] of (11) his head.”
w y‘n . yṭpn . m[hr . št] Then Yatpan, the wa[rrior of the Lady]
replied,
(12) šm‘ . l btlt . ‘nt . “(12) Listen, O Maiden Anat,
’at . ‘[l . qšth] (13) tmÆṣh . [For his bow], (13) you will strike him,
qṣ‘th . hwt . l tḥ[wy . xxx] (for) his arrows, you will not [let him live],
(14) n‘mn . Çzr . št .¨rm . (14) The pleasant one, the hero, has laid a
meal,64
w[ xxxxx] (15) ’išt’ir . b Ädm . [ ] (15) he has stayed in dwellings
w n‘rs[ . xxxx] and has settled [ ].”
In his speech to Anat, Yatpan echoes Anat’s plan to smite Aqhat for
his bow. As Anat’s henchman, Yatpan’s job is to obey and he does. Then
Anat instructs Yatpan in detail of how she will carry out her plan to slay
Aqhat.
Anat Instructed Yatpan How to Slay Aqhat (KTU 1.18 IV:16-27)

(16) w t‘n . btlt . ‘nt . (16) And Maiden Anat replied,
¨b . yṭp . w[ xxx] (17) lk . “Come, Yatpan, and [I will teach?] (17)
you,
’aštk . km . nšr . b ḥb[šy] I will put you like a eagle in my be[lt],
(18) km . diy . b t‘rty . (18) like a bird in my sheath.
63 It is uncertain whether the word is “to sit” or “to turn.” Since the context
suggests going to the town of ABLM, I choose “to turn.”

64 The fragmentary nature of the text makes it unclear whether Yatpan instructs
Anat to prepare a meal or whether Aqhat is the one who prepares the meal.
’aqht .[km . y¨b] (19) l lḥm . (When) Aqhat [sat down] (19) to eat,
[[b]] wbn . dn’il . l ¨rm . and the son of Dan’il to dine,
[‘lh] (20) nšrm . trÆpn . [above him], (20) the eagles will hover,
ybṣr . [ḥbl .d] (21) ’iym . [the flock of b]irds (21) will circle (?)
bn . nšrm . ’arÆp . ’an[k .] Among the eagles, I will hover,
‘l (22) ’aqht . ‘dbk . above (22) Aqhat, I will place you,
hlmn .¨nm qdqd strike him twice (on) the skull,
(23) ¨lïd . ‘l . ’udn . (23) three times over the ear,
špk . km . šiy (24) dm . spill (his) (24) blood like an executioner(?)
ûm . šÆṭ . l brkh . like a slaughterer, to his knees.
ṭṣi . km (25) rḥ . npšh . (25) Let his life go out like a wind,
ûm . ’i¨l . brlth . his spirit like a spittle,
km (26) qṭr . b ’aph . (26) from his nose, like a smoke,
b ’ap . mprh . ’ank (27a) l ’aḥwy. Surely, (?) (27a) I will not let him live.”
The text omits Yatpan’s verbal response to Anat’s plan. The author
seems to assume Yatpan’s consent and thus it is unnecessary to include his
response in the text. The following line (line 27b) immediately speaks about
Anat executing her plan of action to kill Aqhat. Yatpan does exactly as told.
In this brutal scene of killing, Yatpan functions no more than “an agent.”
However, toward the end of the story, the author reveals more infor-
mation about Yatpan, probably to depict him as a villain in contrast to
Pughat, the heroine. We know more about Yatpan now than when he first
appears in the story. Whether he develops into a full-fledged character re-
mains unknown since the broken text prevents us from discovering this.
The extant text does not show a broad range of Yatpan’s traits, yet one trait
dominates: his arrogance. His arrogance is linked to his perception of
Anat’s violence.

When Pughat infiltrates the tents of Yatpan, the author uses Yatpan’s direct
speech to reveal his arrogance. When the messenger delivers the news of
Pughat’s coming, Yatpan speaks to Pughat:
Yatpan Boasted of his Might (KTU 1.19 IV:52-60)

(52) w y‘n . yṭpn . m[hr] (52) And Yatpan, the wa[rrior] of
(53) št (53) the Lady replied,
qḥn . w tšqyn . yn . “Take this and give me wine to drink,
t[q]ḥ (54) ks . bdy . ta[k]e (54) the cup from my hand,
qb‘t . b ymny . the goblet from my right hand.”
tq(55)ḥ . pÇt . w tšqynh . (55) Pughat took and she gave him to
drink.
tqḥ [. ûs .] bdh She took [the cup] from his hand,
(56) qb‘t . b ymnh . (56) the goblet from his right hand.
w y‘n . yṭ[p]n[ . mh]r Then Yat[pa]n, [the warrio]r of
(57) št . (57) the Lady replied,
b yn . y št65 . ’ila66 . ’il šxn [.] “By the wine, O Lady, I am mighty. I
could [ ] El,67
’il (58) d yqny . Ädm . El (58) who created the dwellings.
yd . mÆṣt . ’aq[h]t . Ç(59)zr . The hand that slew Aq[ha]t the h(59)ero,
tmÆṣ . ’alpm . ’ib . št will slay thousands of the Lady’s enemies,
[ . t]št (60) ḥršm . l ’ahlm . [ ] (60) setting spell over the tents.”
The speech of Yatpan is brief (3 lines), but full of boast. In his speech,
Yatpan claims two things: (1) He is mighty and can do anything or com-
pares himself to El or the god(s); (2) He admits that he slays Aqhat and that
he will slay thousands more of Anat’s enemies.
Yatpan occupies the lowest rank in the hierarchy of the gods. His
name is even excluded from the god lists. In light of his low status in the
divine realm, Yatpan’s first claim that he is mighty and that he is compara-
ble to El, the high god in the pantheon, is ironically and comically out of
touch with reality. Wright notes that Yatpan thinks his status as being ele-
65An epithet of Anat.

66Here, I take the word as from the root liy. For various renderings of this
word, see Wyatt’s discussion. Wyatt, RTU, 312, n. 275.
67 Or god, thus, Yatpan is claiming divinity. See Dijkstra and de Moor, “Prob-
lematic Passages,” 213. See Wright for the possible reconstruction of the word ’ilšn
as “slander.” Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 214.
vated to a divine level. 68 Indeed, Yatpan’s perception of himself comes

from an inflated ego.
In his second claim, Yatpan reveals his perception of Anat’s violence
against Aqhat. First, he admits that he kills Aqhat. Second, he perceives
Aqhat as one of Anat’s enemies. Third, he boasts that he can kill thousands
of Anat’s enemies.
From Yatpan’s point of view, Aqhat, by refusing to surrender his bow
becomes the enemy of Anat and deserves to be punished. In this sense,
Yatpan shares Anat’s point of view of her own violence before she kills
Aqhat – the killing of Aqhat is a case of divine punishment. It is uncertain
whether Yatpan is aware of Anat’s reaction after her violence and the out-
come of her violence, i.e. her weeping and the losing of the bow. The fact
that Yatpan appears to be boastful and the fact that he does not express any
sorrow or remorse suggest that the author of the story purposely keeps him
“in the dark” regarding Anat’s reaction after her act of killing. This may due
to the relatively “insignificant” role that Yatpan plays in the story.
Because of Yatpan’s relationship with Anat as her henchman, his per-
ception of Anat’s violence is much influenced by her perception before her
killing. Yatpan takes pleasure in his role as “the warrior of the Lady” and
will assist her when asked. Yet, the story portrays Anat’s point of view in a
multifaceted fashion and Yatpan’s point of view in a one-dimensional man-
ner. This confirms the role of Yatpan in the story as an “agent” who serves
his function and there is no need to elaborate more on his thoughts and
feelings.

From the interest point of view, by stressing Yatpan’s arrogance (a negative
trait), the author places him in contrast to the positive portrayal of Pughat,
as we will expound in the next chapter. In this sense, the character Yatpan
serves as the foil against which the personality of the major character,
Pughat, stands out.69 By depicting Yatpan as a villain, the author casts his
role in a negative mode and thus influences the audience’s perception of
him. In addition, by keeping Yatpan in ignorance of Anat’s reaction after
her act of violence and in the identity of Pughat, and by informing the audi-
ence of that information, the author elevates the audience’s position and
likewise gains the trust from the audience to take the author’s point of view

69 Drawing upon Bar-Efrat’s idea. See Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art, 86.
implicit in the story – to perceive Yatpan as a villain, which indirectly casts

doubt on Anat’s act of violence.

The extant text does not indicate the emotions of Yatpan. This is mostly
because of his function in the story as an agent. As an agent, Yatpan serves
his function to the plot and nothing else about him is necessary to be in-
cluded in the story. Because of this lack of emotion attributed to Yatpan,
the audience is emotionally distant from him and is unlikely to take his
point of view.

In addition to the conflicting points of view of El and Baal, the shift in
point of view of Anat before and after her act of violence further adds to
the complexity of the story’s portrayal of her violence. Before killing Aqhat,
Anat perceives her act of violence as a divine punishment, a means to pos-
sess the bow, and an opportunity to assert her authority. However, after her
killing of Aqhat, her weeping and the losing of the bow suggest the futility
of using violence to achieve her ends.
Because of Yatpan’s role as a henchman of Anat, his point of view
conforms to Anat’s point of view before her act of violence. His boasts
suggest that he does not share or most likely is unaware of Anat’s weeping
and her losing of the bow.
Thus, in the divine realm, we see El, Anat before her act of violence,
and Yatpan sharing the same point of view of the violence against Aqhat
that it is a case of divine punishment against a disobedient human being.
The point of view of Baal and Anat after her act of violence provide a
counter point of view to that of divine punishment. These two levels of
disparity further demonstrate the complexity and ambiguity in the author’s
portrayal of Anat’s violence. By including the weeping and the losing of the
bow as the outcome of Anat’s violence, the author seems to depict her vio-
lence negatively. This negative outcome of Anat’s violence influences the
audience’s perception of her violence as a negative act. Yet, questions re-
main: Is Aqhat responsible for his death? Is Dan’il and Pughat’s perception
of his death accurate? We will explore these questions in the next chapter.
5 HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW:
DAN’IL, PUGHAT, AQHAT
Having examined the two levels of disparity in the divine characters’ point
of view between El and Baal and between Anat’s shifts in perspective, we
now turn to the point of view of the human characters in the story. In the
human realm, there are also two levels of disparity of point of view. On the
one hand, the disparity is revealed through the human characters, Dan’il
and Pughat’s perception of Anat’s violence and Pughat’s violence. On the
other hand, the disparity is revealed through the divine characters, El and
Anat’s perception of Aqhat and the human characters Dan’il and Pughat’s
perception of him.
The purpose of this chapter is to show how the author of the story
uses the diverging points of view of the human characters on the two acts
of violence in the story to influence his implied audience’s ethical judgment
of Anat’s violence. This chapter also demonstrates how the author, by dis-
closing and withholding information, affects the characters’ perception of
Anat’s violence.
We will first investigate the characterization of the human characters,
Dan’il and Pughat, and present their diverging points of view on the two
acts of violence in the story. We will then inquire into the reasons behind
these contrasting viewpoints. Finally, we will situate Aqhat in the context of
the two acts of violence.
DAN’IL
The Characterization of Dan’il in the Story of Aqhat

The character Dan’il in the story is depicted as a pious and a righteous king.
He offers sacrifices to the gods and makes feast to the deities.1 The author
describes him as one “who takes care of the case of the widow and defends
1 KTU 1.17 I:1-15; II:24-38; V:13-31; 1.19 IV:22-27.

117
the need of the orphan.”2 By attributing these positive character traits to

Dan’il, the author establishes Dan’il’s integrity and credibility. The granting
of a son to Dan’il may be due to his credibility as a righteous king. The
movement from the theme “no son - son - no son” in the story sets the
points of view of Dan’il of Anat’s violence and Pughat’s vengeance in con-
text.
The text describes Dan’il as a man in action both before and after the
death of Aqhat. Before the death of Aqhat, Dan’il makes sacrifices to the
gods, dines with the birth goddess, takes care of the case of the widow and
orphan, and presents a bow to Aqhat. 3 After the death of Aqhat, Dan’il
tears his clothes, adjures the clouds in the heat, inspects the condition of
the land, prays for the diminished plants, asks Baal to help recover the re-
mains of Aqhat, buries Aqhat, curses the towns near the site of Aqhat’s
death, and blesses Pughat for her mission of vengeance.4
The author not only describes Dan’il as a man in action, but also por-
trays him as a man of emotion. For instance, when Dan’il hears the news of
the granting of a son, “his face beams, he breaks out into laughter.” When
he hears the news of the death of his son, Dan’il “trembles and perspires.”
When he buries Aqhat, he weeps. He mourns Aqhat for seven years.5
The text presents Dan’il as a “real” person with multiple character
traits. He is a man of integrity, a devout worshipper, righteous, loyal to his
family, one who loves his children, one who expresses anger, sadness, joy,
and a sense of justice, retaliation and vengeance. Because of these descrip-
tions, Dan’il appears to be a full-fledged character. This positive portrayal
of Dan’il’s character helps the audience to identify with his experiences and
feelings.
Since the story does not explicitly indicate Dan’il’s perception of
Anat’s violence, we can only infer his perception through the descriptions
of his emotions and actions.
Dan’il’s Perception of Anat’s Violence

The author does not explicitly point out Dan’il’s perception of Anat’s vio-
lence either through Dan’il’s speech or through the author’s evaluation of
him. The author chooses to use Dan’il’s emotions and his actions after the
death of Aqhat to reflect Dan’il’s perception of Anat’s violence.
2 KTU 1.17 V:7-8; 1.19 I:23-25.

3 KTU 1.17 I:1-15, II:24-40; V:7-8, 33-39.
4 KTU 1.19 I:36-37, 39-42, II:12-25; III:1-4-IV:17, 35-40.
5 KTU 1.17 II:8-12; 1.19 II:44-47; III:40; IV:11-17.
HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW 119
Dan’il’s emotion after the death of Aqhat is characterized by distress

and grief. This distress and grief form a stark contrast to Dan’il’s longing
for a son at the beginning of the story.
Dan’il Longs for a Son. The lacking of progeny and the need for a
son is one of the common motifs in ancient literature.6 The Story of Aqhat
begins by describing Dan’il performing a ritual to the gods.7 This ritual lasts
for six days. On the seventh day, Baal draws near in compassion and makes
a plea for El to give Dan’il a son so that he can perform filial duties to
Dan’il.8 El subsequently blesses Dan’il with a son.9 The text repeats this list
of filial duties three more times in the rest of the story, with minor varia-
tions in the pronominal suffixes.10 Below is its first occurrence when Baal
intercedes for Dan’il.
The List of Ideal Sonship (KTU 1.17 I: 23-33)

(26) nṣb . skn. ’ilibh . b qdš (26) Who sets up a stela for his divine
ancestors,
(27) ztr . ‘mh . in the sanctuary (27) a monument (for) his
clan;
l ’arṣ . mšṣu . qṭrh (28) l ‘pr . Who brings out his smoke from the earth,
Ämr . ’a¨rh . (28) Who protects his step from the dust;
ṭbq . lḥt (29) niṣh . Who closes the mouth of (29) those who
revile him;
6 For example, Abraham and Sarah lack a son (Gen 15), Hannah prays for a son
(1 Sam 1), king Kirtu prays for his lack of progeny (KTU 1.14-16).
7 KTU 1.17 I: 1-15. I assume that the first missing ten lines describe or are re-
lated to Dan’il’s desire to have a son since the surviving text starts with Dan’il’s
performance of ritual to the gods. Then Baal comes and intercedes to El for Dan’il
to have a son. Dan’il may have stated his reason for his ritual in those missing lines.
KTU 1.17 I: 2-48.
8 KTU 1.17 I: 16-33.
9 KTU 1.17 I: 34-48. The surviving text does not explicitly mention Dan’il’s ob-
jective in performing the ritual. The missing ten lines at the beginning of the story
may have included the reason for Dan’il’s ritual performance. Nevertheless, based
on the remaining text that comes down to us, we can infer from Baal’s plea to El
that Dan’il’s objective in performing the ritual is to ask the gods for a son.
10 These four lists are in KTU 1.17 I: 26-33, 44-48, II: 1-8, 16-23. McAfee
points out that in the missing portion of the text, it is possible that the author re-
peats the list again. See McAfee, “The Patriarch’s Longed-for Son,” 68.
grš . d . ‘šy . lnh Who drives out those who disturb him;
(30)’aÆd . ydh . b škrn. (30) Who takes hold of his hand in drunk-
enness,
m‘msh (31) [k ]šb‘ . yn Who carries him when (31) (he is) sated
with wine;
spu . ksmh . bt . b‘l Who eats his portion in the house of Baal,
(32) [w ] mnth . bt . ’il . (32) and his share in the house of El;
ṭÆ . ggh . b ym (33) [ï]ṭ . Who plasters his roof on the day of (33)
mud,
rḥṣ . npṣh . b ym . r¨ Who washes his garment on the day of
mire.
The author places this list at the beginning of the story and repeats the
list three times – a seemingly purposeful device. The significance of the
list’s position in the story (at the beginning of the text) and the frequency of
its repetition (four times total) in the surviving text point to its unique func-
tion and place in the story. What is the function of this list in the story? In
both biblical and Akkadian literature, repetition serves a variety of func-
tions. Below we group them into four categories pertaining to the narrative
purposes. The possible functions of the list will follow this grouping.
(1) Repetition unfolds and advances a plot. It is not just the event told
that is important but also who tells and retells the event that plays an active
role in the dynamics of the action.11 In the Story of Aqhat, the list of Ideal
Sonship is repeated three times by different characters: Baal, El, Messenger
of El and Dan’il. Therefore, the author uses this list to move the plot de-
velopment from one character to another. It is worth noting that both El
and Baal are well aware of Dan’il’s desperate need of a son. This knowledge
foreshadows their subsequent actions towards the fate of Aqhat.
(2) Repetition increases the reader’s suspense. For instance, in the
poem The Descent of Ishtar, Ishtar has to pass through seven gates in or-
der to enter the netherworld. Before entering each gate, Ishtar has to take
off one of her ornaments or apparels to gain admittance. This ritual is re-
peated seven times (total twenty one lines with seven three-line segment)
with variation in the number of the gate and the name of the finery that is
taken off. Reiner points out that this series of repetition serves to delay the
action and increase the reader’s suspense as to what will happen to Ishtar.12

12 Erica Reiner, Your Thwarts in Pieces, Your Moorings Rope Cut: Poetry from Babylonia
Similarly, McAfee thinks that the lists of the filial duties raise questions
in the mind of the audience. The audience may ask questions such as: Will
Dan’il die in this story? Will his son perform the duties for him?13 Other
scholars also maintain that the four-fold repetition fits well with the literary
purpose: to emphasize the need for a son and to enhance the increasing
literary expectation of a son which prepares the way for the depths of dis-
appointment at the death of Aqhat.14
(3) Repetition may operate in the interests of cohesion, enrichment or
reversal of meaning, and for dramatic emphasis.15 Aitken also identifies the
dramatic function of repetition. He states that “repetitions mark climax,
create and release tension, control the pace of the plot development and
highlight contrasts, thereby enhancing the dramatic quality of the narra-
tion.”16 The list of Ideal Sonship may serve a number of these functions to
enhance the dramatic effect of the need for a son.
(4) Repetition can be used in the forms of “forecast” and “enact-
ment” to contrast with the outcome. In this use, the author spells out an
expected command, prophecy or scenario and then states the actual state of
affairs.17 In this sense, the list of Ideal Sonship is what the characters ex-
pected from Aqhat and it forms a contrast to the outcome of their expecta-
tion – Aqhat does not and cannot live up to the expectations of the list.
Buccellati uses the beginning verses of Enuma Elish to demonstrate
the concept of anticipation and contrast. These verses provide a powerful
description of the cosmic setting against which creation take place:
e-nu-ma e-liš la na-bu-u ša-ma-mu
šap-liš am-ma-tum šu-ma la zak-rat
When on high no name was given to heaven,
and Assyria (Mich.: Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies, 1985), 40, 51.
14 Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 38; Boda, “The List,” 11; McAfee, “The Pa-
triarch’s Longed-for Son,” 69; Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 69. J-M. Husser, from a
literary and poetic point of view, thinks that the enumeration of the duties of a son
lends to the text a refrain-like rhythmical movement. Husser, “The Birth of a
Hero,” 85.
16 Aitken, “Formulaic Patterns,” 9. Although Aitken chooses the passing of
time as his focus, his study seems to apply to other forms of repetitions such as the
repetition of the list of Ideal Sonship.
nor below was the netherworld called by name…18

This negative anticipation forms a contrast to the outcome of the
story: the fifty names of Marduk given at the end of the poem create a reso-
lution to the initial emphasis on the lack of a name for the cosmos and the
gods.19
Similarly, in the Story of Aqhat, the list of Ideal Sonship may function
to stress the anticipation of the son and contrast that with the unexpected
outcome – the dutiful daughter.
In view of these functions of repetition, it is difficult to delineate the
author’s intended function(s). The list of the Ideal Sonship may serve mul-
tiple functions including all of the above four elements: to advance the plot
development, to increase reader’s suspense and expectation of the ideal son,
to create a dramatic effect on the need of a son, and to form a contrast to
the outcome of the story. In any case, Dan’il’s need for a son is stressed
through the repetition of the list.
This need is actualized when the messenger delivers the news of El’s
granting of Dan’il’s wishes. Upon hearing the news, Dan’il responds with
joy:
Dan’il Rejoiced (KTU 1.17 II: 8-15)

(8) b ’unil20 (9) pnm . tšmÆ . (8) Dan’il’s face rejoiced,
w ‘l . yṣhl pi t (9) and above, his countenance shone.
(10) yprq . lṣb21 . w yṣḥq (10) He opened his mouth and laughed.
(11) p‘n . l hdm . y¨pd . (11) He placed (his) foot on the footstool.
ŷšu (12) gh . w yṣḥ . He lifted up (12) his voice and cried:
’a¨bn . ’ank (13) w ’anÆn . “At last I can sit down (13) and rest,
w tnÆ . b ’irty (14) npš . and (14) (my) soul can rest in my breast,
18 “Epic of Creation,” translated by Benjamin R. Foster (COS 1.111:391).

19 Giorgio Buccellati, “On Poetry – Theirs and Ours,” in Lingering Over Words:
Studies in Ancient Near Eastern Literature in Honor of William L. Moran (Edited by Tzvi
Abusch, John Huehnergard, Piotr Steinkeller; Atlanta: Scholars, 1990), 120.
20 KTU has “Lg. dn’il” in note 5, thus, the reading should be “dn’il.” See KTU,
48.
21 Gibson has “throat” instead of “mouth,” see Gibson, CML, 105; Pardee ren-
ders “forehead,” “The ’Aqhatu,” 345; Parker avoids the specifics and simply para-
phrases “he breaks out into laughter,” UNP, 55.
k yld . bn . ly . km For a son will be born to me like

(15) ’aÆy . w šrš . km . ’aryy (15) my brothers, and a scion like my kins-
men.”
Dan’il’s response to the news of El granting him a son further con-
firms his need for a son and reveals his motive of performing the ritual to
the gods – He wants a son, a son who can fulfill the filial duties, a son who
can attend him in his old age and after his death. From praying for a son to
hearing the news of granting a son, the righteous Dan’il experiences an
emotional and a dramatic journey from distress to delight.
Dan’il Trembles for the Loss of the Son. However, Anat’s killing of
Aqhat turns this delight back to distress. In fact, this distress is a far more
intense than the previous one since Dan’il had experienced the granting of a
son and now he has lost him. This distress has now escalated to despair.
With the death of Aqhat, Dan’il’s dream of having a son vanishes without a
trace. The movement from distress to delight and then to despair makes the
audience sense the depth of Dan’il’s grief and disappointment. Dan’il’s
emotional journey depicts Anat’s violence as a negative act. After hearing
the messengers delivering the news of Aqhat’s death, the text describes
Dan’il’s physical reaction:
Dan’il Trembled (KTU 1.19 II: 44-47)22

(44) bh . p‘nm] (45) tṭṭ . (44) Below, his feet (45) trembled;
‘l[n . pnh . td‘ . b‘dn23] Above, his face sweated;
(46) ksl24 . y¨[br . Behind, (46) (His) loins cracked.
yÇ§ . pnt . kslh] Shook were the joints of his loins,
(47)’anš . d[t . `rh . (47) Weak were those of his back.
Upon hearing the news of Aqhat’s death, Dan’il responds with intense
quaking and fear. Dan’il’s fear gives the audience of the story a window into
his emotional state and invites the audience to sense the effect of Anat’s
violence through Dan’il’s point of view and to identify with Dan’il’s loss.
22 The lines 44-47 are restored based on the parallel texts KTU 1.3 III: 32-5 and
1.4 II: 16-20. Both describe Anat’s physical reaction upon perceiving threats.
23 Gordon sees this word as the adverb b‘d “behind.” See Gordon, UT, 374.
24 Ksl refers to “back.” See Segert, BGUL, 190, In order to distinguish this word
from `r (“back”) in line 47, we use the translation “loin.”

His response to this sad news acutely contrasts with his response to the
joyful news of Aqhat’s birth.25
There is no indication in the text that Dan’il is aware of the encounter
between Anat and Aqhat and that it is because of Anat’s covetousness that
compels her to kill, nor is he aware of Aqhat’s lack of respect for the god-
dess that has contributed to his death. This lack of knowledge on the part
of Dan’il strongly influences his perception of Anat’s violence. Thus, the
author presents Dan’il’s point of view as a one-sided view.
Then Dan’il raises his voice and cries. He asks Baal to retrieve the re-
mains of Aqhat from the bodies of the birds (see the text in chapter 2,
KTU 1.19 III:1-45). The first two attempts fail. Dan’il succeeds in the third
attempt and finds Aqhat’s remains in the body of the mother bird, ṣamal.
He then weeps and buries Aqhat.26 Dan’il’s performance of the burial rite
for Aqhat is in stark contrast to his expectation of a son to perform filial
duties before and after his death. The emotional distress, the physical reac-
tion, and the verbal entreat to Baal point to Dan’il’s perception of Anat’s
violence as a malevolent act.
Dan’il imprecates the towns near Aqhat’s death. Upon finishing
Aqhat’s burial rite, Dan’il curses three towns near the site of Aqhat’s death.
He calls down banishment and blindness on the inhabitants of the towns
and loss of vegetation on their lands for their share of the blood-guilt.27
Dan’il Cursed the Towns (KTU 1.19 III:45-IV:6)

(45) qr . my[m] (46) mlk . yṣm . (45) QR-MY[M], (46) the king cursed:
y lkm . qr . mym . “Woe to you, QR-MYM,
d‘[lk] (47) mÆ§ . ’aqht . Çzr . n[ear you] Aqhat the hero (47) was smit-
ten.
’amd . gr bt ’il Stood a supplicant in the house of El.
(48) ‘nt . brḥ . p‘lm.h . (48) Now and forever a fugitive,
‘nt . p dr . dr now to all generations.”
(49) ‘db . ’uÆry mṭ . ydh (49) Then he took (his) staff (in) his hand,
(50) ymÇ . l mrrt . tÇll . bnr (50) he came to MRRT-TGLL-BNR.
(51) yšu . gh . w yṣḥ . (51) He lifted up his voice and he cried:
25 KTU 1.17 II: 8-11. Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 194.

26 KTU 1.19 III: 1-41.
27 Gibson, CML, 26.
y lk . mrrt (52) tÇll bnr “Woe to you, MRRT-TGLL-BNR,

d ‘lk . mÆṣ . ’aqht (53) Çzr near you Aqhat (53) the hero was smitten.
šršk . b ’arṣ . ’al (54) yp‘ May your root not (54) grow from the
land.
riš . Çly . bd . ns‘k May (your) head bow in the hand that
plucks you.
(55) ‘nt . brḥ . p ‘lmh (55) Now and forever a fugitive,
(56) ‘nt . p dr . dr (56) now to all generations.”
‘db . ’uÆry . mṭ ydh Then he took (his) staff in his hand.
(1) ymÇ .l qrt . ’ablm (1) He came to the city of ABLM.
’ablm (2) qrt . zbl . yrÆ . ABLM, (2) the city of Prince YariÆ.
yšu . gh (3) w yṣḥ . He lifted up his voice (3) and he cried:
y lk . qrt . ’ablm “Woe to you, the city of ABLM,
(4) d‘lk . mÆṣ . ’aqht . Çzr (4) near you, Aqhat the hero was smitten.
(5) ‘wrt . yštk . b‘l . (5) May Baal strike you (with) blindness,
l ht (6) w ‘lmh . from now (6) and forever,
l ‘nt . p dr . dr from now to all generations.”
This practice of cursing the towns near the site of someone’s death
brings to mind the practice prescribed in Deut 21:1-9.28 In this passage, if a
slain person is found lying in the open country, and it is not known who
has struck him, then the elders and judges should go out and measure the
cities near the slain one. The elders of the nearest city shall sacrifice a heifer,
wash their hands, and declare before the Levitical priests that they are inno-
cent from the blood-shed.
By cursing the towns near Aqhat’s death, Dan’il attempts to bring on
the guilty towns their punishment. His cursing further reflects his percep-
tion of Anat’s violence that it is an unjust act and that Aqhat is the victim
whose blood has been shed wrongfully.
Dan’il Mourns for the Loss of the Son. The next reaction of Dan’il
is mourning. The description of Dan’il’s mourning and its duration reflects
28 John Harrison Tullock, “Blood-Vengeance Among the Israelites in the Light
of Its Near Eastern Background” (Ph. D. diss., Vanderbilt University, 1966), 156.
Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 126.
the extent of his grief. After cursing the three towns, Dan’il invites weeping
women (“bkyt” and “mšspdt”) to enter into his house.29 The text describes
Dan’il’s mourning in the following passage:
Dan’il Mourned (KTU 1.19 IV:11-17)

(11) ybk30 . l ’aqht (12) Çzr .ydm‘ . l (11) He wept for Aqhat, (12) the hero,
kdd31 . dn’il shed tears for the child of Dan’il,
(13) mt .rp’i . (13) man of Rapi’u.
l ymm . l yrÆm From days to months,
(14) l yrÆm . l šnt . (14) from months to years,
‘d (15) šb‘t . šnt . until (15) seven years.
ybk . l’ aq (16) ht . Çzr . He wept for Aq(16)hat, the hero,
ydm‘ . l kdd (17) dn’il . mt . rp[’i . shed tears for the child of (17) Dan’il, man
m]k . of Rapi’u.
The weeping women and the duration of mourning for seven years
enhance the tragic result of Anat’s violence.32 The time reference of seven
years is enclosed in an envelope-kind of structure, repeating twice (lines 11,
29 KTU 1.19 III: 45-56 - IV: 1-11.

30 After Anat’s killing of Aqhat, the verb bk “weep” occurs seven times in the
extant text: once for Anat (KTU 1.18 IV: 39), four times for Pughat (KTU 1.19 I:
34, II: 8, 9, 10), and twice for Dan’il (KTU 1.19 I: 35). The synonym dm‘ “shed
tears” occurs three times: once for Pughat (KTU 1.19 I: 35) and twice for Dan’il
(KTU 1.19 IV: 12, 16). Ilimilku employs this word pair (bk and dm‘) in the Baal
Cycle and in the Kirtu text as well. In the Baal Cycle, Anat weeps and sheds tears
for Baal’s death (KTU 1.6 I: 9-10). In the Kirtu text, king Kirtu weeps and sheds
tears for the death of his progeny (KTU 1.14 I: 26-27, 31-32, 39-40; II: 8-9). Thus,
Ilimilku uses this word pair to express the tragedy of the death of one’s close family
members. Aitken notes that this word pair reflects a formulaic pattern used in the
context of mourning. See Aitken, “Word Pair and Tradition,” 33. Cf. This word
pair appears in Lam 1:2, which is also in the context of mourning.
31 Margalit emends kdd to mdd or jdd and translates “the beloved (child) of
Dan’il. Margalit, UPA, 164, 442-3.

32 See KTU 1.19 IV: 9-15. In the Hittite myth of Elkunirša, Ašertu also ap-
pointed the mourners to mourn for the death of her sons for seven years. See
“Elkunirša and Ašertu,” translated by Gary Beckman (COS 1.55, 149). Normally
the mourning period for the dead is seven days (Gen 50:10; 1 Sam 31:13) or thirty
days (Deut 34:8) or seventy days (Gen 50:3). The seven-year mourning expresses
the extent and the depth of the tragedy.
15) exactly the activity Dan’il undertakes. In this sense, the seven years of
mourning do not seem to make any difference to Dan’il’s family.33 Aqhat
remains dead. Dan’il continues to mourn. Wright rightly notes that, “The
statement about seven-year mourning is the last and, though briefly related,
the most comprehensive account of mourning because of its duration, the
number of people involved, and the inclusion of both genders.”34
The text repeats Dan’il’s epithet “man of Rapi’u (mt rp’u)” which
means “man of healing” twice35 to further intensify the irony of Aqhat’s
death from which Dan’il is incapable of healing and restoration. The word
“Rapi’u” comes from the root rp’ meaning “to heal.”36 Its Hebrew cognate
is ‫ רפא‬.Besides the meaning “to heal,” the word also carries the connotation
“to darn,” “to mend,” “to repair,” “to pacify.” 37 On the meaning of the
verb ‫ רפא‬, J. Gray states that
This verb is used in the sense of conferring fertility in Genesis 20: 17,
where the Lord “heals” or restores fertility to the harem of Abimelech
of Gerar, and in 2 Kings 2: 21, where Elisha “heals” or gives fertilizing
properties to the spring of Jericho which had previously brought sterility
and death to the land.38
Caquot and Sznycer (1974: 419) translate the epithet of Dan’il mt rp’i
“man of healing.” In a similar sense, de Moor (1987: 225) renders it “the
Saviour’s man” followed by Coogan (1978: 32) “the Healer’s man.” De
Moor notes that “Saviour” or “Healer” is an epithet of Baal. Therefore he
takes Dan’il’s epithet “the Saviour’s man” as characterizing Dan’il as the
protégé of Baal.39 This epithet may also link to the Rapiuma texts where rp’i
refers to the dead ancestors.40 Here, we have an interesting foreshadowing
of a twist on the theme of dead ancestors, because in the story, the father
33 Hunt, verbal communication.

34 Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 195. Aitken also notes that this is the most elabo-
rate example of the formulaic patterns for the passing of time. In this case, “in the
seventh year” reinforces the period of the enduring action. See Aitken, “Formulaic
Patterns,” 5.
35 KTU 1.19 IV: 13, 17.
36 For a detailed discussion of the meaning of this word, see Margalit, UPA,
251-60.
37 BDB, 950; HALOT III, 1274.
38 Gray, The Legacy of Canaan, 154, n. 6.
39 De Moor, ARTU, 225, n. 5.
40 Other commentators take this epithet as referring to a place name. For ex-
ample, Gibson, CML, 101; Margalit, UPA, 143; Parker, UNP, 51; Pardee, “The
’Aqhatu,” 343; and Wyatt translates the epithet “man of Rapi’u,” RTU, 250.
mourn for the ancestors but mourns for the son. The double meanings of
healing and death may also reflect the story line. However, it is uncertain
whether the Rapiuma texts serve as the sequel to the Story of Aqhat.
As a result of Anat’s violence, Dan’il experiences no happiness but
only grief. Dan’il may not be aware of Aqhat’s arrogance that has contrib-
uted to his death. All he knows is that Anat deprives him of his previous
son, of an heir, of the hope to continue his family line, and possibly of his
kingdom. All his responses after the death of Aqhat including his fear, his
grief, his discovering of Aqhat’s remains and his curses suggest that Dan’il
disapproves Anat’s violence against his son. He perceives it as an unjust act.
Dan’il’s Perception of Pughat’s Violence

There is a shift of mood from mourning to rejoicing in the next scene. Af-
ter the seven years of mourning for Aqhat, Dan’il charges the weeping
women to depart from his house. Then he presents a ritual offering to the
gods.41 Based on what follows, the motive of Dan’il’s offering of sacrifices
seems to ask the gods’ favor to redeem the tragedy of losing a son.
Dan’il Offered a Sacrifice to the Gods (KTU 1.19 IV:22-27)

(22) w yqr[y] (23) dbḥ . ’ilm . (22) Then he ma[de] (23) an offering to
the gods,
yš‘ly . dÇ¨hm (24) b šmym . he caused his incense rise (24) to the
heavens,
dÇ¨ hrnmy [.] b [k] (25) bkbm . incense of hrnmy to the (25) stars.
‘lh . yd . d[n’il . xx]xx Upon it, the hand of Da[n’il]
(26) ‘lh . yd . ‘d . lhklh xxx (26) Upon it, the hand again to his pal-
ace …
mṣ (27)ltm . mrqdm . dšn . l bt[h] [cym]bals, castanets of ivory to [his]
house.
The text indicates that the object of Dan’il’s ritual is a general refer-
ence “the gods” (’ilm), but it does not specify the identity of these gods.
Since Dan’il is unaware of the heavenly encounter between Anat and El, he
is ignorant about the role El played in the death of Aqhat, unless the origi-
nal text contains that piece of information.42 However, this is unlikely since
41KTU 1.19 IV:22-27.

42This calls to mind the heavenly scene between Yahweh and the Satan in Job
1-2. Job remains ignorant about this heavenly scene throughout the whole book.
the lacuna in the text does not have enough space to disclose the encounter
between El and Anat to Dan’il. If Dan’il indeed includes El as one of the
gods to whom he appeals, this would create a sense of irony since it is El’s
divine permission that decrees Aqhat’s death. Dan’il’s ignorance of the role
El played in his son’s death suggests a further level of disparity between the
author/audience’s knowledge and Dan’il’s knowledge about what has oc-
curred in the divine realm. By allowing this disparity, the author elevates the
audience’s knowledge more than Dan’il’s, thus helps the audience to sympa-
thize with Dan’il’s ignorance.
If the term “the gods” included Baal, this would seem to confirm
Baal’s disapproval of Anat’s violence. However, the term “the gods” else-
where in the context of making offering to the deities in the Story of Aqhat
refers to the gods as a collective divine body in general without drawing
specific attention to any particular god.43 Here, we may construe the term as
referring to the divine realm in general. This general address to the “gods”
rather than to any specific god such as “Baal” subtly points to the “strain
between the human and the divine” at this juncture of Dan’il’s life.44
The idea of invoking the blessings of the gods before one goes on a
serious mission also appears in the Baal Cycle. When Baal descends to the
underworld, El orders Shapshu to seek him. 45 He delivers his message
through Anat. In response, Anat carries El’s message to Shapshu and then
confers a blessing upon her.
Anat Blessed Shapshu (KTU 1.6 IV:22-24)

(22) ’an . l. ’an .y špš (22) Wherever (you go), O Shapshu,
(23) ’an . l. ’an . ’il . yÇr[k] (23) wherever (you go), may El protect
[you],
(24) tÇrk . šlm[ ] (24) may [ ] protect you in peace.
The next forty lines are unintelligible. When the text resumes, Baal re-
appears and sits on his throne. This result indicates that Shapshu’s mission
of seeking Baal succeeds. This success may be associated with Anat’s con-
ference of the blessing of El upon her.
43 For instance, KTU 1.17 I:2; V:20.

45 Shapshu, the sun goddess, travels through the underworld during the night.
See KTU 1.6 VI:49.

Dan’il’s seeking of divine blessing suggests that there is an unsatisfac-

tory state that needs to be dealt with: the death of Aqhat.46 From Dan’il’s
point of view, Aqhat’s death is unjustified and needs to be redeemed. His
reasons for that, however, remain unknown to the audience. It may simply
be that Aqhat is his son despite what he does to the goddess Anat. In this
sense, one’s relationship to the victim of violence has a great influence upon
one’s perception of the violence committed against the victim.
One element present in this ritual and in contrast to the previous curs-
ing and mourning is the element of joy. Wright notes that this ritual differs
from the previous rituals in the story in that it includes different accompa-
niments such as cymbals (mṣltm) and clappers (mrqdm).47 Elsewhere in the
Ugaritic texts, the words mṣltm and mrqdm occur twice (KTU 1.3 I:19;
1.108:4-5). 48 In both of these two occurrences, the context is related to
celebration and joyful feast. For instance, after Baal wins the battle against
Yamm, he holds a victory feast. There, a hero deity sings to Baal with the
accompaniment of cymbals.
Baal’s Victory Feast Employed Cymbals (KTU 1.3 I:18-22)49

(18) qm . ybd . wyšr (18) He rose, chanted and sang,
(19) mṣltm . bd . n‘m (19) (with) cymbals in the hands of the mu-
sician.
(20) yšr . Çzr . tb . ql (20) The hero sang (with) a good voice,
(21) ‘l . b‘l . bṣrrt (22) ṣpn (21) for Baal in the heights of (22) Saphon.
In the hymnic prayer to the deity Rapi’u,50 the poet invokes the people
to bless Rapi’u and to extol him with music including both mṣltm and
mrqdm.
The Praise to Rapi’u Involved Cymbals and Castanets (KTU 1.108:1-

5)
(1) [xx]n .yšt . rp’u . mil . ‘lm . (1) May Rapi’u, king of eternity drink [ ],
46This is not unlike the case of Anat seeking El’s permission to deal with an
unsatisfactory state: the rebellion of Aqhat.
48 Dietrich and Loretz, Word List, 136, 138.
49 When Anat speaks of Baal’s revivification, she may allude to this feast. See
KTU 1.17 VI:30-32.

50 The identity of Rapiu is uncertain.
w yšt (2) [’il ]g¨r . w yqr . may he drink, (2) the strong and the pow-
erful [god],
’il . y¨b . b ‘¨trt the god (who) sat on ‘¨trt,
(3) ’il ¨pṭ51 . b hdr‘y . (3) the god (who) rules in hdr’y,
d yšr . w yÄmr whom one sings and makes music
(4) b knr . w ¨lb. (4) with zither and flute,
b tp . w mṣltm . on tp(?) and cymbals,
b m(5)rqdm . dšn . with (5) clappers of ivory,
b ḥbr . k¨r . `bm with the ḥbr skillful `bm.
Studies have shown that music is used to celebrate the cultic events
both in Ugarit and Israel. 52 All the occurrences of the word
‫“ מצלתים‬mṣltm” in the Hebrew Bible appears in the context of celebration
of cultic events such as in transporting the ark to the city of David and in
the dedication of the wall of Jerusalem.53 The function of cymbals used in
the cultic events is related to its nature as a percussion instrument.54 It is
connected with rhythm and not melody. Thus, the accompaniment of cym-
bals conveys a joyful mood to the occasion of celebration.
This joyful element points backward as an indication of the end of
mourning, and forward as a preparation for Pughat’s vengeance. This dou-
ble function indirectly cast Anat’s violence in a negative light and the
vengeance of Pughat in a positive light.
Dan’il Blesses Pughat for Her Mission of Vengeance. After Dan’il
makes sacrifice to the gods, Pughat in turn requests the blessing of Dan’il to
exact vengeance for Aqhat:
51KTU reads ¨b`.

52Korpel, A Rift in the Clouds, 484. Annie Caubet, “La Musique à Ougarit:
nouveaux témoignages matériels,” in Ugarit, Religion and Culture, 10. For a sketch of
cymbals, see Caubet, “La Musigque,” 29, fig. 1. Joachim Braun, Music in Ancient
Israel/Palestine: Archaeological, Written, and Comparative Source (trans. Douglas W. Stott;
Grand Rapids, Mich., Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2002), 20.
53 1 Chron 13:8; 15:16, 19; 16:5, 42; 25:6; 2 Chron 5:12, 13; 29:25; Ezra 3:10;
Neh 12:27.
54 Matahisa Koitabashi, “Significance of Ugaritic mSltm “Cymbals” in the Anat
Text,” in Cult and Ritual in the Ancient Near East (ed. H.I.H. Prince Takohito Mikasa;
Otto Harrassowitz: Wiesbaden, 1992), 3.
Pughat Sought Dan’il’s Blessings for Revenge (KTU 1.19 IV: 29-35)
(29) qrym . ’ab . dbḥ . l ’ilm (29) My father offered a sacrifice to the
gods,
(30) š‘ly . dÇ¨h . b šmym (30) he caused incense to rise into heav-
ens,
(31) dÇ¨ . hrnmy . b kbkbm (31) incense of hrnmy into the stars.
(32) l tbrkn55 . ’alk . brktm (32) (Father), Bless me, I will go blessed!
(33) tmrn. ’alk . nmrrt (33) Strengthen me, I will go strengthened!
(34) ’imÆṣ . mÆṣ . ’aÆy . (34) I will slay the slayer of my brother.
’akl [.] m (35) kly[ . ‘]l56 .’umty I will finish [ ] (35) (Who) finished my
mother’s child.”
w y‘n . dn (36) ‘il . mt . rp’i. And Dan (36) ’il, man of Rap’iu replied,
npš . tḥ[.] pÇ[t] (37) ¨kmt . “By my life, let Pugha[t] (37) bearer of
mym . water, live,
ḥspt . l š‘r (38) ṭl . who extracts dew from the flee (38) ce,
yd‘t [.] hlk . kbkm xx who knows the course of the stars,
(39) npš . hy57 . mÆ . (39) by my life (?), my brain (?)
tmÆṣ . mÆṣ[ . ’aÆh] You will slay the slayer of [your brother],
(40) tkl . mkly . ‘l . ’umt .[xx] You will finish the one who finished the
child of your mother …
The objective of Pughat’s request from Dan’il is to avenge her brother,

Aqhat, by killing the murderer. Dan’il in turn assures Pughat of his own
blessing, not the gods’ blessing. By conferring his blessing to Pughat, Dan’il
approves Pughat’s act of vengeance – a vengeance that will be accom-
plished through an act of violence. By implication, Dan’il perceives Pughat’s
violence as an act of vengeance, an act to remedy a wrong.
55 It is possible that Pughat invokes the gods to bless her mission of vengeance.
I take the word tbrkn as 2ms with Dan’il as the subject since the context suggests
that Pughat is speaking to Dan’il. Cf. Gibson and Aitken take the subject as refer-
ring to the gods, “Let the gods bless me.” See Gibson, CML, 120 and Aitken, The
Aqhat Narrative, 77, 105.
56 Pardee remarks that in the strict sense, this word means “suckling, ” thus it
denotes “child.” See Pardee, “The ’Aqhatu,” 355.

57 KTU reads “hy.” See KTU, 61. The context suggests the word “ḥy.”

The extant text does not mention whether Dan’il has inquired into the
cause for his son’s death. The only possible lacuna that may have included
Dan’il’s inquiry appears in KTU 1.19 II:49-55 where Dan’il responds to the
news of his son’s death, because there are no other major gaps in the rest of
the story to justify the inclusion of Dan’il’s inquiry. Yet, it is doubtful
whether these six lines, being so brief, would include Dan’il’s inquiry and
the messengers’ reply. It is more likely that Dan’il does not inquire into the
reason for his son’s death. This suggests that what matters to Dan’il is the
death of his son, not so much the cause behind it. The death of his son
constitutes enough reason for Dan’il to disapprove of Anat’s violence.
For Dan’il, Anat’s violence is a case of unjust murder and his son,
Aqhat, is the victim of that crime. This is a personal matter. The author
purposely withholds the piece of information regarding the encounter be-
tween Anat and Aqhat from Dan’il so as to present Dan’il’s point of view
as a one-sided point of view.
On the contrary, Dan’il approves Pughat’s violence. He confers “by
his life” his blessings upon Pughat for her mission of vengeance. Thus,
Dan’il views Pughat as a blood-avenger who will redeem the family honor
by slaying the murderer.
These two opposing points of view on Anat and Pughat, a murderer
and an avenger, reveal that Dan’il does not object to the idea of violence.
He is concerned with the cause for violence. For him, it is reasonable to use
violence for the cause of justice as in the case of taking vengeance for the
death of a family member but it is wrong to use violence to kill his son re-
gardless of any “legitimate” reasons.
This latter concept leads to the connection between one’s perception
of violence and one’s relationship with the victim of the violence. In
Dan’il’s case, if the victim of Anat’s violence is someone else outside of his
family, he may not have cared enough to respond the way he did. There-
fore, Dan’il’s perception and conception of violence are tightly bound up
with his relationship with the victim of the violence. Since the victim of
Anat’s violence is his son, it accounts for the two diverging points of view
of Dan’il regarding the two acts of violence in the story.

The text places great emphasis on the emotions of Dan’il, from desiring a
son, to having a son, to losing the son, and to taking vengeance against the
losing of the son. Dan’il is depicted as a real human character with flesh and
blood. This emphasis on emotion aids greatly in the audience’s identifica-

tion of Dan’il’s feelings and his plight.

The story brings out the issue of the need for a son and the tragic loss of
the son. This experience must have engendered sympathy in the story’s au-
dience. By portraying Dan’il as a positive character, and by elevating the
audience’s knowledge over Dan’il’s, the author establishes a reliable rela-
tionship with the audience, which influences the audience’s perception of
Dan’il by sympathizing with his tragedy and his ignorance.
In addition, the author’s descriptions of Dan’il’s distress, anger, and
grief also affect the audience’s emotion and invite the audience to identify
with Dan’il’s loss and feelings. The identification with Dan’il’s emotion
arouses a sense of justice and vengeance on the part of the audience. Lanser
states that the more the character is “subjectified,” the greater the audi-
ence’s access to his or her persona and the more powerful the affinity or
identification with that particular character.58 Thus, the “subjectification” of
Dan’il by the author of the story greatly influences the perception of the
audience.
PUGHAT
The Characterization of Pughat in the Story of Aqhat

Pughat first appears in KTU 1.19 I: 34, after Anat kills Aqhat and plays a
significant role subsequent to that event. The name “Pughat” is a common
Ugaritic word for “girl,” 59 the feminine counterpart to the male pÇy,
“boy.”60 The names of Aqhat’s parents (Dan’il and Danatiya) both build on
the root dny “the administration of justice” which may reflect their social
roles as king and queen. The name of Aqhat, which means “obedience,”
reveals his familial role. 61 As opposed to her parents and her brother’s
names, the name “Pughat” simply reflects her gender as a female. Her epi-
thets reflect her role as a “house girl.”
58 Susan Sniader Lanser, The Narrative Act: Point of View in Prose Fiction (Prince-
ton: Princeton University, 1981), 206.
59 This word appears 6 times in KTU 1.15 III: 7-12, describing that king Kirtu’s
wife will bear girls to him. It also occurs in KTU 1.102 where there is a list of cen-
sus including women, children and young people. This word designates young girls.
60 McAfee, “The Patriarch’s Longed-for Son,” 104-5.
Pughat’s threefold epithet “the bearer of water” (¨kmt my), “the collec-
tor of dew from the fleece” (ḥspt. lš‘r. ṭl), and “the one who knows the
course of the stars” (yd‘t. hlk. kbkbm)62 emphasize Pughat’s household du-
ties: she draws and collects water and she rises up early when the stars are
about to disappear from the sky.63 From these images, the author depicts
Pughat as the “the girl next door,” and the dutiful daughter.
After the death of Aqhat, Pughat’s “house girl” image soon changes
into a warrior image. She exacts blessing from her father to avenge her
brother. She places a knife and enters the tent of Yatpan to carry out her
vengeance. The story describes Pughat as a dutiful daughter, a faithful sis-
ter, a blood-avenger, and a heroine. She expresses distress and grief at her
brother’s death, but also shows courage, strength and determination when
she decides to avenge her brother. Therefore, in the Story of Aqhat, Pughat
is portrayed as a full-fledged character, a positive figure like Dan’il, her fa-
ther. This positive portrayal encourages the audience to side with her.

After the death of Aqhat, the author describes Pughat’s reactions. The per-
ception of Pughat on Anat’s violence is reflected in her emotion, her
speech, and her actions after the death of Aqhat. The author first draws
attention to her emotion, and then focuses on her speech and actions.
Pughat Expresses Grief. The story first describes Pughat’s emotion
when she perceives the diminished state of the land and the flock of birds
hovering over her father’s house.64 Then the text reads:
Pughat Wept (KTU 1.19 I: 34-35)

(34) tbky . pÇt . bm . lb (34) Pughat wept in (her) heart,
(35) tdm‘. bm . kbd (35) Shed tears in (her) liver.
(36) tmz ‘. kst . dn’il . mt (36) Rent is the garment of Dan’il, man of
(37) rp’i . ’al<l>. Çzr. mt hrnmy (37) Rap’iu, robe of the hero, man of
Harmemite.
62 The text repeats her first epithet “the bearer of water” three times (KTU 1.19
II: 1-3, 6-7; IV: 28). Wyatt notes that “knowing the course of stars” involves ele-
ments of astronomy and astrology. However, Pughat is a house girl, not a diviner.
This epithet may simply refer to her reading of the agricultural seasons off from the
celestial calendar. See Wyatt, RTU, 297, n. 209.
63 Margalit, UPA, 364-5.
64 KTU 1.19 I: 29-33.
Upon her observation of the vegetation and the flock of birds: Pughat
weeps in her heart. Pughat’s intuition tells her that something disastrous has
happened since it is a common belief in ancient cultures that the suffering
of nature implies misdeed and death. 65 The context suggests that Pughat
may not realize that the victim is her brother since the news of Aqhat’s
death comes later in the story.66 Therefore, both Pughat and Dan’il perceive
the diminishing of nature without knowing the cause behind it.
However, the author has revealed the cause to the audience of the
story. His purpose of withholding this information from Pughat and Dan’il
seems to help the audience anticipate their response once Pughat and Dan’il
realize the cause for Aqhat’s death, thus creating suspense and a dramatic
effect for the story.
In KTU 1.19 I: 49, Dan’il calls his daughter to lead a donkey for him
to ride on in order to inspect the condition of the land. The author de-
scribes Pughat’s emotion vividly in the following lines:
Pughat Assumed Duties of a Son (KTU 1.19 II: 8-11)

(8) bkm67 . tmdln . ‘r (8) Weeping, she saddled a male-donkey,
(9) bkm . tṣmd . pḥl . (9) weeping, she harnessed a donkey,
bkm (10) tšu68 . ’abh . weeping, (10) she lifted up her father.
tštnn. l [b]mt ‘r She placed him unto the back of the donkey,
(11) l ysmsm69 . bmt . pḥl70 (11) onto the most comfortable part of the
back of the donkey.
65 Gibson, CML, 25. Other examples of the death of a person affects nature in-
clude Baal’s death (KTU 1.6 IV: 1-5), the death of Abel (Gen 4:10), the death of
Saul (2 Sam 1:19-27), and the death of Enkidu (Gilgamesh Epic VIII: I).
66 KTU 1.19 II: 27-44.
67 Most commentators take the m in bkm as an enclitic mem, and translate bk
“weeping.” e.g. Caquot, TO I, 446; Parker, UNP, 69; Pardee, “The ’Aqhatu,” 352;
and Wyatt, RTU, 298. Margalit offers an alternative translation by taking bkm as
cognate with Arabic bakima “be dumb, silent, mute.” Thus he translates “silently.”
Margalit reasons that this interpretation is in line with Pughat’s self-control as she
cries “inwardly.” See Margalit, UPA, 159, 360, n. 13. Margalit’s translation, though
different, would not deny the negative emotion of Pughat. Dijkstra and de Moor
take the word as an adverb of time (comparable to Hebrew and Aramaic bkn)
meaning “thereupon.” See Dijkstra and de Moor, “Problematic Passages,” 203. De
Moor later renders the word “then.” See De Moor, ARTU, 252. Gibson has
“forthwith.” In his notes, he adds “possibly ‘weeping.’” See Gibson, CML, 115.
68 From the root NŠ’, “to lift up.” Segert, BGUL, 194.
The story presents a picture of a young girl who experiences great

emotional pain as she leads the donkey to her father and lifts her father up
onto the back of the donkey – an activity normally performed by a male.71
Lines 8-11 above recall an episode in the Baal Cycle.72 In this latter story,
Athirat’s male servant Qudsh wa-Amrar prepares the donkey for Athirat to
ride on in order to journey to El’s abode. The author employs the same
vocabulary and wording in both texts. 73 He seems to suggest that now
Pughat, the daughter, takes the place of Aqhat, the son – an ironic twist to
Dan’il’s need for a son.
Pughat Exacts Blessings from Dan’il for Vengeance. Close to the
end of the story, Pughat’s role as an avenger replaces her initial image as a
house girl. Her action takes over her emotion. After the seven years of
mourning for Aqhat’s death, Dan’il sacrifices to the gods and asks their fa-
vor to redeem the tragedy of his son’s death. Immediately following that,
Pughat comes to her father and asks for his permission to slay the slayer of
her brother (see text and translation above, KTU 1.19 IV:29-35).
The exaction of the blessing from the gods and from Dan’il and the
joyful aspect of the feast are instructive for the author’s portrayal of
Pughat’s vengeance since they shift the story’s focus from the previous
tragic mood to a now hopeful mood. This change of mood indicates that
what follows will serve as a remedy for what went wrong. Therefore, the
blessings of Dan’il, together with the accompanying music at the feast indi-
rectly cast Pughat’s vengeance in a favorable light.
In Pughat’s speech of exacting blessings from Dan’il, she uses the
word “slay (mÆṣ)” (KTU 1.19 IV:34). This word carries the meaning of
striking someone with lethal and decisive blow. 74 This word is used in
Anat’s double-massacre (KTU 1.3 II:5-6) to kill the human soldiers, in
Anat’s threat against El (KTU 1.3 V:23) to smash his crown, and in Anat’s
killing of Aqhat (KTU 1.18 IV:13, 40; 1.19 I:14, 15). Here, the story uses
69 In Segert’s glossary, this word means “beautiful, pleasant,” see Segert, BGUL,
188. The meaning “beautiful” is in the sense of “the most comfortable part.”
70 Wyatt notes that this bicolon occurs at KTU 1.4 IV: 14-5. See Wyatt, RTU,
298, n. 212.
71 Van Selms, Marriage & Family, 112
72 KTU 1.4 IV: 18-15.
73 For example, mdl ‘r “leads the donkey,” (1.19 II: 8; 1.4 IV: 9), ṣmd pḥl “ropes
up the ass,” (1.19 II: 9, 1.4 IV: 10), lbmt ‘r “the back of the donkey,” (1.19 II: 10, 1.4
IV: 14), lysmsm bmt pḥl “the most comfortable back of the ass,” (1.19 II: 11, 1.4 IV:
15).
74 Walter C. Kaiser, ‫ מחץ‬, in TWOT, 499.
the same word to describe Pughat’s vengeance coming from her own
mouth. This choice of word suggests the author’s intention to use Pughat’s
vengeance as a reversal for Anat’s violence in order to redeem what Anat
has done. Both women are portrayed as warriors capable of violence. Yet
Pughat’s violence is cast in a more favorable light than Anat’s.
Pughat Avenges. After obtaining Dan’il’s blessing for vengeance,
Pughat prepares to infiltrate into the camp of Yatpan to carry out her mis-
sion. She first disguises herself by putting on her clothing.
Pughat Disguised Herself (KTU 1.19 IV:44-46)

t[ ] (44) tlbš . npṣ. Çzr . Un[derneath](44) she put on a hero’s cloth-
ing,
tšt . Æ[lpn] b (45) nšgh . she placed a k[nife] in (45) her nšg
ḥrb . tšt . b t‘r[th] a sword she placed in [her] sheath.75
(46) w ‘l . tlbš . npṣ . ’a¨t . (46) And on top she put on a woman’s
clothing.
The wearing of a hero’s clothing underneath and a woman’s clothing
on top suggest the element of deception, as does the concealment of the
weapons. Wyatt observes that the description of Pughat’s clothing is in the
form of an envelope: the bicolon on clothing frames the bicolon on weap-
ons, which make a tetracolon. Thus the weapons are concealed within
Pughat’s garments. 76 These deceptions acutely contrast with Anat’s em-
ployment of deception in killing Aqhat.
Before Anat carries out her violence, she lures Aqhat to the town of
ABLM by pretending that she wants to teach him the art of hunting.77 The
text at this particular juncture is very broken and we do not know the exact
nature of Anat’s “lure.”78 Anat may have used her charm as a means to at-
75 Heb.‫תער‬
76 Wyatt, RTU, 310, n. 267.
77 KTU 1.18 I: 22-34.
78 The text reads “’at .’aÆ. wan. [ ].” Many commentators and KTU
1.18 I: 24 restore to ’a[Ætk], to mean “you are (my) brother, and I am [your sister].”
Lying behind this statement is the suggestion that Anat is making a formal marriage
proposal to Aqhat. See Gaster, Thespis, 290; De Moor and Dijkstra, “Problematic
Passages,” 194; Gibson, CML, 111; Coogan, Stories From Ancient Canaan, 39; de
Moor, ARTU, 242; Pardee, COS 1.103: 348. Although this reading is possible, it is
based on the conjecture of the restored reading. As Walls indicates, the poor condi-
tion of this line diminishes the above interpretation. Wyatt maintains that the pro-
posed a in (a[Ætk]) is an over-written horizontal wedge, and thus renders the above
tract Aqhat. As Wyatt points out “sexual feelings and activity and physical
violence have a long joint history.” In any case, Anat’s lure of Aqhat in-
volves deception – “she disarms Aqhat by pretending that all is well be-
tween them, as though they are jolly hunters together.”79 Not only do both
Pughat and Anat employ deception in their missions to kill, they also share
the manner of placing their respective weapons in their sheaths.
Anat Placed Yatpan in her Sheath (KTU 1.18 IV:27-29)

(27) tqḥ . yṭpn . mhr . št (27) She took Yatpan, the Soldier of the
Lady,
(28) tštn . k nšr . b ḥbšh (28) she placed him like an eagle in her belt,
km . diy (29) b t‘rth . like a bird (29) in her sheath.
Just as Anat places Yatpan in her sheath, Pughat places her weapons in
her sheath. Just as Yatpan functions as a “weapon” for Anat to kill, the
knife and the sword function for Pughat as weapons to kill. These similari-
ties in language and image suggest that the author intends to contrast
Pughat’s vengeance to Anat’s killing.
Up to this point, the descriptions of the activities of Pughat move pro-
gressively from one step to another, from exacting blessings to preparing
for vengeance, which will culminate in the actual act of vengeance. After
putting on her clothing, the story continues:
Pughat Infiltrated the Tents of Yatpan (KTU 1.19 IV:47-52)

[lm] (47) ṣb’i. nrt ’ilm . špš . (47) When the lamp of the gods, Shapshu,
set,
‘r[bt] (48) pÇt . m’inš . šdm . (48) Pughat entered the encampment (in)
the fields,
l m‘r[b] (49) nrt . ’ilm . špš . (49) when the lamp of the gods, Shapshu,
declined,
mÇy[t] (50) pÇt . l ’ahlm . (50) Pughat arrived at the tents.
reading impossible. See Wyatt, RTU, 279, n. 132. Dressler suggests the translation
for this line “Come, brother, and I [ ].” See Harold H.P. Dressler, “The Meta-
morphosis of a Lacuna: Is AT.Aï. WAN ... a Proposal of Marriage?” UF 11
(1979a): 211-17. Parker and Wyatt follow Dressler’s interpretation. See Parker,
UNP, 64 and Wyatt, RTU, 279. This translation seems to fit the context of Anat’s
offering to teach Aqhat to hunt.
79 Wyatt, RTU, 280, n. 132.
rgm . l yṭ[pn . y] (51) bl . Word (51) was brought to Yat[pan]:

‘agrtn 80. b’at . b Ädk . “The woman we hired has come to your
dwellings,
[pÇt] (52) b’at . b<a>hlm . [the girl] (52) has come to your tents.”
What is Pughat’s disguise? Two views are suggested in the past: (1)
Pughat disguises herself as Anat;81 (2) Pughat disguises herself as a prosti-
tute or a servant girl. 82 Both views depend on the understanding of the
word “’agrtn.” Judging by the word itself without the vowels, it can be taken
as either active or passive in meaning, either “the one who hires” or “the
one who is hired.” If the intended meaning is the former, then the referent
is Anat since Anat has the power to hire Yatpan and his servants. If the
intended meaning is the latter, then the referent may be a prostitute or a
servant girl. This would point to Pughat’s disguise as either a prostitute or a
servant girl.
I find the first view more convincing for the following reasons:
(1) Since the messengers of Yatpan do not express suspicion upon
Pughat’s arrival, they must have regarded Pughat as someone they recog-
nized. However, there is no indication that Pughat has a prior relationship
with Yatpan. This suggests that Pughat disguises herself as someone whom
they are able to recognize. Pughat’s putting on of a warrior’s clothing before
she enters the camp indicates her intent to disguise herself as someone who
will not be arousing suspicion.
(2) Yatpan’s boast seems logical when we take his object of boasting as
Anat rather than a prostitute or a servant girl since he claims that the hand
that slays Aqhat will slay thousands of the Lady’s (i.e. Anat) enemies. Why
would Yatpan mention his slaying of Aqhat if the object of his boast is a
prostitute or a servant girl who is unaware of the identity of Aqhat? It is
unlikely that a prostitute or a servant girl hired by Yatpan will have a prior
knowledge of Aqhat. Yatpan’s boast makes sense only when we take his
object of boasting as Anat.
(3) The interpretation of the word št (KTU 1.19 IV:57, 59) as Anat’s
epithet rather than the verb “to drink” (šty) seems to make more sense in
understanding Yatpan’s boast. As Wright states, “the evidence that št is an
80 Akk. “hireling” (’aÇru). See CAD A1, 151-53.

81 For example, Gibson, CML, 121; de Moor, ARTU, 264; Watson, “Puzzling
Passages,” 375-76; Margalit, UPA, 452; Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 209; Wyatt,
RTU, 311.
82 For example, Aitken, The Aqhat Narrative, 105; Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narra-
tive, 131; Walls, The Goddess Anat, 208-9.

epithet is not conclusive but is relatively strong.”83 Two other places point
to št as Anat’s epithet (KTU 1.13:7; 1.22 I:9). Both places connect “warrior”
to “Anat.”84 Yatpan’s own epithet “mhr št” (Soldier of the Lady)85 also adds
support to the interpretation of št as Anat’s epithet.
(4) The descriptions of Pughat’s vengeance call to mind the descrip-
tions used for Anat’s violence. For example, the manner in which Pughat
conceals her weapons (KTU 1.19 IV:43-46) echoes the way Anat places
Yatpan as her weapon (KTU 1.18 IV:27-29); Pughat uses the word mÆṣ
(KTU 1.19 IV:34) to indicate her mission of vengeance that forms a rever-
sal of Anat’s employment of the same word mÆṣ (KTU 1.19 I:14-15) in her
slaying of Aqhat. Both Pughat and Anat execute their violence in the con-
text of feast scenes. These similarities suggest that the narrator intended to
use Pughat as an antagonist of Anat. Pughat disguising herself as Anat
would form a literary balance to the plot and the design of the story.
Unfortunately, the story leaves us in suspense as to whether Pughat
succeeds in her revenge. Many scholars propose the supposed ending of the
story, i.e. Pughat’s successful revenge, based on the comparative evidence.86
Parker, for instance, contends that the conventional ending for a story like
the Story of Aqhat always ends in a female’s successful avenging of her
male enemy. This is the same with Anat’s vengeance over Mot in the Baal
Cycle (KTU 1.6 II: 30-35), Jael’s killing of Sisera in Judges 5, a nameless
woman’s killing of Abimelech in Judges 9, and Judith’s killing of Holopher-
nes in the Apocrypha (Judith 13).
Parker adds that since various parts of the Story of Aqhat employ tra-
ditional narrative motifs in its composition,87 its ending corresponds to this

84 KTU 1.13 is a hymn to Anat. Line 7 reads mhrk “your warrior.” KTU 1.22 is
part of the Rapiuma text. I:9 has mhr ‘nt “warriors of Anat.”
85 KTU 1.18 IV:5, 27.
86 For example, Gray, Coogan, De Moor, Margalit, Walls, Parker, and Wright.
87 For example, in the beginning of the story, we have a patriarch who longs for
a son (KTU 1.17 I: 1-33). This motif corresponds to king Kirtu’s longing for prog-
eny (KTU 1.14 I: 1-35) and Abraham’s longing for a son (Gen 15-18). The hospi-
tality of Dan’il’s family to Kothar-wa-Khasis is comparable to the hospitality of
Abraham to the three visitors (Gen 18: 1-16) and Lot’s hospitality to the messen-
gers of God (Gen 19: 1-16). The encounter between Anat and Aqhat is reminiscent
of the encounter between Ishtar and Gilgamesh (Gilgamesh Epic, VI) and the en-
counter between Jezebel and Naboth (1 Kgs 21). For a detailed comparison of
various portions of Aqhat with other ancient Near Eastern parallels, see Parker,
“Death and Devotion,” 72-81.
tradition as well. Parker’s interpretation, however, overlooks one element.

The stories cited above all involve a deity killing another deity or a human
being killing another human being. The Story of Aqhat, however, overturns
this traditional motif: A human being attempts to kill a divine being, Yat-
pan, although Yatpan occupies the lowest rank in the divine realm. This is a
rare exception in ancient literature. It is possible that the ending may not
conform to the traditional narrative motif.
Therefore, whether Pughat succeeds in her revenge in the story re-
mains a conjecture rather than a supposed fact. Although it is very likely
that the story may end in Pughat’s successful revenge, the rarity of excep-
tions to the traditional narrative precludes certainty on this element of the
story.
The fact that Pughat takes vengeance against Yatpan reveals her per-
ception of Anat’s violence as an unjust act and her brother’s death as an
innocent death.
The Role of Pughat as a Blood-Avenger

By volunteering to slay the slayer of her brother, Pughat takes the responsi-
bility to redeem the death of her brother. Other examples in ancient litera-
ture where a sister takes the role of avenging a brother include Anat, who
redeems her brother/husband Baal in the Baal Cycle, Isis, who redeems her
brother/husband Osiris in Egypt, and Geshtinanna, who redeems her
brother Dumuzi in Sumer.88
In his study of blood-vengeance in Israel, Tullock defines blood-
vengeance this way: “Blood-vengeance is an act whereby the avenger, on
behalf of one who has been slain or otherwise injured by another, takes
measures to inflict upon the offender a like or a worse injury than the of-
fender has inflicted upon his victim.”89 Tullock’s definition takes into ac-
count the cases of injury, either physical or psychological such as a rape and
a curse. He also states that the act of vengeance is generally based on family
relationship but it can apply to a covenant relationship as well.90 This defini-
tion is a rather broad and inclusive one.
Peel provides a more refined and narrower definition of blood-
vengeance: “The right and obligation, in the case of the murder of a blood
88 Amico, “The Status of Women,” 155-6.

89 Tullock, “Blood-Vengeance,” 140.
90 For example, David’s covenantal relationship with Jonathan and his marital
relationship with Michal, Saul’s daughter, makes him obligated to avenge Saul’s
death (2 Sam 1:13-16). Tullock, “Blood-Vengeance,” 140-142, 165.
relative, to enact vengeance upon the murderer and his descendants.”91 In

contrast to Tullock’s definition, Peel’s definition identifies the nature of
blood-vengeance as specifically referring to the act of murder, not including
injury or other forms of crimes such as rape and curses, and it applies only
to the family involved, not to someone outside of the family.
This latter definition specifically applies to Pughat’s situation. From
Pughat’s point of view, Aqhat’s death is viewed as a case of murder and
thus she takes the right and obligation to enact vengeance upon the mur-
derer.
Additionally, the expressions used in describing the death of Aqhat
bring to mind the expressions used in describing situations of blood-
vengeance, which adds support to the interpretation of Pughat’s vengeance
as a case of blood-vengeance.
In Biblical Hebrew, two words are closely bound up with the concept
of life and its subsequent loss: ‫ נפשׁ‬and ‫“( דם‬life” and “blood”). Since these
words have received scholarly attention in the past, we do not intend to
repeat the finds.92 Generally speaking, ‫ נפש‬has a broad range of meaning
from “soul,” “living being,” ‘life,” “self,” to “desire,” “appetite,” “emo-
tion,” and “passion.” It denotes “life” as it is manifested through breath-
ing.93 The connection between “life” and “blood” is reflected in Lev 17:11
where it says: “the life of the flesh is in the blood” (‫)נפשׁ הבשׂר בדם הוא‬. Thus
the spilling of blood (‫ )שׁפך דם‬denotes the loss of life. Since all three words
‫נפשׁ‬, ‫דם‬, and ‫ שׁפך‬are cognates with the corresponding Ugaritic words, npš,
dm, and špk, we may assume they share the same semantic values as well.
When Anat instructs Yatpan to kill, she uses the phrases “spill (his)
blood” (špk … dm)94 and “let his life go off like a breath” (tṣi km rḥ npšh).95
These descriptions portray Anat’s killing as an intentional act of violence
that aims to terminate the life of Aqhat. This detailed depiction of Aqhat’s
violent death evokes a sense of vengeance in the minds of the story’s audi-
ence and paves the way for the blood-vengeance of Pughat.
Tullock identifies one principal factor in motivating the act of blood-
vengeance: to restore wholeness to the injured person or group. Vengeance
is a matter of “getting-even.”96 This factor is what Peel calls the psychologi-
91 Peels, The Vengeance of God, 79.

92 For example, Tullock, “Blood-Vengeance,” 47-70.
93 BDB, 659.
94 KTU 1.18 IV:23-24, 34-35.
95 KTU 1.18 IV:24-25, 36.
96 Tullock, “Blood-Vengeance,” 141.
cal motive and the material motive. In addition to this principal factor,
Peels’s study also includes three other motives in the origin of the practice
of blood vengeance. The five motives are listed as follows:
1. Psychological motive: It is part of human nature that with the vio-
lent death of a relative, there surfaces a desire for vengeance in
which feelings of wrath, pride and honor play a role.
2. Material motive: Through the death of the blood relative, the fam-
ily suffers a loss that calls for compensation. By killing the trans-
gressor, the act of vengeance restores a form of balance.
3. Superstitious motive: According to animistic concepts, the soul of
the murdered person would not leave the blood relatives in peace
until the vengeance was complete and his blood was “set free”.
4. Moral motive: The common sense of justice requires retribution
for any infringement of the right.
5. Religious motive: The god of the murdered person has lost a wor-
shipper, which mandates vengeance; through blood vengeance the
wrath of the god is appeased.97
Three of these five (no. 1, 2, and 4) suggested motives seem to apply
to Pughat’s act of vengeance. The other two (no. 3 and 5) are uncertain due
to the limited evidence supplied by the extant text. Pughat’s vengeance may
involve all of the above motives. These motives cover a broad range of
human experience: psychological, material, and moral. Most importantly,
these motives suggest an unsatisfactory state: the death of a blood relative is
not avenged. Thus, Pughat’s vengeance serves as a remedial action against
this unsatisfactory state for the purpose of restoring some kind of balance,
justice and wholeness to the family.
The portrayal of Pughat as a blood avenger and Yatpan as a villain
points to the author’s possible intention to contrast their actions and char-
acters. Pughat emerges as a heroine and her act of vengeance is justified by
the violent death of Aqhat and her own sense of restoration of wholeness
to the family.
From the context of the story, it is certain that Pughat intends to kill
Yatpan. Yet, it is uncertain how exactly Pughat might view Anat, the god-
dess behind the death of Aqhat. When the messengers deliver the death
news of Aqhat to both Dan’il and Pughat, they clearly indicate that Anat
kills Aqhat. Below is the announcement of the death of Aqhat by the two
messengers. The name of Anat is highlighted in bold print.
97Peels, The Vengeance of God, 81. For a survey of different perspectives in

blood vengeance, see Tullock, “Blood-Vengeance,” 1-38.
Pughat Knew Anat was the Killer (KTU 1.19 II:40-44)

(40) tmÇyn . tša . ghm . w[ tṣḥ] (40) They came, raised their voices and
[cried]:
(41) šm‘ . l dn’il . mt . [rpi] (41) “Listen, Dan’il, man of [Rapiu],
(42) mt . ’aqht . Çzr . (42) Aqhat the hero is dead.
[šṣat] (43) btlt . ‘nt . (43) Maiden Anat [has expelled]
k r[ḥ . npšh] [his life] like a win[d],
(44) [[’i]]k ’i¨l . brlth . (44) his spirit like a breath.”
There is no doubt that Anat not only plans the procedures to kill
Aqhat but also is involved in the actual killing of Aqhat. As the text indi-
cates, in her act of killing, Anat puts Yatpan like a bird in her belt. Then she
releases him right above Aqhat’s head, and Yatpan strikes Aqhat to death.98
Although Anat is not the “direct” executioner of Aqhat, she is definitely
behind his death. Even though Pughat realizes that Anat is the real killer,
she chooses Yatpan as the object of her vengeance. This fact is instructive
in our understanding of the nature of Pughat’s vengeance.
Elsewhere in ancient literature, when a blood-vengeance is enacted, it
is usually carried out in the context of a deity against another deity such as
in the case of Anat taking vengeance for Baal against Mot,99 or in the con-
text of a human being against another human being as in the case of Joab
killing Abner because Abner had killed Joab’s brother.100 In Israel, there is
an exception where Yahweh takes vengeance for his people Israel against
other human beings.101 As we mentioned earlier, at Ugarit, we have a rare
98 KTU 1.18 IV: 27-37.

99 Another example of a deity taking vengeance against another deity is: Tiamat
avenges the death of Apsu and Mummu (Enuma Elish I, II).
100 2 Sam 2:18-23, 27. Other examples of a human being taking vengeance
against another human being include: Gideon killed Zebah and Zalmuna who had
killed Gideon’s brothers (Judg 8:18-21), the vengeance of the Gibeonites against
the house of Saul (2 Sam 21:1-9), Amaziah’s vengeance for Joash (2 Kgs 14:5), and
the vengeance for Zechariah ben Jehoiada on Joash (2 Chron 24:20-26). For an
analysis of these passages, see Tullock, “Blood-Vengeance,” 189-206. Peels holds
reservation in whether these texts can be applied to blood vengeance. See Peels, The
Vengeance of God, 81.
101 The book of Nahum is a case in point. Here, God takes vengeance against
the Ninevites for their bloodshed against the Israelites. See especially Nah 1:2-6.
For an extensive research regarding Yahweh’s role in defending Israel, see Long-
incident in the Story of Aqhat where a human being takes vengeance

against a deity, albeit a lesser deity, Yatpan.
The role of Yatpan is significant to the plot of the story. He functions
as “an agent” who executes the plan of his mistress Anat. Since a human
being has no capacity to kill a goddess, the presence of Yatpan provides an
object for Pughat to take vengeance against.102 The role of Yatpan in the
story is reminiscent of “the messengers of Yahweh” (‫)מלאך יהוה‬in the Hebrew
Bible who act on behalf of Yahweh. Pughat’s choosing of Yatpan as her
object of vengeance reveals the hierarchical difference between divine and
human realms. It heightens Pughat’s courage at the same time subtly points
to Anat’s superiority as a deity who gets away with her crime.103

Based on the text, Pughat does not inquire into the cause for Aqhat’s death.
She simply takes vengeance. There are no gaps in the text that would sug-
gest the inclusion of Pughat’s inquiry into Aqhat’s death. Pughat’s intent to
take vengeance suggests her point of view of her vengeance as a necessary
act to redeem an unsatisfactory state, the murder of her family member,
regardless of the cause of the death.
Other observations concerning Pughat’s conception of violence in-
clude:
(1) Since her vengeance is inseparable from an act of violence,
Pughat’s violence is a means to her end. This is not unlike Anat, who uses
violence as a means to her end. The two young ladies share this in common.
(2) By concealing a sword in her sheath, Pughat intends to inflict Yat-
pan with the same violence he has inflicted upon Aqhat. This calls to mind
Tullock’s definition of blood-vengeance: “to inflict upon the offender a like
or a worse injury than the offender has inflicted upon his victim.”104 In this
sense, Pughat accepts the notion and the possibility of using violence as a
means to “return” or “correct” another violence, which fits the Hebrew
Bible’s rule for retaliation – “an eye for an eye.”
man and Reid, God is a Warrior, 31-88.

102 Walls, The Goddess Anat, 207.
103 Margalit and Wright interpret the death of the mother bird Ṣamal as the
fate of Anat. They associate the bird with Anat since Anat is identified symbolically
with a bird in KTU 1.13. See Margalit, UPA, 181, 406-408; Wright, Ritual in Narra-
tive, 219. This interpretation is unlikely since no evidence in the Ugaritic texts sug-
gests that Anat is dead.
104 Tullock, “Blood-Vengeance,” 140-41.
(3) By taking vengeance, Pughat approves her own violence against

Yatpan and disapproves Anat’s violence against Aqhat. This disparity in her
view of the two acts of violence suggests that she does not oppose the idea
of violence. It is the reason for using violence that matters to her.
(4) Last but not least, Pughat’s conception of violence is also closely
linked to her relationship with the victim of the violence. If the victim were
someone else outside of her family, it is unlikely that Pughat would take the
measure to avenge the crime.
Because of Pughat’s kinship relationship with Dan’il and Aqhat, she
shares the same point of view with Dan’il regarding the two acts of violence
in the story.

Like the emphasis of Dan’il’s emotions, the author also draws attention to
Pughat’s emotions with the focus on her grief for the death of Aqhat. This
depiction of her emotion aids the audience’s identification with her and
helps the audience sense the effect of Anat’s violence upon her.

The author portrays Pughat as a dutiful daughter and a faithful sister who
avenges the death of her brother. Her vengeance is placed at the end of the
story, which serves as the resolution to the problem of the death of Aqhat.
This positive portrayal of her helps the audience to view her as a normative
character in the story. The description of her weeping and sadness after the
death of Aqhat also gains sympathy from the audience. The sense of loss
that Pughat feels not only compels her to take vengeance but also invokes a
sense of hope for a successful vengeance on the part of the audience.
However, the fact that the object of Pughat’s vengeance is Yatpan and
not Anat reflects the limitation of her power. Pughat’s lack of knowledge of
Aqhat’s arrogance, which contributes to his death and the audience’s
knowledge of it, complicates the perception of the audience regarding her
vengeance.
AQHAT
The Characterization of Aqhat

Aqhat is the center of the story. He is the major character upon which every
other character in the story hinges. The activity of every other character in
the story revolves around Aqhat, either his birth or his death: El’s permis-
sion is concerned with Aqhat’s rebellion against Anat. The focus of Anat’s
covetousness is the bow of Aqhat. It is also Aqhat’s arrogance and rebellion

that provoke Anat’s anger, which leads to her killing of Aqhat. Aqhat’s fa-
ther, Dan’il, desires a son and the subsequent loss of the son prompts his
actions of retaliation. Pughat is the sister of Aqhat who takes vengeance
against the death of Aqhat. Baal, the patron god of Dan’il, intercedes to El
for Dan’il to have a son and then when Aqhat dies, he protests against it.
The story is rightly named after Aqhat.
The author portrays Aqhat as a young man who is wise in his own
eyes, but lacks the wisdom to perceive and recognize Anat as the goddess
of war. In his brief appearance in the story, Aqhat has a distinctive voice of
his own. His conversation with Anat reveals that he is a person who stands
firm by what he believes. Thus, the character Aqhat is a full-fledged charac-
ter.

Aqhat, the central character in the story, although appearing briefly (KTU
1.17 VI:20-41), is significant to the plot of the story. Although he does not
mention violence in his direct speech to Anat nor give any hint of his point
of view of violence in the story, he is the key that links the two acts of vio-
lence – Anat kills him because she wants his bow and punishes him with
violence for his pride and irreverence; Pughat attempts to kill the one who
has killed Aqhat. Thus, Aqhat’s arrogance and rebellion account for Anat’s
employment of violence and Aqhat’s subsequent death gives reason for
Pughat’s violence.
Aqhat’s perception of Anat is reflected in his encounter with Anat.
Here we will once again investigate the conflicts aroused between them, but
this time, the focus is on Aqhat.
Anat’s Offer and Aqhat’s Refusal (KTU 1.17 VI:15-41)

(16) tšu . gh . ]w tṣḥ . (16) [She lifted up her voice] and she
cried,
šm‘ . m‘ (17) [l ’aqht . Çzr . “Hear, now, (17) [Aqhat the Hero],
i]rš . ksp . w ’atnk ask for silver and I will give (it) to you.
(18) [Ærš . w ’aÁ]lḥk . (18) [Gold, and I will send] (it) to you.
w tn . qštk . ‘m (19) [btlt . ] ‘n[t .] But give your bow to (19) [Maiden Anat],
q§‘tk . ybmt. limm your arrows to the Sister-in-law of the
Peoples.”
(20) w y‘n . ’aqht . Çzr . (20) Then Aqhat the hero replied,
’adr . ¨qbm (21) b lbnn . “The strongest trees (21) from Lebanon,
’adr . gdm . b rumm the strongest sinews from the wild ox,
(22) ’adr . qrnt . b y‘lm . (22) The strongest horns from the Moun-
tain goats,
<‘adr>mtnm (23) b ‘qbt . ¨r . <the strongest> tendons (23) from the
bull’s heels,
’adr . b Çl il . qnm the strongest reeds from the great marsh,
(24) tn . l k¨r . w Æss . (24) give to Kathar-wa-Hasis,
yb‘l . qšt . l ‘nt let him make a bow for Anat,
(25) qṣ‘t . l ybmt . limm . w t‘n . btlt (25) arrows for the Sister-in-law of the
(26)‘nt . peoples.” And Maiden (26) Anat an-
swered,
irš . ḥym . l ’aqht . Çzr “Ask for life, Aqhat the hero,
(27) ’irš . ḥym . w ’atnk . (27) ask for life, and I will give (it) to you;
bl mt (28) w ’ ašlḥk . immortality, (28) and I will send (it) to
you.
’ašsprk . ‘m . b‘l I will cause you to count years with Baal;
(29) šnt . ‘m . bn ’il . tspr . yrÆm (29) With son of El, you shall count the
months.
(30) k b‘l . k yḥwy . y‘šr . (30) Like Baal, he shall live indeed.
ḥwy . y‘š (31) r . w yšqynh . ybd . w He shall be feasted, alive, (31) The min-
yšr .‘lh strel shall chant and sing concerning him.”
(32) n‘m[n . w y]‘nynn . (32) [And she] said to him,

’ap ’ank . ’aḥwy (33)’aqht [. Ç]zr . “Surely I will revive (33) Aqhat the
[he]ro.”
w . y‘n . ’aqht . Çzr But Aqhat the hero replied,
(34) ’al . tšrgn . y btltm . (34) “Do not lie, O Maiden,
dm . l Çzr (35) šrgk . ÆÆm . to a hero (35) your lie is rubbish.
mt . ’uÆryt . mh . yqḥ What does a man get in the end?
(36) mh . yqḥ . mt . ’a¨ryt . (36) What does a man get as his destiny?
spsg . ysk (37) [l] riš . Glaze will be poured (37) [upon] the head,
ḥrṣ . l `r . qdqdy gold on the top of the skull.
(38) [’ap ]mt . kl . ’amt . (38) [Surely] the death of all I shall die,
w ’an . mtm . ’amt and I shall die indeed.”
(39) [’ap.m]¨n . rgmm . ’argm . “(39) [Also, anoth]er thing I will say:
qštm (40) [k l . ]mhrm Bows (40) [are for] warriors!
ht . tṣdn . tin¨t (41) [b h g]m . Will women now hunt (41) [with it]?”
Aqhat’s speech reveals his perception of Anat. Aqhat views Anat as
someone who desires his bow, who lies to him by offering him immortality,
and who, being a woman, wants to perform a male’s task and use a male
weapon. Aqhat apparently refuses to budge.
From Aqhat’s response to Anat, his arrogance is expressed in the fol-
lowing ways:
1. First of all, Aqhat refuses to surrender the bow.
2. Aqhat shows off his knowledge of how the composite bow is
made.105
3. Aqhat bluntly charges Anat with deceit and lectures Anat on the
reality of human mortality.106
4. Aqhat insults Anat’s gender and states his male superiority over
her.107
The author does not hide this character trait of arrogance from the au-
dience. Since Anat is the object of Aqhat’s speech, she is well aware of the
latter’s arrogance. When Anat approaches El for permission to kill, she
complains about Aqhat’s arrogance. 108 El responds, “whoever resists you
will surely be crushed.”109
Thus, Aqhat’s arrogance is made known to the audience of the story,
to Anat and to El. However, it is hidden from the human characters of the
story, Dan’il and Pughat. When the messengers deliver the news of Aqhat’s
death, they do not include the reasons for causing his death.110 There is no
indication in the context that Dan’il and Pughat are aware of the encounter
between Aqhat and Anat. The unveiling of Aqhat’s arrogance to the divine
105 KTU 1.17 VI:20-23.

106 KTU 1.17 VI:34-38.
107 KTU 1.17 VI:39-41.
108 KTU 1.17 VI:51-52.
109 KTU 1.18 I:19.
110 KTU 1.19 II:40-44.
characters and its veiling from the human characters of the story presents
another disparate point of view, this time between the divine beings/author
and the human characters of the story.
In this respect, the audience sees what the author sees. The audience
knows more than what Dan’il and Pughat know. This veiling of informa-
tion from Dan’il and Pughat further points to the multi-dimensional por-
trayal of the author’s point of view: Where one stands and knows in the
story influences one’s point of view on things, including the perception of
Anat’s violence.

The fact that Aqhat dies because of his arrogance and pride suggests that
the author does not approve his arrogant attitude towards Anat. Aqhat is
not wise enough or experience enough to recognize his own place in the
hierarchical order of the world, which proves deadly, and ultimately goes
against his self-interest.

The two human characters, Dan’il and Pughat, share the same point of view
of the two acts of violence in the story. Both of them disapprove Anat’s
violence and approve Pughat’s violence. This disparity in their perception
of violence is directly linked to their relationship with the victim of the vio-
lence. For them, violence is manifested in two opposing ways. It is accept-
able to use violence for the cause of justice and blood-vengeance but it is
wrong to use violence to kill their family member for any reason. Like the
divine characters in the story, the human characters’ relationship with the
victim of the violence strongly influences their point of view on the acts of
violence in the story.
All the major human characters in the story, Dan’il, Pughat, and Aqhat
are portrayed as full-fledged characters with their own thoughts, actions,
and emotions. By portraying the characters of Dan’il and Pughat in a posi-
tive light and by emphasizing the effect of Aqhat’s death upon them, the
author encourages the audience to identify with them.
The fact that the author withholds the information from Dan’il and
Pughat regarding Aqhat’s arrogance but reveals it to the audience of the
story is suggestive. It shows that the human characters’ point of view is de-
pendent upon their knowledge of the situation in which the violence takes
place. The elevation of the position of the audience on the one hand helps
the audience to identify with Dan’il and Pughat’s feelings of loss and the
need to avenge. On the other hand, the audience knows that it is also
Aqhat’s fault that contributes to his death. By presenting these two points
of view and by remaining reticent, the author invites the audience to further
ponder the ethics of Anat’s violence.
CONCLUSION TO PART TWO

If the Story of Aqhat followed the sequence of human rebellion, divine
permission to kill the rebel, ending with divine killing of the human rebel,
the story would present a clear case of human rebellion and divine punish-
ment. However, the text includes episodes such as a killer who fails to attain
her goal, a divine protestation, and a human vengeance blessed by another
human agent. These inclusions present the story’s ethical portrayal of Anat’s
violence in a multiperspectival fashion.
Two ideological points of view appear in the story: (1) Aqhat’s death is
unjust, and (2) Aqhat’s death is justified by his arrogance and rebellion.
Those who take the first ideology include the divine character Baal and the
human characters, Dan’il and Pughat. Those who take the second ideology
include the divine character El, Anat, and Yatpan. The second ideology is
not shared by any of the human characters in the story.
The author does not present these two opposing ideologies as a reflec-
tion of the dichotomy between the divine point of view and the human
point of view. Instead, he places Baal in the first category, identifying with
the human characters of the story. This creates a sense of disharmony in the
divine sphere – the gods do not share the same point of view on Anat’s
violence in the story. Thus, the two ideologies direct the audience’s focus
from divine dissonance to human uniformity.
Which ideological point of view serves as the normative point of view
of the story? By portraying the human characters Dan’il and Pughat posi-
tively, the author seems to encourage the audience to identify with them, to
take their point of view as the normative point of view. Yet, the audience
knows that the human characters’ point of view is marred by their lack of
knowledge of the cause for the death of Aqhat which is made known to the
audience. This lack of knowledge on the part of the human characters un-
dermines the accuracy and validity of the human characters’ point of view.
Baal shares the same ideological point of view with the human charac-
ters of the story. Although he expresses his point of view through actions,
the fact that he remains silent points to his impotence. His actions only help
Dan’il to bury Aqhat but are unable to remedy the death of Aqhat. Baal
does not avenge Aqhat by attempting to kill Yatpan. Therefore, his point of
view is not presented as the normative point of view.
On the other hand, because of El’s position in the pantheon, his point
of view seems to be the normative point of view on Anat’s violence. How-
ever, the author also casts doubt on his authority by allowing Anat to
threaten El with violence if the latter refuses to comply with her request.
His supposed “normative” point of view is weakened by Anat’s attitude
toward him.
In addition, although Anat is portrayed as a fearless goddess who takes
extreme measures to get what she wants, her weeping and the losing of the
bow after resorting to violence reflect her inability and ineffectiveness in
accomplishing her goal. This unfulfilling outcome of her violence disquali-
fies her point of view as the normative point of view.
Therefore, the two ideological points of view expressed in the story:
unjust murder and deserved death, exist in tension with one another. Since
the implied audiences are human beings, and not deities, and since the au-
thor places great emphasis on the human characters’ grief and on their posi-
tive characterization, it is likely that the author intends his implied audiences
to identify and to take the human characters’ point of view. Yet, at the same
time, he wants the audiences to be aware of the subjective and the limited
aspect of the human characters’ point of view.
By influencing the audience to identify with the human characters’
point of view and by disclosing the human characters’ limited point of view
on Aqhat’s death, the author allows room for ambiguity and openness. This
ambiguity in the author’s narration of the story forces the audience to
struggle to establish his or her own ethical judgment of Anat’s violence.
Each audience’s response varies according to his or her particular context
and experience.
PART THREE: RELIABILITY CHECK
6 THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE’S
POINT OF VIEW
Part Two illustrates how the author of the story uses ambiguity in his pres-
entation of points of view to invite his implied audience to make his or her
own ethical judgment of Anat’s violence. The purpose of this chapter is to
investigate how the hypothetical actual audience would view the two acts of
violence in the Story of Aqhat. We will determine which character’s point
of view would have the most effect upon the ancient audiences. Would they
take El’s point of view or Baal’s? Would they take Anat’s point of view or
Dan’il and Pughat’s point of view?
We will first reconstruct the hypothetical actual audiences by compil-
ing a profile of their thought world, namely, their conception of deities, of
death and afterlife, of family and its values, and of authority. We will then
use three different categories of people who occupy different tiers in the
Ugaritic society to explore their respective points of view regarding the vio-
lence in the story. These three categories include an Ugaritic king, an ordi-
nary male Ugaritian, and an ordinary female Ugaritian.
A PROFILE OF THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE

This profile is not exhaustive but representative. It highlights several signifi-
cant concepts in the historical audience’s thought world pertaining to the
themes in the Story of Aqhat, thereby gaining understanding into their
worldview and values. We will use texts other than the Story of Aqhat.
The Conception of Deities

The Story of Aqhat contains many interactions between the deities and the
human beings. The large number of rituals present in the story testifies to
the close connection between the two realms.1 An understanding of how
1 82% of the surviving Aqhat story involves ritual element. Wright, Ritual in
Narrative, 6. For a brief summary and conclusion of the functions of rituals in the
Story of Aqhat, see 223-29.
157
the Ugaritians perceive the deities in their world influences much of their
point of view on the two acts of violence in the story.
The Ugaritians worship multiple deities. Based on the evidence pro-
vided by the religious texts, we summarize the Ugaritians’ conception of
deities into two broad categories: deities as benefactors to humanity, and
deities as troublemakers to humanity. Although the notion of the deities as
benefactors and troublemakers to humanity applies to other ancient Near
Eastern literature and not just to the Ugaritic tradition, we are limiting this
analysis to the Ugaritic texts.
Deities as Benefactors to Humanity

The Ugaritic deities control all aspects of human activity from birth to
death.2 There are two major aspects of these benefits to humanity: provi-
sion and protection.
As Providers. In various genres within the Ugaritic texts, such as the
mythological texts, the ritual texts,3 the letters and the personal names de-
pict the Ugaritians as dependent on the deities for their lives and well-being.
In the mythological texts, the gods control the destinies of human beings.
El is the Father of Humanity. He grants progeny to king Kirtu.4 He creates
healers to cure Kirtu’s disease.5 Baal often functions as an intercessor for
human beings. For example, he intercedes to El for king Kirtu to have
progeny. Baal is also a storm god who sends rain to the earth and brings
nourishment to vegetation and to the land.6
In the Baal Cycle, Anat redeems Baal by killing the god of death, Mot,
thus restoring rain to the land.7 Thus, her action is beneficial to humanity.
In a prayer for well-being, the poet invokes multiple gods including El,
Baal, Yarih, and Reshep (KTU 1.123). 8 In another Akkadian letter from
Ugarit (RS 19.070), the king and the queen of Ugarit write to a man of
lower rank, greeting him with a blessing, “May the gods keep you in good
health.”9
2 Ashley, “The ‘Epic,’” 368.

3 Del Olmo Lete defines the ritual texts as the structured sequence of rites as
written text. See Del Olmo Lete, CR, 87.
4 KTU 1.15 II:16-28.
5 KTU 1.16 V:19-28.
6 KTU 1.6 IV: 12-16.
7 KTU 1.6 II:30-37 - III:1-9.
8 Dennis Pardee, Ritual and Cult at Ugarit (SBLWAW; Atlanta: SBL, 2002), 150-
52.
9 John Huehnergard, “The Akkadian Letters,” in HUS, 377.
THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE’S POINT OF VIEW 159
As Protectors. The Ugaritic prayers and hymns portray the deities as

protectors of human beings. For instance, in KTU 1.6 VI:45-53, the Uga-
ritians praise the sun goddess Shapshu for watching over the boundaries
between night and day, and between the worlds of the living and the dead.10
In a hymn to Anat, the poet asks Anat to hear his voice because she has
bound up evil (KTU 1.13). 11 In another hymn (KTU 1.101), the author
praises Baal’s power and enthronement. 12 One prayer invokes Rapiu’s
strength, help, power, rule and splendor to be in the midst of Ugarit (KTU
1.108). 13 The Ugaritians also invoke the gods to protect their city (KTU
1.65).14 In a ritual text, the author includes a prayer to Baal to drive the en-
emy from the gate of Ugarit (KTU 1.119).15 These prayers, hymns, and in-
cantations all consider the gods as the means of the Ugaritians’ rescue.
In the letters, a typical greeting formula often includes the phrase
“May the gods guard (nÇr) you and grant your well being/peace (šlm).16 This
formula and its variant forms appear eleven times in the seventeen letters
that contain greeting formulas. 17 One letter (KTU 2.16) specifically indi-
cates that it is the gods of Ugarit whom the writer of the letter invoked to
protect the addressee.18
Aside from the mythological texts and letters, theophoric personal
names also bear an important witness to the gods as benefactors to Uga-
10 Klaas Spronk, “Incantations,” in HUS, 272.

11 For translations, see de Moor, ARTU, 137-141; Caquot and Tarragon, TO II,
19-27; Wyatt, RTU, 148-151.
12 For translations, see de Moor, ARTU, 1-2; Caquot and Tarragon, TO II, 45-
50; Wyatt, RTU, 388-390.

13 The identity of Rapi’u, however, is uncertain. L’Heureux and Avishur think
that El is Rapi’u. Dietrich and Loretz think it is Baal. For translations, see Dietrich
and Loretz, “Baal RPU ,” 171-82; de Moor (who sees the text as an incantation),
ARTU, 187-190; Good, “On RS,” 155-60; Avishur, Studies in Hebrew, 280-81;
Wyatt, RTU, 395-398.
14 For translations, see Wyatt, RTU, 363-365; Del Olmo Lete, CR, 341-342.
15 For translation, see de Moor, ARTU, 171-174; Wyatt, RTU, 416-422.
16 E.g. KTU 2.4 lines 4-6, 2.11 lines 7-9, 2:13 lines 7-8, 2.14 lines 4-5, 2.16 lines
5-6, 2.30 lines 6-7, 2.38 lines 4-5. KTU 5.9 lines 2-6 has an extended version of this
greeting formula: “May the gods protect you, keep you healthy, keep you hardy for
a thousand days and ten thousand years forever!” See Jesus-Luis Cunchillos, “The
Correspondence of Ugarit,” in HUS, 364. For formulae in letters, see Cunchillos,
“Correspondence” in TO II, 244-263.
17 Ansgar L. Kristensen, “Ugaritic Epistolary Formulas,” UF 9 (1977): 150.
18 Kristensen, “Ugaritic,” 152.
ritians.19 El and Baal appear frequently in the personal names of Ugarit. El’s
activities in these personal names include “creates,” “judges,” “decrees” and
“the granting” of what is requested. Baal’s activities include “creates,”
“gives perfection,” “bestows with generosity,” “guides,” “helps” and
“saves.”20
Some deities, when functioning as patrons of one group, may bring
trouble to the destruction of another group. For example, El supports king
Kirtu in his campaign against king Pabuli from the kingdom of Udum.21
King Kirtu invokes Horon and Astarte to break the head of his rebellious
son when the latter attempts to usurp his throne.22 Smith thinks that these
cases can be understood as “expressions of blessing for humans, because
they aid some people at the expense of others.”23
From these diverse genres of the Ugaritic materials, the role of the dei-
ties as providers and protectors is evident in many aspects of the Ugaritians’
lives. The deities are the dominant power in the course of human lives. The
Ugaritians trust that their gods can guarantee the basics of their existence,
well-being, long life, and good health by exerting power to intervene in their
favor.24
Deities as Troublemakers to Humanity

The majority of the Ugaritic deities such as El, Athirat, Baal, and Anat not
only bring benefit to the Ugaritians but can also cause them trouble. The
account of king Kirtu invoking Horon and Astarte to break his son’s neck
is a case in point. Although this curse aids Kirtu, it brings trouble to Kirtu’s
son. Thus, from the hypothetical actual audience’s point of view, many dei-
ties are a mixture of benefactor and troublemaker, rather than exclusively
one or the other.
From the information provided by the mythological texts, the deities
can bring trouble to the audience in at least two ways: As punishers and as
predators. Several deities in the Ugaritic texts such as Reshep and Yamm
function as troublemakers to human beings.25 However, there is a lack of a
19 For a survey and critique of the previous study on Ugaritic personal names,
see Richard S. Hess, “The Onomastics of Ugarit,” in HUS, 499-514.

20 Del Olmo Lete, CR, 339.
21 KTU 1.14-1.15.
22 KTU 1.16 VI:54-57.
24 Del Olmo Lete, CR, 337-8. Cunchillos, “The Correspondence,” 364. Cf.
Nicolas Wyatt, “The Religion of Ugarit: An Overview,” in HUS, 529-562.

25 Reshep and the Lad of Yamm are responsible for the death of Kirtu’s wives.
clear context for their respective stories, making it difficult to put them into
either category. Here we will only explore the deities whose stories have a
clear context.
As Punishers. As punishers, the Ugaritic deities can bring trouble to a
human being as a way to punish the offence he or she has committed. This
offense is usually manifested in the violation of a divine-human order (i.e.
human beings disobey the divine will). The purpose of punishment is to
assert the deities’ authority and to bring the appropriate order back to the
divine-human relationship. These kinds of deities can both give benefit and
cause trouble to human beings. Their punishment also does not aim to
bring any material benefit to the deities.
In the Story of Kirtu, we have a case of divine punishment for a hu-
man offense. Athirat is the wife of El and the mother of the Ugaritic pan-
theon. The heir to king Kirtu’s throne will “drink the milk of Athirat.”26
This divine suckling enables human kings to share in the divine nature.27
However, when king Kirtu fails to pay his vow to the goddess Athirat, she
inflicts a fatal illness upon him.28
For Kirtu and his family, the act of Athirat is malevolent because it
threatens Kirtu’s life. The wailing and mourning of Kirtu’s children at his
death bed indicates their perspective on the act of Athirat. From Athirat’s
point of view, however, her act serves as a punishment to Kirtu’s irrever-
ence. It not only reinforces her divinity but also warns Kirtu and the human
audience of the story not to cross a deity. As a goddess, Athirat demands
obedience from human beings and whoever violates this demand suffers
punishment.
As Predators. As predators, the Ugaritic deities can bring trouble to a
human being not because of the latter’s offense, but because of the deity’s
self-interest. In fact, the “predator” deities seek to destroy and seldom bring
benefit to human beings. The textual and the archaeological finds do not
support the audience’s worship of the “predator” deities.29
One of the primary characteristics of a predator deity is that he or she
preys on a defenseless weaker being and takes advantage of that weaker
being. In the Ugaritic texts, the most prominent example of a predatory
See KTU 1.14 I:18-20. The arrows of Reshep need to be stopped in order to save a
“possessed” girl in KTU 1.82:3. Anat kills human soldiers in KTU 1.3 II.
26 KTU 1.15 II:27.
27 Wyatt, “Asherah,” in DDD, 100.
28 KTU 1.15 III:25-30.
29 See KTU 1.39, 1.41, 1.43, 1.46, 1.102, 1.104, 1.109, 1.119, 1.130, 1.148, 1.162,
1.168.
deity is Mot, the god of death. Mot devours human beings, not because
these human beings violate him or transgress an order, but because of his
self-interest – he wants to satisfy his own appetite.
In the Ugaritic texts, Mot personifies and embodies the reality of
death.30 For instance, in KTU 1.6 II: 15-19, Mot says to Anat,
(15) ’an . ’itlk . w ’aṣd . (15) I went and I hunt

kl (16) Çr . l kbd . ’arṣ. in (16) every mountain in the heart31 of the
earth,
ûl . gb‘ (17) l kbd . šdm . in every hill (17) in the heart of the fields.
npš. Æsrt (18) bn nšm My appetite was lacking (18) humans,
npš hmlt (19) ’arṣ my appetite, the multitudes of (19) the
earth.32
Such descriptions portray Mot as a hungry and an insatiable monster
who always preys on humans.
In KTU 1.23, Mot is portrayed as a demonic force to be feared. In this
text, the ritual destruction of Mot needs to be carried out in order to pro-
tect the soon-to-be-born deities. Mot not only carries a double epithet:
“Death and Dissolution” (mt wšr) but also holds a double scepter: “The
Scepter of Sterility” (Æṭ ¨kl) and “The Scepter of Widowhood” (Æṭ ’ulmn).33
All four epithets reflect the meaning of his name: Death. KTU 1.127:30-32
also attests Mot’s threat to human lives.
(30) ḥm qrt tuÆd . (30) If the city is taken,

ḥm mt y‘l bnš if Mot attacks human (lit. man),
(31) bt bn bnš yqḥ (31) the house of the son(s) of humankind
will take
‘z (32) w yḥdy mrḥqm a goat (32) and will look afar.
It is no surprise that the audience does not worship Mot nor include
him in the offering lists.34
30N. Wyatt, “The Religion,” 546.

31Lit. “liver.”
32 Cf. KTU 1.133.
33 Healey, “Mot,” in DDD, 600. KTU 1.23: 8-9.
34 Wyatt, “The Religion,” 546. Healey, “Mot,” 598; Ted J. Lewis, “Mot,” in
ABD, vol. 4, 923.

In summary, the audience perceives the deities as able to bring benefit

and also cause trouble for human beings. Most of the deities such as El and
Baal are perceived as benevolent deities. The purpose in which the deities
bring trouble is either to punish a human offense or for self-interest only.
By being both a benefactor and a troublemaker, the deities control all as-
pects of human existence from birth to life to death. Human beings depend
on the deities for granting progeny, curing diseases, protecting their lives,
and driving away their enemies. At the same time, the deities are also seen
as the causes for their trouble and pain.
Seeing Anat’s violence in this light, she can be perceived as a mixture:
a predator and a punisher. Anat first covets the bow of Aqhat. When Aqhat
refuses to surrender the bow, Anat kills him for it. The motive of her killing
is first to get the bow and second to punish Aqhat for his rebellion. Thus,
Anat, the deity, creates a category of her own. She is not like any other deity
at Ugarit. In some texts such as the Baal Cycle, she is even perceived as a
protector.
The Conception of the Status of El And Baal

El and Baal play significant roles in the Story of Aqhat. Their points of view
on Anat’s violence diverge significantly as we have analyzed in chapter
three. An understanding of their respective positions in the divine world
would help to delineate the influence of their respective point of view upon
the hypothetical actual audience of the story. Since many scholars have de-
voted their attention to the status of El and Baal, we will only briefly sum-
marize the past argument and assert our own position.
Pope maintains that, “the controversy concerning perception of the
character and role of El in the Ugaritic mythological poems is one among
the most provocative and intriguing issues raised by the exhumation of
these documents in modern times.”35 El’s status is directly linked to his rela-
tionship with Baal. This relationship has invited much discussion in past
scholarship. Two opposing views emerge from the discussion: One view
holds that El is a nominal head of the pantheon and his position is gradually
replaced by Baal. Another view holds that El remains the supreme head of
the pantheon and Baal is subordinate to him.36
An analysis of the Ugaritic mythological texts suggests that both views
can be true. El may be on the way to retirement since he is not active in the
center of the stage, yet he is still the supreme god of the pantheon and Baal
35 Marvin H. Pope, “The Status of El at Ugarit,” UF 19 (1987): 230.

36 See chapter 3, note 1.
is subordinate to him. For example, in the Baal Cycle, El has the authority
to grant or to remove kingship.37 Anat has to come to El for building a
house for Baal and for permission to kill Aqhat.38 Smith’s study on body
gesture as rank symbolism reveals El’s supremacy. El never did obeisance
to anyone in the Ugaritic texts. Only the gods in the lower rank pay homage
to their superiors. El also never travels to any other gods. Other gods must
travel to El’s abode to see him.39 El remains the supreme head of the pan-
theon and his decisions are final and undisputable.
On the other hand, Baal stays in a subordinate position to El. For ex-
ample, in the “Baal-Yamm” section of the Baal Cycle, El favors Yamm for
kingship and despite Baal’s strong objection with force, he is unable to re-
voke El’s verdict at the moment.40
El Declared Yamm’s Kingship (KTU 1.2 I:36b-41)

(36)‘bdk . b‘l . y ymm . (36) “Your slave is Baal, O Yamm,
‘bdk . b‘l (37) [nhr]m . (37) your slave is Baal, [O River].
37 See KTU 1.3 V:19-25; 1.17 VI:46-1.18 I:1-19.

38 See KTU 1.2 II:36-38; 1.6 I:43-55; VI:23-29.
39 For example, KTU 1.4 IV:20-30; 1.6 I:34-8; 1.17 VI:48-51. Mark S. Smith,
“Divine Travel as a Token of Divine Rank,” UF 16 (1984): 359. See also Paul A.
Kruger, “Rank Symbolism in the Baal Epic: Some Further Indicators,” UF 27
(1995): 169-175. This is not to say that Baal never replaces El in a later period after
the destruction of Ugarit. The process of replacement of El by Baal may have taken
place sometime between the destruction of Ugarit (around 1200 BCE) and the
Elijah stories (735 BCE when Ahaz, king of Judah reigns). In the Elijah stories, we
find Baal, not El, to be the major “Canaanite” deity whom Elijah contends with.
The replacement of Baal over El may even occur in an earlier stage. As early as
the Book of Judges, after the death of Joshua, the Israelites turned to other gods
including Baal and Ashtaroth (Judg 2:11-13). The names of Saul’s family members
have “Baal” components such as Eshbaal and Meribbaal that indicates the influ-
ence and popularity of Baal worship even in the royal house (1 Chron 9:39-40).
However, it is in the eighth century that the Baal-worship finds its culmination with
its promotion by Ahab’s wife, Jezebel. The eighth century prophet Hosea con-
demns the apostate Israel of following Baal and regarding Baal as her source of
abundance. See Hosea 2:8, 16.
For a survey among the relationship of El, Yahweh, and Baal in Israel, see Mark
S. Smith, The Early History of God: Yahweh and Other Deities in Ancient Israel (2nd ed.;
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Dearborn: Dove, 2002), 32-107. For the distinction be-
tween “Canaanite” and “Ugaritian,” see A. F. Rainey, “A Canaanite at Ugarit,” IEJ
13 (1963): 45; idem. “Ugarit and the Canaanite Again,” IEJ 14 (1964): 101.
40 KTU 1.2 II:38b-44.
bn . dgn . ’asrkm . The Son of Dagan is your captive.

hw . ybl . ’argmnk41 . k ’ilm He will bring you tribute, like the gods;
(38) [xxxx ]ybl . (38) [xxxx ] he will bring
k bn . qdš . mnḥyk.42 like the sons of the Holy One, your offer-
ings.”
’ap . ’anš . zbl . b‘l Then Prince Baal is enraged.
(39) [w yuJ]d . b yd . mšÆt . bm (39) [And he seiz]ed with his hand a
. ymn . mÆṣ . striker, in his right hand a slayer,
Çlmm . yš[u] the boys, he att[acked(?)].
(40) [xxx . ‘]nt . tuÆd . (40) [xxx . A]nat seized,
šmalh . tuÆd . ‘¨trt . his left hand, Astarte seized.
’ik . mÆ[ṣt] (41) [xxx . “How could you slay (41) [xxx .
t‘]dt . ¨pt . nhr . the lega[tion] of Judge River?”
Not only is Baal not able to revoke El’s verdict at the moment, the
goddesses Anat and Astarte have to restrain Baal from challenging El and
Yamm’s messengers. However, at the end of the story, Baal does succeed in
claiming the kingship, with the help of Anat. This result reflects the dy-
namic development in the struggle of power between El and Baal.
In the “House of Baal” section of the cycle, Baal cries to El for he has
no house like the gods.43 This fact suggests that Baal needs El’s approval
for building a house for him. Baal has no authority to build one for himself.
Later, after Athirat’s intercession, El decrees to have a house built for Baal.
Baal’s role as a petitioner reflects El’s supreme position and authority in the
pantheon.44
In the Story of Kirtu, Baal’s subservient nature becomes more evident.
In this text, Baal functions as an intercessor between human beings and El.
Baal requests El to bless king Kirtu with progeny. El subsequently responds
41 Smith observes that the treaty document in KTU 3.1 bears the languages of
lines 36-38. The phrase, ybl ’argmn “to send tribute” is common to both 1.2 I: 37
and 3.1 24-25. See Smith, UBL, 308.
42 Ugaritic mnḥ occurs as political tribute in KTU 4.91.1, just as it appears in
KTU 1.2 II: 38. Smith, UBC, 308.

43 KTU 1.3 V:35-9; 1.4 I:4-11; IV:47-51.
44 KTU 1.4 V:1.
to his prayer.45 There is a clear distinction between the rank of an interces-

sor and the granter. This again reflects the dynamics of the pantheon.46
The shorter mythological texts such as the Rapiuma texts (KTU 1.20-
22) are too fragmentary to elucidate the relationship between El and Baal.
Based on the three major myths described above, El is superior in rank and
authority to Baal at both divine and human levels: in granting kingship and
in declaring Aqhat’s fate. Although in the Baal Cycle, Baal appears fre-
quently in action, it is El who holds the ultimate authority. However, Baal’s
eventual exaltation in the pantheon suggests that El’s authority may be de-
clining.
The difference between the status of El and Baal can be explained by
their differences in the nature of their divinity. Cross distinguishes between
two types of gods in two types of myths: the theogonic myth and the cos-
mogonic myth. The former type of myth represents the old gods who are
associated with the birth of the gods. These gods usually have no temples
or cults. The latter type of myth is characterized by the conflict between the
older god(s) and the young gods out of which emerge victory for the young
god and the establishment of kingship in the cosmos.47 Cross states that the
characterization of El as the creator of the gods and humanity suggests that
he belongs to the realm of theogonic myth, whereas Baal belongs to the
sphere of cosmogonic myth. Yet these two spheres are typically not so dis-
tinct in the Ugaritic texts.48
Smith also proposes that the tension between El and Baal lies in the
conflict between two competing forms of divinity: El is an astral deity
whereas Baal is a sky god.49 El’s astral status is hinted by the names of his
children associated with celestial figures such as Shahar and Shalim (Dawn
and Dusk), Yarih (moon), Shapshu (sun), Athtar (stars), Astarte (stars), and
Reshef (Mars?). On the other hand, Baal’s designations as the “son of
45 KTU 1.15 II:13-6.

46 A term borrowed from Prof. Longman.
47 Cross, “The ‘Olden Gods,’” 329, 332; and Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epics:
Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel (Mass. and London: Harvard University
Press, 1973), 120.
48 Longman, written communication.
49 Smith also adds that El’s cult did not exist in Iron Age Israel except as part of
an identification with Yahweh. Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism, 136-7, 140.
For various historical and political views on the relationship between El and Baal,
see Smith, UBC, 87-114.
Dagon”50 and as “the storm-god” clearly reveal his “outsider” status to El’s
family.51
These considerable differences between El and Baal reflect their re-
spective rank differentiation in the divine world. El stays in a higher posi-
tion than Baal. This follows that in the divine realm, El’s decisions in the
pantheon are also weightier than Baal’s.
However, despite El’s prestigious status, he is a far more remote god
than Baal to the hypothetical actual audience. KTU 1.65 is a rare prayer that
invokes El’s protection for the city of Ugarit. In most other prayers, people
consider Baal the patron god of Ugarit. In these prayers, people address
Baal with his epithet “Baal of Ugarit” (b‘l ’ugrt)52 They call upon Baal to pro-
tect them from the attack of snakes or from the threat of other enemies.53
Baal’s role as an intercessor in the stories of Kirtu also demonstrates his
close relationship with humanity.
A modern analogy of El and Baal’s function may be viewed as: El is a
king whereas Baal is a prime minister.54 The king has the ultimate authority
yet he often stays behind the scenes. The prime minister is the “action
hero” who participates actively in public affairs. People respect the king, yet
it is the prime minister who does the job for the interest of the people and
whom the people would most likely identify with.
This brief analysis of the audience’s conception of the deities reveal
several facts:
(1) The audience considers the deities as the dominant power in peo-
ples’ lives. They are the sources of their well-being as well as their calami-
ties. Thus, Anat’s violence against Aqhat should not be seen as an excep-
tion, but as a part of human experience.
(2) The audience may perceive Anat in the story as a predator who kills
for self-interest. Yet at the same time, the audience also perceives Anat’s
violence as an act of divine punishment for Aqhat’s rebellion. This mixture
places Anat in a different category from all the rest of the pantheon.
(3) The status of El and Baal shows that the audience may identify
with Baal’s actions more than with El’s permission, since Baal is their pa-
tron god and tends to take the side of human beings.
50 KTU 1.2 I:19; 1.5 V:23-24.

52 KTU 1.27:4; 1.65:10-11; 1.105:19; 1.109:11, 16, 35-36; 1.119:3, 12, 21, 31.
53 KTU 1.107:39; 1.119:28-34; 1.169:1.
54 Goldingay, verbal communication.
The Conception of Death And Afterlife

As mentioned in chapter five, the character Aqhat is the central figure
whom all the other characters, both divine and human, hinge upon. Al-
though his presence in the story occupies less than a half column (KTU
1.17 VI:20-41), his significance to the plot of the story and to the other
characters in the story cannot be overlooked. Both acts of violence in the
story are directly linked to Aqhat.
Since the major content of the speech of Aqhat is concerned with
death and his mortality, an understanding of how the audience conceives
these concepts influences his or her perception of the character Aqhat and
his or her point of view of the acts of violence in the story. Does Aqhat
really rebel against Anat? Does he deserve to be killed? What does death
mean to the surviving members of Aqhat’s family? Do they expect Aqhat to
be revived? An investigation of the audience’s conception of death and af-
terlife would help to shed light on these questions.
Death
No text discovered at Ugarit directly and systematically expresses theologi-
cal interest in the concepts of death such as in the case of the Egyptians’
“The Book of the Dead.”55 Yet both the archaeological and the textual evi-
dence reflect the reality that the hypothetical actual audience is deeply and
consciously interested in the phenomenon of death. According to Xella,
death is one of their primary ideological interests.56
The most prominent example of the ancient audiences’ preoccupation
with death is that all major mythological texts involve the theme of death:
In the Baal Cycle, we have the death of Yamm, the death of Baal, and the
death of Mot.57 In the Story of Kirtu, we have Kirtu’s impending death.58
Thus, for the audience of the Story of Aqhat, the death of Aqhat must have
caught their attention.
In these texts, the death of the deities such as Yamm, Baal, and Mot is
only temporary, not permanent. Yamm is clearly pronounced dead in KTU
1.2 IV:32, 34 after Baal defeats him with the two weapons made by the
craftsman god. Yet, later in the text, Yamm reappears and resumes another
55 Xella, “Death,” 2059. For literature regarding death and afterlife, see Spronk,
Beatific Afterlife; Lewis, Cults of the Dead; K. Van der Toorn, Family Religion, 151-77;
Del Olmo Lete, CR, 213-53; Spronk, “The Incantations,” 282-84.
56 Xella, “Death,” 2061.
57 KTU 1.2 IV:23-27, 32, 34; 1.5 VI:3-10; 1.6 II:30-37.
58 KTU 1.15 V:17-1.16 I:45.
fight with Baal.59 Baal not only is announced dead in KTU 1.5 VI: 9-10 but
also mourned and buried.60 However, he soon reappears upon Anat’s defeat
of Mot.61 Mot also is described as being split (bq‘), winnowed (dry), burned
(šrp), grinded (ṭḥ), and sowed (dr‘) by Anat.62 Besides, even the birds have
consumed his remains.63 It would seem impossible for Mot to return to life,
yet he reappears after seven years and resumes his challenge against the
kingship of Baal.64
On the contrary, the fate of human beings is to die a permanent death.
This is reflected in words of the children of Kirtu spoken at his deathbed.
Because of Kirtu’s status as king, his children consider him as being exempt
from death. Yet, Kirtu’s impending death proves them wrong.
Kirtu’s Daughter Lamented for His Mortality (KTU 1.16 II:36-49)

(36) b ḥyk [.] ’abn (37) nṣmÆ. (36) In your living, O father, (37) we re-
joice.
bl mtk . ngln In your not-dying, we are happy.
(38) k klb . b btk . n‘tq (38) Like a dog, you pass into your tomb;
(39) k ’inr . ’ap . Æštk (39) Like a cur, even into your grave.
(40) ’ap ’ab . k mtm . tmtn (40) But, father, how can you die like mor-
tal men?
(41) ’u Æšk . l bky . ‘tq (41) Or will your grave pass into weeping?
(42) bd . ’a¨t ’ab . ṣrry (42) In the hands of women, father ṣrry
(43) ’u ’ilm . tmtn . (43) Or do the gods die?
špḥ (44) l¨pn . l yḥ . The progeny of (44) the Kind One not
live?
The audience considers human kings as deified beings after their
death.65 Yet, Kirtu’s fatal disease unveils the reality of death as a common
fate for all human beings, even including the kings. In the light of the con-
59 The mention of the name Yamm in KTU 1.4 VI:12 and the broken begin-
ning of 1.4 VII hint at this possibility. See Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism,
98.
60 KTU 1.5 VI:11-25; 1.6 I:2-31.
61 KTU 1.6 V:1-8.
62 KTU 1.6 II:30-35.
63 KTU 1.6 II:35-37.
64 KTU 1.6 V:8-VI:22.
65 Xella, “Death,” 2060; Del Olmo Lete, CR, 185-6.
ception of divine immortality and human mortality, Aqhat’s assertion of his

own mortality and his charge that Anat is a liar are warranted.
This understanding of the irreversibility of death is also reflected in the
Hebrew Bible. For instance, when the first son of David conceived through
Bathsheba is on the verge of death, David laments, “I shall go to him, but
he will not return to me” (2 Sam 12:23). Job also testifies “as the cloud
fades and vanishes, so those who go down to Sheol do not come up” (Job
7:9); “As waters fail from a lake, and a river wastes away and dries up, so
mortals lie down and do not rise again” (Job 14:11).66 In this sense, it is not
Aqhat’s realism that contributes to his death, but his attitude of arrogance
that causes his downfall.
The mourning and grief for the death of one’s family member demon-
strates the devastating effect of death upon the surviving members of the
family. Death arouses deep emotions. When Baal dies, both El and Anat
mourn for him.67 When Kirtu is about to die, his children mourn for him.68
In a ritual text, people are called to mourn the deceased king, Niqmaddu.69
In this text, death is associated with desolation.
A Call to Mourn King Niqmaddu (KTU 1.161:13-17)

(13) ksi . nqmd . ’ibky (13) O throne of Niqmaddu, may you be
mourned!
(14) w . ydm‘ . hdm . p‘nh (14) And may tears be shed (over) the
footstool of his feet.
(15) l pnh . ybky . ¨lḥn . mlk (15) Before him, let the table of the king
be mourned.
(16) w . ybl‘ . ’udm‘th (16) And let his tears be swallowed.
(17) ‘dmt . w . ‘dmt . ‘dmt (17) Desolation and desolation of desola-
tions.
In the Story of Aqhat, there appears an extensive period of mourning
for the death of Aqhat. The text emphasizes the emotional distress experi-
66 For more on the irreversibility of death in the Hebrew Bible, see Philip S.
Johnston, Shades of Sheol: Death and Afterlife in the Old Testament (Downer Grove, Ill.:
InterVarsity Press, 2002), 32.
67 KTU 1.5 VI:23-25; 1.6 I:1-9.
68 KTU 1.16 I:6-12.
69 Recent study suggested that Niqmaddu III is the king mentioned in KTU
1.161. See Pardee, Ritual and Cult, 85-86.

enced by Dan’il and Pughat in vivid terms.70 The mourning, sadness, and
grief suggest that in the ancient world of Ugarit, the audience does not wel-
come death, especially the death of the loved ones. The mourning customs
such as weeping, sitting on the ground, pouring ash on the head, and put-
ting on sackcloth described in these texts are similar to those in the Hebrew
Bible.71
It is worth noting that in all the above cases of death, the cause of
death is not as much a focus as the mourning for death itself. For instance,
when Baal dies, El immediately carries out a mourning rite.
El Mourned for Baal (KTU 1.5 VI:11-25)

(11) ’apnk . l¨pn . ’il[[xx]] (11) Then the Kind One, El [ ]
(12) d pid . yrd . l ksi . (12) the Good-Natured descended from
his throne,
y¨b (13) l hdm . sat (13) on his footstool.
w l . hdm . then from his footstool,
y¨b (14) l ’arṣ . sat (14) on the ground.72
yṣq . ‘mr (15) ’un l rišh . He poured ash (15) on his head,
‘pr . pl¨t (16) l . qdqdh . dirt of sprinkling (16) on his skull.
lpš . yks (17) mizrtm . For clothing, he put on (17) sackcloth.
Çr . b ’abn (18) ydy . (His) skin with a stone (18) he scraped,
psltm . b y‘r sideburns with a razor.
(19) yhdy . lḥm . w dqn (19) He cut cheeks and chin.
(20) y¨l¨ . qn . Är‘h [.] (20) He plowed (his) upper arm.
yḥr¨ (21) k gn . ’ap lb . He plowed (21) his chest like a garden,
k ‘mq . y¨l¨ (22) bmt . like a valley, he plowed (22) (his) back.
yšu . gh [.] w yṣḥ He raised his voice and cried,
70 KTU 1.19 I:34-35; II:8-11; IV:11-17.

71 For example, Gen 37:34; 2 Sam 1:11; 13:31. For more information on
mourning customs in Israel, see Roland de Vaux, Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institu-
tions (tran. John McHugh; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1961), 59; Johnston,
Shades of Sheol, 47-8.
72 Or “the underworld.”
(23) b‘l . mt . “Baal is dead!

my . lim . bn (24) dgn . What happened to LIM, son of (24)
Dagon?
my . hmlt . What happened to the Peoples?
’a¨r (25) b‘l . ’ard . b ’arṣ After (25) Baal, we shall descend to the
underworld.”
In El’s word, he laments the death of Baal and inquires into the cause
for his death (lines 23-24). This latter inquiry is more of an expression of
mourning than an actual inquiry for the cause of Baal’s death since, as the
story unfolds, El does not seek to find out the cause. Similarly, when Anat
carries out her mourning rite, she repeats what El has said earlier.
Anat Mourned for Baal (KTU 1.6 I:6-8)

(6) b‘l . mt . (6) Baal is dead!
my . lim . bndgn . What happened to LIM, son of Dagon?
(7) my . hmlt . (7) What happened to the Peoples?
’a¨r . b‘l . ’ard . (8) b ’arṣ After Baal, we shall descend (8) to the un-
derworld.
This repetition of language suggests that El and Anat’s way of mourn-
ing is a formulaic expression in the Ugaritic texts. The difference between
El and Anat’s mourning is that even though the text does not indicate
Anat’s inquiry into the cause for Baal’s death, her action proves that she is
well aware of the cause for his death because later in the story Anat asks
Mot to give up Baal and, when the latter refuses, Anat crushes him to
pieces.73
This is the same situation with Kirtu’s death. His family members
mourn for his death yet Kirtu’s rebellion against Athirat is not mentioned.
This suggests that to the audience, death itself is worth mourning and the
cause of death, whether due to the dead person’s own fault, remains secon-
dary. Viewing death in this light, Dan’il and Pughat’s mourning for Aqhat’s
death points to their grief for the loss of a loved one and the cause for his
death does not warrant inquiry.
73 KTU 1.6 II:11-37.

Afterlife
In the previous section, we saw the devastating effect of death upon the
living. When the audience hears the part of the story where Dan’il and
Pughat mourn and weep for Aqhat, they can sense the depth of their grief.
However, is this grief a reflection of their despair that Aqhat would not re-
turn to life again? For this question, we need to explore the audience’s con-
cept of afterlife.
The ancients generally believe in a three-tiered universe: heavens for
the gods, the earth for the human beings, and the underworld for the
dead.74 The offering of food to the dead testifies the belief of the afterlife.
Both the archeological and textual evidence from Ugarit attest to the offer-
ing of food and drink to the deceased ancestors.75 For instance, in the text
we mentioned earlier, KTU 1.161, it describes a ritual in honor of the de-
ceased king of Ugarit, Niqmaddu III.76 In this text, the phrase “making of-
ferings to the dead” appears seven times (lines 27-30) accompanying the
official invitation to the deceased king Niqmaddu III to descend among his
ancestors.77 This sevenfold offering to the deceased king stresses its signifi-
cance and completion. The Ugaritians, through the care of the deceased,
assure the living the aid of their dead in healing, granting of fertility and
predicting the future through divination.78 The practice of this rite suggests
the belief in an afterlife at Ugarit. However, this seems to contradict
Aqhat’s ridiculing Anat for offering him an afterlife. A further examination
of the evidence suggests that there exists a tension between the general be-
lief in the afterlife and the rejection of it.
For instance, the spirits of the deceased ancestors are called Rapiuma
(meaning “Saviors” or “Healers”). They might vary in their social status
while they were alive.79 In KTU 1.20-1.22, Dan’il invites the Rapiuma to
74 Johnston, Shades of Sheol, 69.

75 For other textual evidence, see Xella, “Death,” 2060-61. Spronk, Beatific After-
life, 139; Van Selms, Marriage & Family, 131.
76 See Lewis, Cults of the Dead, 5-46. Pardee, Ritual and Cult, 86. For more infor-
mation on royal funerary cult, see Del Olmo Lete, CR, 213-53.
77 Pardee, Ritual and Cult, 86. For Pardee’s translation of this text, see 87-8. The
seven-fold descent of the king may refer to the ritual lowering of the deceased king
seven times into the depths of the earth. See Pardee, “Marziḥu, Kispu, and the Ug-
aritic Funerary Cult,” in Ugarit, Religion and Culture (Edited by N. Wyatt, W.G.E.
Watson and J.B. Lloyd; Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996), 275.
78 Xella “Death,” 2061.
79 The Rapiuma have been viewed as minor deities, heroic warriors, a tribal
group, the shades of the dead or some combination of the above. See Ted J. Lewis,
come and feast at his place. The text describes the Rapiuma as active beings
who mount on their chariots and come on their stallions to Dan’il’s resi-
dence. For six days, they feast. The text unfortunately breaks off when it
starts to describe the events of the seventh day. The epithet “Rapiuma”
itself expresses the dead ancestors’ benevolent role to the world of the liv-
ing. The root rp’ means “to heal.” The name Rapiuma denotes their ability
to help the living. The Rapiuma serve a variety of functions for the living.
They intervene on behalf of the living, healing their diseases, providing
oracular responses, protecting them on a personal and communal level, and
fostering fertility.80 They are perceived as benefactors.
Moreover, archaeological evidence attests to the fact that the Uga-
ritians have a custom of living alongside the tombs of their ancestors. Ar-
chaeologists discover the underground burial vaults beneath each house at
the city of Ugarit.81 People usually build the family tomb at the same time
they build their houses.82 A house, therefore, is a place to shelter and to join
both the living and the dead. This planning of tombs reflects the desire of
the living to maintain permanent communication with the deceased. This
relationship with the dead serves a commemorative function.83 It also en-
sures the living of their collective identity in their lineage and their place of
origin.84
The audience does not believe that death is the end of everything.
There is an afterlife in Ugaritian’s thought. However, death is not welcomed
as shown by the grief of the living upon the dead. This grief suggests that
the audience does not envision the afterlife as a “beatific” one. Thus, the
effect of the death of Aqhat upon his family members is a tragic and devas-
tating one. Their grief suggests that they do not anticipate Aqhat returning
to life again.
The Conception of Family

The Story of Aqhat centers on a human family: the family of Dan’il. The
story revolves around the three major characters in this family: the father
“The Rapiuma,” in UNP, 196. Van Selms notes that the Rapiuma occur in parallel-
ism with the warriors of Baal and Anat. This points more to a certain class of mi-
nor gods than to the ghosts of the dead. See Van Selms, Marriage & Family, 130.
80 Xella, “Death,” 2065. Cf. Spronk, Beatific Afterlife, 196.
81 Pope, “The Cult of the Dead,” 158; Spronk, Beatific Afterlife, 142; Van der
Toorn, Family Religion, 161.

82 Xella, “Death,” 2061.
83 J. C. De Moor, “Standing Stones and Ancestral Worship,” UF 27 (1995), 19.
84 Van der Toorn, Family Religion, 177.
Dan’il, the son Aqhat, and the daughter Pughat. The need for a son, the
death of the son, and the consequence of his death comprise the major plot
of the story. The author places significant emphasis on the subsequent ac-
tions of Dan’il and Pughat after the death of Aqhat. The whole story pro-
vides the audience a glimpse of their family structure, their relationship with
one another, and their family values. However, do these areas correspond
to the world of the hypothetical audience? How would they perceive the
characters’ interactions in the story in the light of their own family structure
and values?
Since Pughat’s vengeance for Aqhat constitutes one of the focal points
in this study, it is helpful to discover how the hypothetical audience per-
ceives her violence. Does her act of vengeance conform to the role of
daughters in those times? Or is her act of vengeance exceptional?
Below we will categorize the audience’s conception of family into two
broad categories: family structure and values, and the role of a daughter
within the family. Other subjects related to family values such as the daugh-
ter’s right of inheritance, her religious function, and the role of a mother
within the family are excluded from this discussion because they are not the
focus in the Story of Aqhat.
Family Structure and Values. The Ugaritic family is patriarchal in
nature. The father is the head of the household who exercises authority
over his wife and children. Families are listed under the name of the hus-
band or father. KTU 4.360, for instance, lists a number of families headed
the patriarch and his sons.85 The Ugaritians view the family as a unit. For
example, when king Kirtu loses his family, the text describes the loss as “in
its entirety” (bpÆyrh).86 The entire family can be sold into slavery or be ran-
somed from it.87 In some cases, the family includes other relatives such as a
future daughter-in-law and son-in-law.88 The average number of members
in a family is between five and six persons and more if it includes the ser-
vants. The archaeological finds on houses at Ugarit demonstrates polygamy
85 Other examples include KTU 4.295, 4.339, 4.519, 4.644. See also Anson F.
Rainey, “The Social Stratification of Ugarit.” Ph. D. diss. Brandais University, 1962;
I. Mendelsohn, “The Family in the Ancient Near East,” BA 11 (1948), 24-5; Smith,
The Origins of Biblical Monotheism, 58.
86 KTU 1.14 I: 25. See also Anson F. Rainey, “Family Relationships in Ugarit,”
Or 34 (1965), 11.
87 RS 34.179 in RSO VII, 15-6; RS 17.130:29 in PRU IV, 103-5; RS 17.244:11 in
PRU IV, 231-2; Iwrkl redeemed the whole family in KTU 3.4.
88 KTU 4.80. See J. P. Vita, “The Society of Ugarit,” in HUS, 478, and n. 162.
or a high number of dwellers in some houses.89 Adoption and divorce were

possible ways to change family units.90
A successful marriage is one that will produce children. King Kirtu,
for example, must marry a woman in order to beget a lawful heir. The
blessing of El to Kirtu also centers on the procreation of children.91 In gen-
eral, parents at Ugarit value sons more than daughters, but they welcome
daughters along with sons. The preference for sons is shown in Kirtu’s spe-
cific request for sons (bnm).92
Marsman points out two other texts that express the preference for
sons over daughters. The first one is RS 15.010:1-9.93 Another text is an
omen text (KTU 1.141). It further testifies to the preference for sons. The
text reads:
l ’agp¨r k yqny Çzr b ’alÿy
For Agp¨r, (that) he will beget a son in Alÿy (a woman’s name).
This preference for sons is largely due to the patrilineal structure of
Ugaritic society since sons are the ones responsible for carrying the family
line and inherit the family land whereas daughters marry off and belong to
their husbands’ family. 94 In light of this preference for sons, it is under-
standable why Dan’il specifically prays for a son (bn).95
Other texts give evidence that a balanced family with sons and daugh-
ters is desirable. For instance, KTU 2.2 is a letter where the sender wishes
the addressee well and blesses the latter with both sons (bnm) and daughters
(bnt).96 In a census list (KTU 4.102), both sons (bn, Çzr, n‘rm) and daughters
(pÇt, bt, n‘rt) are counted.97 KTU 4.360 lists several families. Daughters are
counted along with the sons.98
89 Vita, “The Society,” 479.

90 The objects of adoption are always adults. For adoption at Ugarit, see Vita,
“The Society,” 479-80. Cf. Gary Beckman, “Family Values on the Middle Euphra-
tes in the Thirteenth Century BCE,” in Emar: the History, Religion, and Culture of a
Syrian Town in Late Bronze Age (Edited by M. W. Chavalas; Bethesda: CDL, 1996),
60-68. One of the best documented divorce case at Ugarit is concerned with king
Ammittamru II and a daughter of king of Amurru. See Vita, “The Society,” 477-78.
91 KTU 1.15 II: 18-28.
92 KTU 1.14 II:4-5.
93 Ug V: 147-149.
94 Marsman, Women in Ugarit, 289, 715.
95 KTU 1.17 I:18, 20, 25.
96 KTU 2.2:9-10.
97 Marsman indicates that these terms used to designate sons and daughters,
Based on the Story of Kirtu, daughters can be designated as the first-

born. Kirtu’s wife Lady Huraya is described as the first-born (bkr) of her
family and his daughter Thatmanatu is designated by El as the first-born
(bkr) of Kirtu’s family.99
This high status of women appearing in the mythological texts, how-
ever, is not reflected in the legal and administration texts from Ugarit.
Marsman’s study has shown that the legal texts point to the subordinate
position of most women in Ugarit. In these texts, men are the contracting
parties and function as witnesses, but not women. 100 The administrative
texts also testify to the fact that men are more important to the economic
life of Ugarit than women. For example, the names of women are rarely
mentioned in the administrative texts. The activities of men are recorded
meticulously whereas the activities of women are ignored. Apart from the
queen, hardly any reference to women is made in the administrative texts.101
Therefore, it is safe to say that in the Ugaritic society, sons are highly
preferred over daughters and men generally play a more prominent role
than women in the society.
The Role of a Daughter within the Family. Although the following
categories emphasize the roles of the daughter within the family in relation
to her father and to her brother, they are in fact interconnected with one
another. The role of the daughter is also closely linked to the conception of
authority.
In Relation to Her Father. Based on the Ugaritic mythological texts,
it is the daughter’s duty to take care of her father in his physical weakness.
Kirtu’s daughter, Thatmanatu attends Kirtu by refreshing him with wine
when he lies on his sickbed.102 Baal’s daughter, Tallayu strokes his head and
rubs his legs and horns when he comes back from his journey.103 During a
banquet scene, El’s daughters Anat and Astarte goes out to seek remedy to
which do not seem to differentiate the age difference. All could refer to young
adults. See Marsman, Women in Ugarit, 681.
98 Lines 3 and 5.
99 KTU 1.14 III:39-40; 1.15 III:16.
100 Marsman, Women in Ugarit, 659-676.
101 Marsman, Women in Ugarit, 679-687.
102 KTU 1.16 II:14-16. This understanding is based on the reconstruction of the
cuneiform text by de Moor and K. Spronk. See Johannes C. de Moor and Klaas
Spronk, A Cuneiform Anthology of Religious Texts from Ugarit (Leiden, New York,
Kobenhavn, Koln: E. J. Brill, 1987), 96. The transliteration of their reconstructed
text reads: (14) tšqy [krt >abh] (15) trḥt[kh yn] (16) w msk tr[<bd >il].
103 KTU 1.101:5-7.
cure their father’s hangover.104 Obedient and dutiful daughters are valued
highly at Ugarit. An exception to this obedient daughter image is Anat’s
attitude toward her father, El. In the Baal Cycle, Anat threatens El with vio-
lence if he refuses to grant a house for Baal.
The responsibility of a daughter within a family aside from obeying her
father also includes performing menial tasks and domestic chores such as
cooking. In the Story of Kirtu, Kirtu’s daughter Thatmanatu draws water at
the well.105 KTU 1.92:15 describes Astarte preparing a meal for her father
El.
In Relation to Her Brother. Generally speaking, there exists a close
relationship between sisters and brothers as reflected in the Ugaritic texts.
In the Baal Cycle, when Baal is swallowed by Mot and descends to the un-
derworld, Anat mourns for him, buries him and then takes vengeance
against Mot to enable Baal to return to his throne.106 In the Story of Kirtu,
Kirtu asks his son Ilha’u to find his daughter Thatmanatu to mourn for
him. Ilha’u does not show any trace of jealousy in view of his father’s pref-
erence for her to attend him and willingly follows his father’s instruction to
summon her.107
The letters from Ugarit also testify to the close relationship between
sisters and brothers. In RS 20.232, a brother requests news about his sis-
ter.108 RS 17.063 is another letter from a brother to a sister. The brother
sends a piece of linen to his sister and requests her to have another third
party bringing back some oil to him. RS 92.2005 is a double letter from a
brother to his parents and to his sister inquiring of their well-being. In KTU
2.11, the brother, along with his sister, write a letter to their mother and
inquire of her well-being.
An exception to this general close relationship between siblings ap-
pears in Anat’s threat toward El that if El does not comply with her request,
she would seize his children (bnm) and strike them.109 The word “children”
(bnm) refer to Anat’s siblings. We can also interpret this threat as an indica-
tion that Anat’s loyalty to Baal takes precedence over her loyalty to her
other brothers and sisters.
104 KTU 1.114:26-28.

105 KTU 1.16 I:51.
106 KTU 1.6 I-II:4-37.
107 KTU 1.16 I:25-45.
108 Ug V: 154-55.
109 KTU 1.3 V:19-23. This point is inspired by Marsman, Women in Ugarit, 244-
245.
In summary, the Ugaritic texts testify to the honoring of family values.

An obedient daughter is respected. Viewing the Story of Aqhat in this light,
Pughat indeed is portrayed as an ideal daughter, who attends her father dur-
ing his physical weakness,110 does menial tasks such as drawing water,111 and
has a close relationship with her brother as shown by her mourning and by
taking vengeance for him.112 On the contrary, Anat’s image as a daughter
who threatens not only her father but also her siblings places her outside of
the normal expectation for a daughter and a sister in the Ugaritic texts.
The Conception of Authority

In a patrilinial society such as Ugarit, authority resides in the hands of men.
As Frymer-Kensky maintains, “Power is a male monopoly in the world of
deities and humankind.”113 Within a family, the father has the final author-
ity. Thus, Kirtu gives order to his son Ilha’u to summon the latter’s sister
Thatmanatu to mourn for him.114 Although the brother instructs his sister
to execute a certain task, it is the father who delegates this authority to
him. 115 In the Baal Cycle, El orders Shapshu to seek Baal in the under-
world.116 Similarly, Anat needs her father El’s permission to build a house
for Baal. These examples show El’s authority within his divine family.
In the Ugaritic royal houses, the queen and the queen mother have
considerable power compared to the ordinary women in the society. In let-
ters, they are addressed with the prostration formulae. For example, in
KTU 2.11:5-7, the sender writes,
(5) l . p‘n . ’adtny (6) mrḥqtm (7) ’alny .
(5) Before the feet of our lady, (6) from a distance, (7) we fall.
This prostration formula is used elsewhere in addressing the kings.117
The queen plays prominent roles in politics, in cultic matters, and in eco-
nomic lives of Ugarit. Yet, even though she is powerful, she is still under
110 KTU 1.19 II:8-11.

111 KTU 1.19 II:1-3, 5-7, IV:36-38.
112 KTU 1.19 IV:28-35.
113 T. Frymer-Kensky, In the Wake of the Goddesses: Women, Culture, and the Biblical
Transformation of Pagan Myth (New York: The Free Press, 1992), 46-7. Frymer-
Kensky’s focus is on the ancient Sumero-Akkadian texts, yet this predominance of
male over female is a common phenomenon in ancient cultures including Ugarit.
114 KTU 1.16 I:24-31.
115 Marsman, Women in Ugarit, 246.
116 KTU 1.6 IV:1-20.
117 For example, RS 18.040:5-8, RS 18.113:4-6, RS 94.2391:4-7, RS 92.2010:4-9
the authority of her husband, the king. The extent of her power depends on
how much her husband delegates to her.118
Obedience to authority and to the status quo seems to be the expected
norm at Ugarit. Yet, in the mythological texts, we have a few incidents
where the children rebel against the authority of their fathers. In the Baal
Cycle, Anat challenges El’s authority by threatening him with violence if he
does not give in to her request. In the Story of Kirtu, Kirtu’s son Yassib
rebels against his father by criticizing his reign and by attempting to usurp
his throne before his death. His challenge provokes Kirtu’s violent curse.119
This challenge of authorities is not limited to the mythological texts
but also reflected in the letters. In the latter days of Ugarit, rebellion against
the Hittite overlord characterizes the reign of the last kings of Ugarit, espe-
cially king Ammurapi (1225-1180 BCE). During his reign, the reprimands
that he receives from the overlords are far more than his predecessors.120
KTU 2.39 and RS 34.136 serve as two of the examples. In the former text,
the “Sun” (i.e. the overlord of Ugarit) has a message for king Ammurapi.
Lines 9-16 capture the reprimands of the “Sun.” 121
The “Sun” Reproved King Ammurapi

(9) w. Ä[r‘ . l.]’adny . l . yÆsr (9) Now, (there is) no [grain] lacking [to]
my Lord.
(10) w. [xx . y]d‘ . l. yd‘t (10) But [ ] you have not recognized.
(11) ht [. šxx]. l . špš . b‘lk (11) Now [ ] to the Sun, your master,
(12) ‘b[dm .]sglth . ’at (12) a ser[vant], his possession you are.
(13) ht[. xxx] . špš . b‘lk (13) Now [ ], the Sun, your master,
(14) yd‘m . l . yd‘t (14) you have not recognized.
(15) ‘my . špš . b‘lk (15) To me, the Sun, your master,
(16) šnt . šntm . lm .{.} l . tlk (16) one year, two years, why do you not
come?
In the latter case, the king of Carchemish writes to Ammurapi and rep-
rimands him for offering insufficient gifts. Below is a portion of the letter:
118 Marsman, Women in Ugarit, 697.

119 KTU 1.16 VI:40-58.
120 I. Singer, “A Political History of Ugarit,” in HUS, 707.
121 Cf. D. Pardee, “A Further Note on PRU V, No. 60,” UF 13 (1981): 152.
Thus says to the king. Speak to the king of Ugarit: may you be well. As
to your messenger whom you sent to Hatti and the gifts which you sent
to the high officials, they are much too few!….. Now, perhaps because
of me they (the high officials) did not do anything against your servants
(but) don’t do like this ever again!122
These incidents of rebellion are not constrained to female rebelling
against male authorities but include male rebelling against another male au-
thority. This suggests that the challenge of authorities is not just a matter
related to gender, but also a matter related to one’s perception of the nature
of the authorities. In the few accounts of rebellion mentioned in the mytho-
logical texts and in the letters, all the aforementioned rebels have problem
with the nature of their respective authorities.
The existence of cases of rebellions in both the mythological texts and
the letters suggest that obedience to authorities and challenge of authorities
are in constant tension with one another. Challenging of authority is not
construed as a rare phenomenon in the Ugaritic texts, both in the mytho-
logical texts and letters.
This challenge of authorities forms an interesting parallel to the theme
of challenging order in the Story of Aqhat. In this story, Baal challenges El
and Anat’s violence by his actions of protestation. Anat challenges El’s au-
thority by threatening him with violence. Aqhat challenges Anat by refusing
to surrender the bow and by insulting her gender. Dan’il challenges Anat by
cursing the birds and the towns. Pughat challenges Anat by killing Yatpan.
On the other hand, obedience is also a theme stressed in the Story of
Aqhat. For example, the List of Ideal Sonship stresses the need for an obe-
dient son. The wife of Dan’il is portrayed as an obedient wife who obeys his
husband. Pughat is also described as an obedient daughter who listens to
her father, attends him, and does house chores. Obedience to authority and
challenge of authority reflects the dynamics and the tension existed among
the characters in the story.
SUMMARY OF THE PROFILE

In summary, the profile of the hypothetical actual audience shows that the
audience views the deities as able to bring both benefit and trouble to hu-
man beings. They control the course of human life. Therefore, it should not
be a surprise to the audience that both El and Anat determine the fate of
Aqhat. The audience views El as the remote god, who has the authority to
122For the transliteration and the translation of this text, see W. H. Van Soldt,
“Tbṣr, Queen of Ugarit?” UF 21 (1989): 390.
decree their destinies and Baal as their patron god who acts in their interest.
Yet, the reality is that although Baal stays on their side, he is unable to save
Aqhat from his death.
The audience views death as the common fate for all mankind. Al-
though there seems to be a tension between Aqhat’s rejection of the idea of
afterlife and the evidence provided by the Rapiuma and the burial practices,
it is certain that death is not welcomed by the audience.
The audience values traditional patriarchal family values and respects a
dutiful submissive daughter. The audience generally displays an obedient
attitude toward authorities, yet there is evidence attested both in the mytho-
logical texts and in the actual letters, which show the challenging of authori-
ties at Ugarit.
Having reconstructed the concepts of the hypothetical actual audience
regarding deities, death and afterlife, family values, and authorities, we now
turn the focus to their possible point of view on the violence in the Story of
Aqhat.
HOW WOULD THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE VIEW

THE TWO ACTS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT?
An Ugaritic King
How would an Ugaritic king view the violence in the Story of Aqhat? Here
we suppose this Ugaritic king is a typical king who occupies the top tier in
the social hierarchy, who represents the kingdom of Ugarit, and who holds
the highest authority over the state religion and its cult. At Ugarit, religion
and state are one. The major function of the state cult is to maintain the
liturgical contact with the deity which is foundational for establishing the
well-being of the deity’s dominion.123 Various liturgical texts testify to the
role of the king played in the state cult.124 Thus, the tasks of the king within
his kingdom include being the commander-in-chief, the chief justice in the
Supreme Court, and the high priest.125 Externally, since the king is subject
to foreign powers such as Egypt and Hatti, his authority is a limited one. He
123 Gosta W. Ahlstrom, “Administration of the State in Canaan and Ancient Is-
rael,” in CANE, vol I, 597.
124 For example, KTU 1.105, 1.109, 1.112, 1.115. For recent monographs on
the liturgical texts of Ugarit and the role of the king in the cults, see Del Olmo
Lete, CR, and Pardee, Ritual and Cult.
125 Ahlstrom, “Administration of the State,” 592.
may at times rebel against his overlords by sending insufficient tribute and
by refusing to appear before the overlords.
Since in the Story of Aqhat, Dan’il is a king, and since the author por-
trays Dan’il as a positive figure, it is very likely that this hypothetical king
might identify with Dan’il and with his plight of losing a son. To deprive a
king of his progeny is a devastating situation in the ancient world. This is
also depicted in the Story of Kirtu. Sons are especially important for the
king. The king needs his son to succeed him and to perpetuate his kingdom
beyond his living years. Although the Ugaritians welcome both sons and
daughters, sons are preferred over daughters as indicated in our recon-
structed profile of the audience. Therefore, the king would likely take
Dan’il’s point of view and perceive Anat’s violence as a malevolent act.
Since the king knows that it is also Aqhat’s arrogance that contributes
to his death, this might raise his awareness to pay attention to his own son.
He might want to teach him not to offend any deity by disobedience. He
might teach him to be wise in knowing his place in the hierarchical order of
the world. He might want to have more sons, just in case some of them
encounter misfortune like Aqhat.
How would the king view Pughat’s violence? First of all, the king
might be surprised at the courage and the role of woman in general. He
might view the females in his family such as his mother, his wife, and his
daughters differently. For him, any of these women can rise to the occasion
and serve as a powerful heroine on his behalf. He might even consider the
possibility of having one of his daughters take the throne in case none of
his sons are eligible to succeed him.126
How would the king view the roles of El and Baal in the story? As a
king at Ugarit, he participates in various cultic events and sacrifices to both
El and Baal. It would be to his advantage to have all the gods’ blessings
upon him to support his reign. He might even sacrifice to the demon gods
just in case he offends them and incurs trouble upon himself. Since El and
Baal do not share the same point of view on Anat’s violence, it might be
difficult for the king to choose whose side to take. The disharmony in the
divine world, however, might not be an unusual phenomenon for the king
126 Korpel’s study on the work of Ilimilku provides insight into the role of fe-
male in both Aqhat and Kirtu stories. She also draws from de Moor’s study and
suggests that in the very same period when Ilimilku wrote Kirtu and Aqhat, a female
Pharaoh Tausret took power in Egypt because no male descendent of the 19th dy-
nasty was able to claim the throne. See Korpel, “Exegesis,” 105-108. Marsman also
discusses Korpel’s suggestion. See Marsman, Women in Ugarit, 351, 359.
because as the king of Ugarit, he must have experienced conflicting powers

in his reign, both within and without.
As the person with the highest authority and power in his kingdom,
the theme of power and the challenge of that power must have left an im-
pression in the king’s mind. Aqhat’s rebellion against Anat might inspire the
king to reconsider whether he should rebel against his overlord since the
story sends the message: the consequence of rebellion is deadly. Addition-
ally, the fact that Pughat’s object of vengeance is Yatpan and not Anat
might help the king realize the limitation of human power in the whim of
the greater forces such as the forces of the divine world and the force of the
overlord(s). After reading the story, the king might struggle to establish his
own view as to whether to obey or disobey his overlord. He might also
ponder his own place and power in his world.
An Ordinary Ugaritic Man

Here we suppose that an ordinary Ugaritic man is someone who is neither
associated with the royal house nor occupies a leadership position in his
community nor someone who is a slave or a social outcast. He is simply a
typical middle-aged man who lives in Ugarit, who upholds the traditional
values regarding the hierarchical order between the deities and human be-
ings, who participates in religious rituals, who observes the civil obligations,
who is the head of his household, who has a wife and several children, and
who has enough means to make a living in his days.
If the Story of Aqhat was read and circulated in his community, how
would this kind of man view the two acts of violence in the story?
Since the author of the story portrays the human character Dan’il in
such a positive way and describes his emotional response after the death of
Aqhat, and since this ordinary Ugaritic man is the head of his household,
just like Dan’il, it is very likely that this man would identify with Dan’il and
with his point of view and emotion regarding the two acts of violence in the
story. Therefore, he would disapprove of Anat’s violence since it deprives
Dan’il of his only son. Although he realizes that El permits Anat to do so
and Aqhat’s pride and arrogance contributes to his death, he might not view
the death of Aqhat as a justified death if he takes Dan’il’s point of view.
Thus, he might view Aqhat’s refusal to give up the bow as a transgression,
but not a sufficient transgression to deserve the death penalty.
He might also view El and Anat as the controlling powers in humans’
lives, powers who can bring trouble and calamity to human beings. He
might view Anat’s violence as a manifestation of evil and Anat, the goddess,
as a threat to the patriarchal society and value.
Since this man has grown up in a patriarchal society and is the head of
his household, Pughat’s role as a blood-avenger might inspire him to dis-
cover the potential of his own daughter whose potential goes beyond doing
domestic chores and attending his needs. In a sense, he might realize that to
have a daughter is really not a liability but an asset.
An Ordinary Ugaritic Woman

Here we assume that an ordinary Ugaritic woman is a typical young, unmar-
ried house girl who adheres to the traditional patriarchal values, who is
obedient to her parents, who does household chores and fulfills her respon-
sibility as a daughter and a sister. If a woman like this read the Story of
Aqhat, how would she view the two acts of violence in the story?
The closest resemblance of this girl in relation to the story is the char-
acter Pughat. Pughat is a young, unmarried house girl who obeys her father,
attends his needs, and who takes the responsibility as the blood-avenger for
her brother. Because of Pughat’s background, her positive portrayal, and
the description of the emotional impact of the death of Aqhat upon her, it
is most likely that this ordinary Ugaritic woman would identify with Pughat
and with her point of view in the story.
This ordinary Ugaritic girl might view Anat’s violence as an evil act
since the depiction of Anat in this story is the direct opposite, or the an-
tithesis of what this ordinary Ugaritic girl is. Anat is assertive, threatening,
violent, disrespectful of parental authority, not conforming to any tradi-
tional values of the patriarchal scheme. On the contrary, Pughat is the ideal
daughter who conforms to the traditional family values of an obedient
daughter. Her vengeance against Yatpan might cause a sense of inspiration
and hope on the part of this ordinary Ugaritic woman. She might view
Pughat as her role model. There might be a paradigm shift in her way of
thinking. She might reconsider her own role and potential as a female living
in a patriarchal family and society.
CONCLUSION TO PART THREE

The three categories of audience, the Ugaritic king, the ordinary Ugaritic
man, and the ordinary Ugaritic woman, all view the violence in the Story of
Aqhat from their own vantage point, from their different background, and
from their own gender, age, and social status. Because of this diversity in
their background, they tend to identify with different human characters in
the story and actualize the story in their own ways.
Three observations can be made from this chapter:
(1) The audiences tend to identify with the human characters in the
story rather than with the divine characters in the story because the audi-
ences share the same humanity as the human characters in the story. They
are able to understand the human characters’ emotions and their points of
view on the two acts of violence in the story.
(2) The audiences’ points of view are greatly shaped and influenced by
the author’s presentation and representation of the characters in the story
and by his manipulation of the characters’ respective points of view. Thus,
the positive portrayals of the human characters in the story, the vivid de-
scriptions of their emotions of anger, distress, and grief gain the audiences’
sympathy and identification. The audiences perceive these characters as
“real-life” characters and they tend to wrestle with them concerning the
perplexities of life as the characters encounter in the story.127
(3) Because of this identification with the human characters’ points of
view and because of their own distinctive background and social status, the
audiences’ points of view are “biased.” They can no longer view the two
acts of violence in an “objective” manner. Thus, the violence depicted in
the story becomes a subjective personal matter rather than an objective
analysis of right and wrong. Like the human characters, Dan’il and Pughat,
what matters to them is the death of their close family member, and not so
much of the cause behind it.
In the conclusion to Part Two, we mentioned that the two ideological
points of view expressed in the story: unjust murder and deserved death,
exist in tension with one another. The author, by placing great emphasis on
the human characters’ grief and on their positive characterization, intends
to move his implied audience to identify with the human characters’ point
of view. Meanwhile, by disclosing El’s permission and Aqhat’s rebellion, he
intends his implied audience to be aware of the subjective and the limited
aspect of their point of view. Thus, he creates a sense of ambiguity and
leaves room for the audience to struggle to establish his or her ethical as-
sessment of Anat’s violence.
In this chapter, we see that the three categories of the hypothetical ac-
tual audiences all tend to identify with the human characters’ points of view:
Anat’s violence is an evil act and Pughat’s violence is a heroic act. There-
fore, the author’s intention for his implied audience to identify with the
human characters, Dan’il and Pughat’s, point of view succeeds. It shows the
power of using characterization and points of view to influence the audi-
ence’s perception of the violence in the story. However, how the audience
127 Drawing upon Culpepper, Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel, 101.

applies different elements of the story to his or her life goes beyond the
control of the author and belongs to the realm of conjecture.
CONCLUSION
The goal of this dissertation is to discover the ethical understanding of vio-

lence in the Story of Aqhat by attempting to answer two questions: (1) How
did the author of the story use characterization and point of view to influ-
ence his implied audience regarding the two acts of violence in the story.
And (2) How would the hypothetical actual audience view the two acts of
violence in the story?
In Part Two (chapters 3-5) of this study, we observe that the author
casts some characters in a positive light and others in a negative light,
thereby encouraging the implied audience to choose the point of view of
the positive characters. Part Two also demonstrates the author’s use of
point of view as a literary technique to portray Anat’s violence in a multi-
perspectival fashion with depth and sophistication, which cannot be re-
duced to any one-dimensional interpretation on the part of the audience or
reader.
By using both characterization and point of view, the author intends to
influence his implied audience to perceive Anat’s violence as a negative act,
an unjustified murder, and Pughat’s violence as a positive act, a vengeance
against a deceased family member, yet he also leaves room for ambiguity
and openness in his portrayal of the two acts of violence, thereby forcing
the audience to wrestle with their own ethical conclusions.
In Part Three (chapter 6), the hypothetical actual audience’s identifica-
tion with the human characters in the story confirms the effectiveness of
using characterization and point of view as means to shape the audience’s
perception of violence. However, the way in which each individual audience
actualizes and applies the various elements in the story goes beyond the
control of the author. Therefore, the impact and the significance of the vio-
lence in the story for the historical audience remain in the sphere of conjec-
ture.
Several observations can be drawn from this study: the power of char-
acterization, the dynamic of point of view, the ethics of violence, and the
purpose of ambiguity and openness in the story.
189
THE POWER OF CHARACTERIZATION

Each character in the story is the creation of the author, who carefully de-
signs the characters and fashions them in order to serve the purpose of the
plot and for the message of the story. In this sense, there is no accident in
the author’s presentation and representation of the characters. By present-
ing Dan’il as a righteous king and Pughat as an obedient daughter, the au-
thor invites the audience to perceive them as the “good guys.” On the con-
trary, by presenting Anat as a killer who fails to achieve her ends through
violence and by portraying Yatpan as an arrogant villain, the author influ-
ences the audience’s perception of them as the “bad guys.”
Yet, the characterization of El and Baal leaves the audience with a
sense of ambiguity. El is presented as the god of supreme authority as re-
flected by his epithets and by his remoteness. However, Anat’s violent
threat against him casts his authority in doubt. Since the story does not ex-
plicitly portray El as the “nasty guy,” or the “nice guy” the audience is left
with ambiguity regarding El’s character.
The same may be said of the characterization of Baal. Baal is portrayed
as a patron god of Dan’il, who takes the standpoint of the human charac-
ters, Dan’il and Pughat, rather than with his fellow divine beings, El and
Anat. However, Baal is unable to alter El’s permission and can only protest
with silence. Baal is presented as the “nice guy,” yet his seeming powerless-
ness and speechlessness undermine his authority and creates a sense of am-
biguity in the audience’s perception of him.
The characterization of Aqhat is also full of ambiguity. On the one
hand, he is portrayed as an inexperienced and prideful young man who pays
the price of his pride with his life. On the other hand, he is portrayed as an
innocent human being who suffers unjustly for his reaction against the
goddess. In this sense, his judgment does not seem to fit the crime. Because
of this ambiguity in the author’s depiction of the characters, El, Baal, and
Aqhat, Anat’s violence against Aqhat involves ambiguity. The ethical as-
sessment of Anat’s violence depends on whose and which point of view the
audience takes.
THE DYNAMICS OF POINT OF VIEW

As Part Two (chapters 3 to 5) illustrates, we can deduce the author’s prob-
able point of view on the two acts of violence in the story by exploring the
various points of view of the characters in the story. These various points
of view on Anat’s violence depict her violence as a complex act that ex-
cludes any one-sided evaluations on the part of the audience.
CONCLUSION 191
Regarding Anat’s violence, the author deliberately includes El’s per-

mission for Anat to harm Aqhat and reveals Aqhat’s arrogant attitude to-
ward Anat. These two inclusions offer a counter perspective contrary to
Dan’il and Pughat’s point of view. Regarding Pughat’s violence, the author
designs to keep Dan’il and Pughat “in the dark” by concealing the informa-
tion of El’s permission and Aqhat’s arrogance but disclosing that informa-
tion to the audience of the story. This concealing and disclosing of informa-
tion elevates the audience’s position by making him or her know more than
the human characters, Dan’il and Pughat. Because the audience knows
more, the burden of interpretation falls on the audience.
One way the author of the story encourages the audience to identify
with Dan’il and Pughat’s point of view is through the description of their
emotion. Emotion is one of the major literary devices the author employs
to influence the audience’s response toward the acts of violence in the
story. The author describes Dan’il’s distress, grief, and anger and draws at-
tention to the weeping of Pughat after the death of Aqhat. These emotional
descriptions help to move the audience’s emotions to empathize with them.
In this way, the audience feels what Dan’il and Pughat feel. The multiplicity
of points of view inherent in the story may not help the audience to make
ethical judgments easily. Yet, the emotional point of view can overshadow
the plain facts, and moves the audience to make a judgment based on his or
her identification with the emotions of the human characters in the story.
By manipulating characterization and point of view, and by allowing
room for ambiguity and openness, the author forces the audience to strug-
gle to establish his or her own ethical assessment on the acts of violence
portrayed in the story.
Three observations can be made on the point of view of the characters
in the story about Anat’s violence:
(1) The character’s point of view regarding Anat’s violence is depend-
ent upon the character’s relationship with the perpetrator and with the vic-
tim, i.e. Anat and Aqhat. El gives in to Anat’s threat and permits her to kill
because he fears Anat more than Aqhat. Dan’il perceives Anat’s violence as
an unjust murder because the victim is his son. Baal sides with Dan’il be-
cause Dan’il is his devotee. Pughat takes vengeance against Yatpan because
the victim is her brother. Yatpan takes Anat’s point of view because Anat is
his superior. Both Dan’il and Pughat do not bother to inquire into the rea-
sons behind Aqhat’s death. They take the act of vengeance simply because
Aqhat is their close family member. In this sense, their vengeance has more
to do with relationship than with the concern of right and wrong. For them,
their relationship with the victim justifies their point of view.
(2) Each character’s point of view regarding Anat’s violence is depend-

ent upon his or her knowledge of the situation in which the act of violence
takes place. El permits Anat to kill because he not only knows that Aqhat
rebels against Anat but he also knows “to offend Anat is to be crushed.”
Both Dan’il and Pughat’s perceive Anat’s violence as an evil act because
they are unaware of the encounter between Anat and Aqhat and are igno-
rant of Aqhat’s rebellious attitude toward Anat. Yatpan takes Anat’s point
of view because he is unaware of Anat’s weeping and her losing of the bow.
(3) Each character’s point of view regarding Anat’s violence is also de-
pendent upon his or her self-interest factor. Does the act of violence serve
one’s interest or act against it? El permits Anat to kill because it saves him
from being crushed by Anat. Baal protests silently because he wants to
make a statement that he disapproves Anat’s act of violence. Anat kills be-
cause she wants the bow of Aqhat. Dan’il and Pughat take vengeance
against Anat’s violence because her violence apparently goes against the
interest of Dan’il and Pughat.
THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE

Each character views Anat’s violence from his or her vantage point and
justifies it according to this vantage point. In this sense, the ethics of vio-
lence is an issue of point of view. Where one stands influences how one
views the violence in the story. Anat’s violence may be perceived as an evil
act if one stands on Dan’il and Pughat’s side and ignores other points of
view. On the contrary, Anat’s violence may be perceived as a divine pun-
ishment of a human rebel if one takes the stand of El and neglects other
points of view. As we observed above, point of view is closely bound up
with one’s relationship with the perpetrator and with the victim, one’s
knowledge of the situation in which the violence takes place, and one’s self-
interest factor. Thus, the ethics of violence is contingent upon these three
factors.
Other observations regarding the nature of violence can be drawn
from this study:
(1) In the Story of Aqhat, the taking of a human life is considered seri-
ously by the family members of the victim and by the author of the story
since the death of Aqhat and the subsequent vengeance stays at the center
of the plot.
(2) Violence is manifested in two opposing ways. From the human
characters’ perspective, Anat’s violence is an unjust murder whereas
Pughat’s violence is a heroic act of vengeance. In this sense, there is a place
CONCLUSION 193
for violence, as in the context of exacting blood-vengeance, but killing for

personal gain is indirectly denounced.
(3) For both Anat and Pughat, violence is a means to their ends. Anat
uses violence to get the bow. Pughat uses violence to kill the killer of her
brother. Both cases show the power of violence as a means to serve self-
interest.
(4) Violence begets violence. The killing of a person needs the killing
of the killer to restore some kind of wholeness to the family of the victim.
This concept is analogous to the concept of “an eye for an eye” in the He-
brew Bible.
THE PURPOSE OF AMBIGUITY AND OPENNESS

As this study shows, the characterization of the major players in the story
invites ambiguity and openness. The various points of view of the charac-
ters also include ambiguity and openness. Thus, the ethics of Anat’s vio-
lence is portrayed with ambiguity and openness. This prompts us to ask the
question: what is the purpose of allowing aspects of ambiguity and open-
ness to be present in the portrayal of Anat’s violence in the story? In other
words, what is the intention of the author when he remains reticent regard-
ing the moral evaluation of Anat’s violence?
The question is related to the function of ambiguity and openness in
stories. One of the ways in which stories influence the audience is by leav-
ing questions and unresolved issues for the audience to answer or to re-
solve. 1 One example from the Hebrew Bible is the Book of Jonah. The
book ends with God’s question to Jonah but leaves the reader in suspense
as to how Jonah responds to the question God poses. This apparent with-
holding of the response from Jonah encourages the reader to ponder the
message of the book. Similarly, the lack of explicit evaluation of Anat’s vio-
lence on the part of the author of the Story of Aqhat forces the audience to
wrestle with the issue and to strive to come to terms with it.
Another function of ambiguity and openness in stories is dynamic
adaptability. By leaving unanswered elements in the story, the story be-
comes adaptable to each succeeding generation and meets specific needs in
different periods of time.2 Different readers and audiences in different gen-
erations and cultures can apply the story in their own ways based on their
own contexts.

2 Drawn from McAfee, “The Patriarch’s Longed-for Son,” 306.
CONCLUSION
To answer the question: what is the text’s implicit understanding of vio-
lence in the Story of Aqhat? Based on the author’s employment of charac-
terization and point of view, the text portrays violence as a complex matter.
On the surface, the text disapproves of violence for material gain and ap-
proves using violence for the sake of blood-vengeance. However, beneath
the surface, many questions arise: Does the one in a higher social hierarchy
have the authority to demand something from the one who is in a lower
rank? What constitutes an unjustified death and a justified death? How does
one decide whether a particular punishment fits a particular crime? Is igno-
rance of the whole matter a means to justify one’s point of view on vio-
lence? These questions arise precisely from the ambiguity and openness left
in the story.
Through investigation of characterization and point of view, the ethics
of violence in the Story of Aqhat is not simply a matter of right and wrong,
but more a matter of point of view. This point of view is strongly influ-
enced by one’s relationship with the perpetrator and with the victim of the
violence, one’s knowledge of the situation in which the violence takes place,
and one’s self-interest factor. Therefore, the author of the Story of Aqhat
composes the story with artistry and sophistication, which not only en-
hances the modern reader’s appreciation of his employment of the literary
techniques but also invites us to ponder the story’s inherent moral message.
AREAS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
This study focuses on the literary aspects of characterization and point of

view as means to recover the understanding of violence implicit in the Story
of Aqhat. Because of these two foci, we have not inquired into other sub-
ject matters and exploration of other methods to approach the issue of the
ethics of violence in the ancient texts in general and in the Story of Aqhat in
particular. The purpose of this section is to raise areas for further research
in connection with the study of the ethics of violence in the Story of Aqhat
and to explore the possible use of the conclusion of this study as a herme-
neutical key for the study of the ethics of violence in other contexts.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 195
THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE OTHER UGARITIC TEXTS

The present study chooses one ancient text as its focus. The conclusion
derived from this text needs further collaboration with other Ugaritic texts
of the same genre such as the Baal Cycle and the Story of Kirtu and with
other genres such as prayers, incantations, and letters in order to present a
comprehensive view of the ethics of violence as conceived by the ancient
Ugaritians.
Clear distinctions need to be made concerning the nature of violence,
the type of violence, and the subject and the object of violence. How do
characterization and point of view play in these texts? Is the concept of vio-
lence portrayed in these texts clear or ambiguous? What other approaches
can we employ to discover the ancient Ugaritian’s understanding of vio-
lence? What are the significance and implications of this study for the study
of other related subject matters such as war and peace, order and chaos?
THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN OTHER ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN

TEXTS
To study the concept of violence in the other ancient Near Eastern texts
requires the use of the comparative method. Past scholarship tends to either
emphasize the similarities among the various ancient texts or repudiate the
validity of the comparative method. A contextual method seems to be a
more appropriate method for the comparative study. Hallo proposes the
“contextual method” for the comparative study. This method involves the
drawing of similarities and differences between traits of two or more cul-
tures, rather than strictly looking for the similarities between these cultures
or rejecting the comparative study.1 Longman notes that, generally speak-
ing, the closer the two cultures are geographically, temporally, and linguisti-
cally, the more likely it is that the comparison is valid.2 When comparing
various ancient Near Eastern texts, the comparison is between two or more
ancient cultures such as the study of the ethics of violence in Ugarit and in
Mesopotamia.
1 William W. Hallo, “Biblical History in Its Ancient Near Eastern Setting: The
Contextual Approach,” in Scripture in Context: Essays on the Comparative Method

(PTMS 34; Edited by Carl D. Evans, William W. Hallo, and John B. White; Pitts-
burgh, Penn.: The Pickwick Press, 1980), 1-26.
2 Tremper Longman III, Fictional Akkadian Autobiography: A Generic and Compara-
tive Study (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1991), 31. For the basic approaches to
the comparative method, its validity and benefits, see Longman, Fictional Akkadian
Autobiography, 24-36.
Precautions need to be taken in comparing texts from different genres

and in comparing texts that differ in context.3 A fundamental issue that is
intrinsic to the study of the ethics of violence is its function and place in
these ancient texts. The theme of violence is predominant in the divine
realm such as in the Baal Cycle and in Enuma Elish. Does the function of
violence simply describe moral or ethical behavior or does it prescribe ethi-
cal models for conducting violence? What methodologies should we em-
ploy to deduce the moral understanding of violence in these texts?
THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE HEBREW BIBLE

Numerous works in the studies of the Hebrew Bible have been devoted to
the subjects of war, holy war or just war, divine warfare, and God as a di-
vine warrior. 4 Several of these works have adopted the comparative method
and have drawn their parallels from both the Ugaritic and the Mesopota-
mian sources.5 These works demonstrate the close affinity between the di-
3 Longman, Fictional Akkadian Autobiography, 31-32.

4 For example, Miller, The Divine; Peter C. Craigie, The Problem of War in the Old
Testament (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1978); Willard M. Swartley, Slavery, Sab-
bath, War, and Women: Case Issues in Biblical Interpretation (Scottsdale, Penn.: Herald
Press, 1983); 97-149; Kang, Divine War; Charles Sherlock, The God Who Fights: The
War Tradition in Holy Scripture (Edinburgh: Rutherford House, 1993); Susan Niditch,
War in the Hebrew Bible: A Study in the Ethics of Violence (New York, Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1993); A. C. Winn, Ain’t Gonna Study War No More (Louisville:
Westminster John Knox Press, 1993); Longman and Reid, God is a Warrior.
5 For instance, P. C. Craigie compares and contrasts the Israelite practice of war
with the ancient Near Eastern practices. He points out the religious dimension of
the conduct of war in Mesopotamia, which is in common with the Israelites under-
standing of divine warfare. Yet no other ancient Near Eastern nation has a vision
of peace and an anticipation of the redemption of all mankind as reflected in the
Israelite tradition. See Craigie, The Problem of War, 115-122. Miller notes that Israel’s
understanding of God is developed through interaction with other ancient Near
Eastern cultures. He explores the nature and role of the Ugaritic divine assembly as
well as investigates the roles of Baal, Anat, and El as the divine warriors. He then
uses these findings as the backdrop for his study of war and warfare in ancient Is-
rael. See Miller, The Divine Warrior, 12-63.
Kang presents a comprehensive overview of divine war in the different con-
texts of the ancient Near East as a means to shed light on Yahweh’s war in the
Hebrew Bible. His approach is both exegetical and comparative. He compares the
structure of divine war in the ancient Near East with that of Yahweh war, examines
the form and function of the various literary texts and genres including inscriptions,
epic, hymnic, annalistic, ritual texts, and graphic sources. See Kang, Divine War, 6,
BIBLIOGRAPHY 197
vine warfare and the divine warrior motifs in the Hebrew Bible and in the
ancient Near Eastern tradition, which lend support to the validity of the
comparative method.6
Since the “contextual method” of the comparative approach takes ac-
count of both similarities and differences between two or more cultures, it
is interesting to note that there is no exact parallel between the plot of the
Story of Aqhat and any of the narrative texts found in the Hebrew Bible. In
the Story of Aqhat, a deity kills a human being for self-interest (i.e. for a
material gain) and then another human being takes vengence against the
henchman of the deity. In the Hebrew Bible, Yahweh seldom kills a human
being for any material gain. However, there are several incidents in which
Yahweh kills human beings for self-regard, to safeguard his name, glory,
and holiness.7 The distinction between killing human beings for self-interest
as in the cases of the Ugaritic deities and the killing of human beings for
self-regard as in the cases of Yahweh deserve further inquiry.8 In what way
does Yahweh share similarities with the Ugaritic deities in terms of commit-
ting violence against human beings and in what way is Yahweh different
from the Ugaritic deities?
Based on the conclusion of this study, the ethics of violence is strongly
influenced by one’s relationship with the perpetrator and with the victim of
the violence, one’s knowledge of the situation in which the violence takes
place, and one’s self-interest factor. This conclusion throws light on the
interpretation of violence in the Hebrew Bible.9
(1) From the standpoint of the interpreter of the Hebrew Bible: The
interpretation of God’s character and his acts of violence against human
11-110. Longman and Reid use two divine warrior myths (the Baal Cycle from Ug-
arit and Enuma Elish from Mesopotamia) to demonstrate the analogous pattern
appeared in the divine warfare of the Hebrew Bible. See Longman and Reid, God is
a Warrior, 83-88.
6 A comparative study preserves scholars from the danger of isolating one cul-
ture from another and helps to dispute false antithesis and establish correct ones.
See Longman, Fictional Akkadian Autobiography, 36.
7 For example, Yahweh kills Uzzah in 2 Sam 6 and the two sons of Aaron in
Lev 10.
8 I pointed out this distinction in my paper “How Does the Portrayal of Uga-
ritic Deities Shed Light on the ‘Dark Side’ of God in the Hebrew Scriptures?” (pa-
per presented at the annual meeting of the SBL. San Antonio, Tex., 20 November,
2004).
9 For a recent bibliography on the issue of violence in the Hebrew Bible, See
Collins, Does the Bible, 53-56.

beings in the Hebrew Bible is strongly influenced by the interpreter’s rela-

tionship with God, the “perpetrator,” his or her knowledge of God’s char-
acter and actions, and his or her self-interest factor. It is impossible to reach
a uniform interpretation of God’s acts of violence if the interpreters stand
in different vantage points in their relationships with God. The point of
view of an atheist regarding God’s acts of violence would significantly differ
from the point of view of an evangelical scholar.
(2) From the standpoint of the author of the Hebrew Bible: The inter-
pretation of God’s character and his acts of violence against human beings
in the Hebrew Bible is strongly influenced by the author’s (the one who
wrote the particular text of God’s violent acts against human beings, such
as the author of Lev 10 about God killing the two sons of Aaron) relation-
ship with God, his knowledge of God and his character, and his self-
interest (or group-interest) factor. The vantage point of a Deuteronomist
would significantly vary from the vantage point of a priestly writer.
(3) From the standpoint of the human character in the Hebrew Bible:
The interpretation of God’s character and his acts of violence is also
strongly influenced by the character’s relationship with God, his or her
knowledge of God, and his or her self-interest factor.10
The various acts of violence portrayed in the Hebrew Bible pose a
great challenge to the biblical scholars and ethicists. Many groups and indi-
viduals including the crusaders, the Puritans, and the abolitionists used the
violence depicted in the Hebrew Bible to justify their use of violence. 11
Questions arise: Does the Hebrew Bible describe or prescribe violence? Is
10 For instance, in the same example we mentioned above (Lev 10:1), God
causes fire to consume the two sons of Aaron when they offer incense, which God
has not commanded. As a result, Aaron remains silent (‫( )דמם‬Lev 10:3b). We can
interpret the silence of Aaron in the light of his relationship with God, his knowl-
edge of God, and his self-interest factor. On the one hand, Aaron is a priest and
has full knowledge of how to approach God in a proper manner, therefore, he fully
understood the cause for the death of his sons. His silence is not due to his igno-
rance of the situation. Aaron’s relationship with God, the “perpetrator,” is not a
hostile but a reverent one. Thus, he cannot conceive God as an enemy, or the ob-
ject of vengeance. On the other hand, the victims of the violence are his two sons.
Their death deprives him of two loved ones, which goes against his self-interest.
Thus, Aaron could have protest with anger and rage, yet his relationship and
knowledge of God prevents him from doing so. Caught in this dilemma, Aaron
cannot express anything verbally but to remain silent. Cf. Goldingay thinks that it is
possible that the word “silent” can mean “wailing.” See John Goldingay, Old Testa-
ment Theology: Israel’s Gospel (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 2003), 425.
11 Collins, Does the Bible, 1-27.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 199
violence considered the last resort or the only means to an end? Is “vio-
lence” the right terminology to use when we speak about the killing of hu-
man beings by the divine agent(s)? In what context do we justify divine vio-
lence? What kind of questions should we ask regarding the ethics of vio-
lence without imposing modern or western concepts and ideologies into the
ancient text and thought? Is the study of violence in the Hebrew Bible by
focusing on the Hebrew Bible itself adequate to address the various issues
involved or should we adopt a cross-disciplinary approaches to the issue of
violence in the Hebrew Bible? These questions await further reflections and
studies.
THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN MODERN MIDDLE EAST

The history of Middle East is characterized by violence. The perpetual vio-
lence between the Palestinians and the Israelis is a case in point. Both sides
claim to have the right to the ownership of the land.12 Many Jewish people
believe God has granted them the land as their possession forever. Many
Christians and Muslims also believe that a land that was under their occu-
pancy remains theirs forever. This apparent paradox is foundational for the
cause of violence between the two parties.13 The different points of view
between the Palestinians and the Israelis concerning the land are directly
related to their respective relationship to God, their knowledge of God and
his promises, and their self-interest factor. An investigation of these three
areas may shed light on their varied points of view.
The war on Iraq is also a reflection of point of view. For example, our
perception of the war on Iraq is laragely dependent upon our relationship
with Saddam Hussein and with the victim of the violence. If someone’s son
was fighting in the war against Iraq and died, he or she would view the war
significantly different from someone whose son did not fight or die in the
war against Iraq.
12 For the recent revised edition on the issue of land, see Walter Brueggemann,
The Land: Place as Gift, Promise, and Challenge in Biblical Faith (2nd ed. Minneapolis:
Fortress Press, 2002). For the recent argument on the moral problem concerning
the conquest of Canaan, see Stanley N. Gundry, ed., Show Them No Mercy: 4 Views
on God and Canaanite Genocide (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 2003); and Wright’s
appendix and his bibliography for further reading in Christopher J. H. Wright, Old
Testament Ethics for the People of God (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 2004), 472-
480.
13 A newsletter by Tony Higton, the Director of Christ Church Ministires in Je-
rusalem. Issue 1 November, 2004.

Our perception of the war is also determined by our knowledge of the

situation. In this sense, the media strongly shapes our perception since it
controls and manipulates the point of view it communicates to the audi-
ence. The media discloses information and images of the war and may
withhold certain information and images from the audience. Thus, we are
unable to see what is outside of the public media.
From the interest point of view, if the war serves one’s self-interest
such as the oil company who purchases oil from the Iraqis, the oil company
would perceive the war differently from those who do not need to purchase
oil from the Iraqis. A study of these aspects of relationship, knowledge, and
self-interest will enhance our understanding of war in general and our per-
ception of particular wars.
At the same time, we acknowledge that the hermeneutical key of using
point of view as a means to understand various kinds of violence, past and
present, does not aid in resolving the various problems involved in the vari-
ous manifestations of violence.
In summary, the questions raised in this section are by no means sim-
ple and facile. Further research on discovering the hermeneutics of violence
in the ancient texts in general and the Hebrew Bible in particular await
scholars and students. To establish the means to reach a resolution of peace
and reconciliation among the conflicting parties in the modern Middle East
and the rest of the world seem to be the more pressing issue at hand.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
PRIMARY SOURCES
Ugaritic
Bordreuil, Pierre. Une Bibliotheque Au Sud De La Ville. Ras Shamra-Ougarit
VII. Paris: Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations, 1991.
De Moor, J. C. and K. Spronk. A Cuneiform Anthology of Religious Texts from
Ugarit. Autographed Texts and Glossaries. SSS 6. Leiden: Brill, 1987.
Dietrich, Manfried, O. Loretz, J. Sanmartin. The Cuneiform Alphabetic Texts
from Ugarit, Ras Ibn Hani and Other Places. Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1995.
J. Nougayrol, ed. Le Palais Royal D’Ugarit IV. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale,
Klincksieck, 1956.
J. Nougayrol, et al. eds., Ugaritica V. Paris: Geuthner, 1968.
Hebrew
Elliger, K. and W. Rudolph. Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. 5th ed. Stuttgart:
Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1997.
SECONDARY LITERATURE
Abusch, T. “Ishtar’s Proposal and Gilgamesh’s Refusal: An Interpretation
of the Gilgamesh Epic, Tab. 6, Lines 1-79.” HR 26 (1986): 143-187.
Ackerman, Susan. Warrior, Dancer, Seductress, Queen. New York, London,
Toronto, Sydney, Auckland: Doubleday, 1998.
Ahlstrom, Gosta W. “Administration of the State in Canaan and Ancient
Israel.” Pages 587-603 in vol. 1 of Civilizations of the Ancient Near East.
Edited by Jack M. Sasson. 4 vols. Peabody, Mass.: Hendricksons, 1995.
Aitken, Kenneth T. “Formulaic Patterns for the Passing of Time in Ugaritic
Narrative.” UF 19 (1987): 1-10.
———. “Oral Formulaic Composition and Theme in the Aqhat Narra-
tive.” UF 21 (1989a): 1-16.
———. “Word Pairs and Tradition in an Ugaritic Tale.” UF 21 (1989b):
17-38.
———. The Aqhat Narrative. JSS Monograph. Manchester: University of
Manchester, 1990.
201
Albright, W. F. and George E. Mendenhall. “The Creation of the Compos-

ite Bow in Canaanite Mythology.” JNES 1 (1942): 227-9.
Alter, Robert. The Art of Biblical Narrative. New York: Basic Books, 1981.
Amico, Eleanor A. “The Status of Women at Ugarit.” Ph. D. diss., Univer-
sity of Michigan, 1989.
Ashley, E. “The ‘Epic of Aqht’ and the ‘Rpum Texts’: A Critical Interpreta-
tion (Parts One and Two).” Ph. D. diss., New York University, 1977.
Audi, Robert et al. Violence: Award-Winning Essays in the Council for Philosophi-
cal Studies Competition. New York: David McKay Company, 1971.
Avishur, Yitzhak. “The ‘Duties of the Son’ in the ‘Story of Aqhat’ and Eze-
kiel’s Prophecy on Idolatry (Ch. 8).” UF 17 (1985): 49-60.
———. Studies in Hebrew and Ugaritic Psalms. Jerusalem: The Magnes Press,
1994.
Bar-Efrat, Shimon. Narrative Art in the Bible. Sheffield: Almond Press, 1989.
Barton, George A. “Danel, A Pre-Israelite Hero of Galilee.” JBL 60 (1941):
213-225.
Beckman, Gary. “Family Values on the Middle Euphrates in the Thirteenth
Century BCE.” Pages 57-79 in Emar: the History, Religion, and Culture of a
Syrian Town in Late Bronze Age. Edited by M.W. Chavalas. Bethesda:
CDL, 1996.
Berlin, Adele. Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative. Sheffield: Almond
Press, 1983.
Boda, M. J. “Ideal Sonship in Ugarit.” UF 25 (1993): 9-24.
Booth, Wayne. The Rhetoric of Fiction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
1961.
Bowman, Charles. H. “The Goddess ‘Anatu in the Ancient Near East.” Ph.
D. diss., Graduate Theological Union, 1978.
Brandon, S. G. F. Creation Legends of the Ancient Near East. London: Hodder
and Stoughton, 1963.
Braun Joachim. Music in Ancient Israel/Palestine: Archaeological, Written, and
Comparative Sources. Trans. Douglas W. Stott. Grand Rapids, Mich.,
Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2002.
Brueggemann, Walter. The Land: Place as Gift, Promise, and Challenge in Biblical
Faith. 2nd ed. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2002.
Buccellati, Giorgio. “On Poetry – Theirs and Ours.” Pages 105-134 in Lin-
gering Over Words: Studies in Ancient Near Eastern Literature in Honor of
William L. Moran. Edited by Tzvi Abusch, John Huehnergard and Piotr
Steinkeller. Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1990.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 203
———. “Ethics and Piety in the Ancient Near East.” Pages 1685-96 in vol.
3 of Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Edited by Jack M. Sasson.
Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1995.
Caquot, Andre and M. Sznycer. Textes Ougaritiques. Tome I. Paris: Les Edi-
tions du Cerf, 1974.
———. Ugaritic Religion. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1980.
——— and J-M de Tarragon. Textes Ougaritiques: Textes Religieux et Rituels.
Tome II. Paris: Les Editions du Cerf, 1989.
Caquot, Andre and Sznycer, M. Ugaritic Religion. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1980.
Cassuto, U. The Goddess Anath: Canaanite Epics of the Patriarchal Age. Trans-
lated by Israel Abraham. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1971.
Caubet, Annie. “La Musique à Ougarit: nouveaux témoignages matériels.”
Pages 9-31 in Ugarit, Religion and Culture: Proceedings of the International
Colloquium on Ugarit, Religion and Culture, Edinburghm July 1994: Essays
Presented in Honour of Professor John C. L. Gibson. Edited by N. Wyatt,
W.G.E. Watson and J.B. Lloyd. UBL 12. Munster: Ugarit-Verlag,
1996.
Chatman, Seymour. Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film.
Ithaca and London: Cornell University, 1978.
Collins, John J. Does the Bible Justify Violence? Minneapolis: Fortress, 2004.
Coogan, Michael D. Stories from Ancient Canaan. Philadelphia: Westminster,
1978.
Cooper, Alan. “Two Exegetical Notes on AQHT.” UF 20 (1988): 19-26.
Cornelius, Izak. The Iconography of the Canaanite Gods Reshef and Ba‘al: Late
Bronze and Iron Age I Periods (c 1500-1000 BCE). OBO 140. Switzerland:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht Gottingen, 1994.
Craigie, Peter C. The Problem of War in the Old Testament. Grand Rapids,
Mich.: Eerdmans, 1978.
Cross, Frank Moore. Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of
the Religion of Israel. Massachusetts and London: Harvard University
Press, 1973.
———. “The ‘Olden Gods’ in Ancient Near Eastern Creation Myths.”
Pages 329-338 in Magnalia Dei: The Mighty Acts of God - Essays on the Bi-
ble and Archaeology in Memory of G. Ernest Wright. Edited by F. M. Cross,
W. E. Lemke, P. D. Miller. Garden City: Doubleday, 1976.
Culpepper, R. Allen. Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel: A Study in Literary Design.
Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983.
Cunchillos, Jesus-Luis. “The Correspondence of Ugarit.” Pages 359-374 in
Handbook of Ugaritic Studies. Edited by Wilfred G. E. Watson and Nico-
las Wyatt. Leiden-Boston-Koln: Brill, 1999.
Dalley, Stephanie. Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, the Flood, Gilgamesh and
Others. Oxford/New York: Oxford University, 1989.
Day, John. “Daniel of Ugarit and Ezekiel and the Hero of the Book of
Daniel.” VT 30 (1980): 174-84.
Day, Peggy L. “Why is Anat a Warrior and Hunter?” Pages 141-6 in The
Bible and the Politics of Exegesis: Essays in Honor of Norman K. Gottward on
His Sixty-Fifth Birthday. Edited by D. Jobling et al. Ohio: Pilgrim Press,
1991.
———. “Anat: Ugarit’s “Mistress of Animals.” JNES 51 (1992): 181-90.
Dietrich Manfried and Oswald Loretz. “ANŠ(T) Und (M)INŠ(T) im Ugari-
tischen.” UF 9 (1977): 47-50.
———. “Baal RPU in KTU 1.108; 1.113 Und Nach 1.17 VI 225-33.” UF
12 (1980a): 171-82.
———. “Amter und Titel des Schreibers Ilimlk von Ugarit.” UF 12
(1980b): 387-89.
———. “Die Ba‘al-Titel B‘l Arṣ und Aliy Qrdm.” UF 12 (1980c):391-93.
———. Word-List of the Cuneiform Alphabetic Texts from Ugarit, Ras Ibn Hani
and Other Places (KTU: Second, enlarged edition). Munster: Ugarit-Verlag,
1996.
Dijkstra, Meindert. “Some Reflections on the Legend of Aqhat.” UF 11
(1979): 199-210
———, and J.C. de Moor. “Problematic Passages in the Legend of
Aqhatu.” UF 7 (1975): 171-215.
Dressler, Harold H. P. “Is the Bow of Aqhat a Symbol of Verility?” UF 7
(1975): 217-20.
———. “The Metamorphosis of a Lacuna: Is at.aJ.wan... a Proposal of
Marriage?” UF 11 (1979a): 211-17.
———. “The Identification of the Ugaritic Dnil with the Daniel of Eze-
kiel.” VT 29 (1979b): 152-61.
Driver, G. R. “Confused Hebrew Roots.” Pages 73-82 in Occident and Orient:
Beginning Studies in Semitic Philology and Literature, Jewish History and Phi-
losophy and Folklore in the Widest Sense in Honour of Haham Dr. M. Gaster’s
80th Birthday. Edited by Bruno Schindler and A. Marmorstein. London:
W. C. L., 1936.
Eaton, A. W. “The Goddess Anat: The History of Her Cult, Her Mythology
and Her Iconography.” Ph. D. diss., Yale University, 1964.
Eissfeldt, O. “Sohnespflichten im Alten Orient.” Pages 268-9 in Kleine
Schriften. Edited by Otto Eissfeldt. Tubingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1968.
Engnell, Ivan. Studies in Divine Kingship in the Ancient Near East. Oxford: Basil
Blackwell, 1967.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 205
Frymer-Kensky, T. In the Wake of the Goddesses: Women, Culture, and the Biblical
Transformation of Pagan Myth. New York: The Free Press, 1992.
Gaster, Theodor H. Thespis, Ritual, Myth and Drama in the Ancient Near East.
New York: Henry Schuman, 1950.
Gibson, John C. L. “Myth, Legend and Folk-Lore in the Ugaritic Keret and
Aqhat Texts.” VTS (1975): 60-8.
———. Canaanite Myth and Legends. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1977.
———. “The Theology of the Ugaritic Baal Cycle.” Or 53 (1984): 202-219.
Ginsberg, H. L. “The North-Canaanite Myth of Anath and Aqhat, I.” BA-
SOR 97 (1945): 3-10.
———. “The North-Canaanite Myth of Anath and Aqhat, II.” BASOR 98
(1945):15-23.
———. “The Tale of Aqhat.” Pages 118-132 in The Ancient Near East: An
Anthology of Texts and Pictures. Edited by James B. Pritchard. Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1958.
Girard, René. Violence and the Sacred. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University,
1977.
Goldingay, John. Models for Interpretation of Scripture. Grand Rapids, Mich.:
Eerdmans, 1995.
———. Old Testament Theology: Israel’s Gospel. Downers Grove, Ill.: Inter-
Varsity, 2003.
Good, Robert M. “Metaphorical Gleanings from Ugarit.” JJS 33 (1982): 55-
59.
———. “On RS 24.252.” UF 23 (1991): 155-60.
Gordon, Cyrus H. Ugaritic Textbook. Analecta Orientalia 38. Rome: Pontifi-
cal Biblical Institute, 1965.
———. “Marriage in the Guise of Siblingship” UF 20 (1988): 53-56.
Gray, John. The Legacy of Canaan. VTSup 5. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1965.
———. “The Bloodbath of the Goddess Anat.” UF 11 (1979): 315-24.
Green, Alberto R. W. The Storm-God in the Ancient Near East. Winona Lake,
Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2003.
Gundry, Stanley W. ed. Show Them No Mercy: 4 Views on God and Canaanite
Genocide. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 2003.
Hallo, William W. “Biblical History in Its Near Eastern Setting: The Con-
textual Approach.” Pages 1-26 in Scripture in Context: Essays on the Com-
parative Method. Edited by Carl D. Evans, William W. Hallo, and John
B. White. PTMS 34. Pittsburgh, Penn.: The Pickwick Press, 1980.
———. ed. Canonical Compositions from the Biblical World. Vol. 1 of The Con-
text of Scripture. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1997.
———. Canonical Compositions from the Biblical World. Vol. 2 of The Context of
Scripture. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2003.
Handy, L. K. Among the Host of Heaven. The Syro-Palestinian Pantheon as Bu-
reaucracy. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1994.
Healey, J. F. “The Pietas of an Ideal Son in Ugarit.” UF 11 (1979): 353-356.
———. “Mot.” Pages 598-603 in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible.
Edited by Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der
Horst. Rev. and enl. ed. Leiden, New York, Koln: Brill, 1999.
Hendel, Ronald S. The Epic of the Patriarch: The Jacob Cycle and the Narrative
Traditions of Canaan and Israel. Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1987.
Herrmann, W. “El.” Pages 293-96 in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the
Bible. Edited by Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van
der Horst. Rev. and enl. ed. Leiden, New York, Koln: Brill, 1999.
Hess, Richard S. “The Onomastics of Ugarit.” Pages 499-528 in Handbook of
Ugaritic Studies. Edited by Wilfred G. E. Watson and Nicolas Wyatt.
Leiden-Boston-Koln: Brill, 1999.
Hillers, Delbert R. “The Bow of Aqhat: The Meaning of a Mythological
Theme.” AOAT 22 (1973): 71-80.
Hoffner, H. A. Jr. “Symbols for Masculinity and Femininity.” JBL 85
(1966): 326-34.
Huehnergard, John. “The Akkadian Letters.” Pages 375-389 in Handbook of
Ugaritic Studies. Edited by Wilfred G. E. Watson and Nicolas Wyatt.
Husser, Jean-M. “The Birth of a Hero: Form and Meaning of KTU 1.17 i-
ii.” Pages 85-98 in Ugarit, Religion and Culture: Proceedings of the Interna-
tional Colloquium on Ugarit, Religion and Culture. Edinburgh, July 1994. Fest-
schrift J. C. L. Gibson: UBL 12. Edited by N. Wyatt, W. G. E. Watson
and J. B. Lloyd. Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996.
Iser, Wolfgang. The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response. Translated
by Der Akt des Lesens. Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins Uni-
versity Press, 1978.
Jacobsen, Thorkild. “Primitive Democracy in Ancient Mesopotamia.” Pages
157-172 in Toward the Image of Tammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian
History and Culture. Edited by William L. Moran. Cambridge, Mass.:
Harvard University Press, 1970.
Johnston, Philip S. Shades of Sheol: Death and Afterlife in the Old Testament.
Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 2002.
Kang, Sa-Moon. Divine War in the Old Testament and in the Ancient Near East.
Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1989.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 207
Kapelrud, Arvid S. Baal in the Ras Shamra Texts. Copenhagen: G. E. C. Gad,

1952.
———. The Violent Goddess Anat in the Ras Shamra Texts. Copenhagen: Uni-
versitets-Forlaget, 1969.
———. “The Relationship between El and Baal in the Ras Shamra
Texts.” Pages 79-85 in The Bible World: Essays in Honor of Cyrus H.
Gordon. Edited by Gary A. Rendsburg et al. New York: KTAV,
1980.
Kautzsch, E. Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar. 2nd Eng. ed. Translated by A.
W. Cowley. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910.
Keel, Othmar and Christopher Uehlinger. Gods, Goddesses, and Images
of God in Ancient Israel. Translated by Thomas H. Trapp. Minnea-
polis: Fortress Press, 1998.
Koehler, Ludwig and Walter Baumgartner. The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of
the Old Testament. Translated by M. E. J. Richardson. Vol. 1. Leiden,
New York, Koln: E. J. Brill, 1994.
Koitabashi, Matahisa. “Significance of Ugaritic mSltm “Cymbals” in the
Anat Text.” Pages 1-5 in Cult and Ritual in the Ancient Near East. Edited
by H.I.H. Prince Takahito Mikasa. Otto Harrassowitz: Wiesbaden,
1992.
Korpel, Marjo Christina Annette. A Rift in the Clouds. Munster: Ugarit-
Verlag, 1990.
———. “Exegesis in the Work of Ilimilku of Ugarit.” Pages 86-111 in Inter-
textuality in Ugarit and Israel. Edited by Jonannes C. de Moor. Leiden:
Brill, 1998.
Kristensen, Ansgar L. “Ugaritic epistolary Formulas: A comparative Study
of the Ugaritic Epistolary Formulas in the Context of the Contempo-
rary Akkadian Formulas in the Letters from Ugarit and Amarna.” UF
9 (1977): 143-158.
Kruger, P. “Rank Symbolism in the Baal Epic: Some Further Indicators.”
UF 27 (1995): 169-75.
Kutsch, Ernst. “‘Trauerbrauche’ und ‘Selbstminderungsriten’ im Alten Tes-
tament.” Pages 25-37 in Drei Wiener Antrittsreden. Edited by Kurt Luthu
et al. Zurich: EVZ-Verlag, 1965.
L’Heureux, E. Rank Among the Canaanite Gods: El, Ba‘al, and the Repha’im.
HSM 21. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1979.
Landy, Francis. The Tale of AQHAT. London: Menard, 1981.
Lanser, Susan Sniader. The Narrative Act: Point of View in Prose Fiction. Prince-
ton, Princeton University, 1981.
Lete, Gregorio del. Olmo. Mitos y leyendas de Canaan segun la tradicion de Ugarit.
Madrid: Ediciones Christiandad, 1981.
———. Canaanite Religion: According to the Liturgical Texts of Ugarit. Translated
by Wilfred G. E. Watson. Maryland: CDL, 1999.
Lewis, Theodore. J. Cults of the Dead in Ancient Israel and Ugarit. HSM 39. At-
lanta: Scholars Press, 1989.
———. “Mot.” Pages 923-24 in Anchor Bible Dictionary. vol 4. New York:
Doubleday, 1992.
Lloyd, J. B. “Anat and the ‘Double’ Massacre of KTU 1.3 ii.” Pages 151-
165 in Ugarit, Religion and Culture: Proceedings of the International Colloquium
on Ugarit, Religion and Culture, Edinburgh, July 1994: Essays Presented in
Honour of Professor John C.L. Gibson. Edited by Wyatt, N. W. G. E. Wat-
son, and J. B. Lloyd. UBL 12; Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996.
Loewenstamm, Samuel E. Comparative Studies in Biblical and Ancient Oriental
Literatures. AOAT 204. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Verlag Butzon & Bercker
Kevelaer, 1980.
———. “Did the Goddess Anat Wear Side-Whiskers and a Beard? A Re-
consideration.” UF 14 (1982): 119-22.
Longman III, Tremper. Literary Approaches to Biblical Interpretation. Grand
Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1987.
———. Fictional Akkadian Autobiography: A Generic and Comparative Study.
Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1991.
———. “Literary Appraches to Old Testament Study.” Pages 97-115 in The
Face of Old Testament Studies. Edited by David W. Baker and Bill T. Ar-
nold. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 1999.
Longman III, Tremper, and Daniel G. Reid. God is a Warrior. Grand Rapids,
Mich.: Zondervan, 1995.
Lotman, J. M. “Point of View in a Text.” New Literary Theory 6 (1975): 339-
352.
Margalit, Baruch. A Matter of Life and Death: A Study of the Baal-Mot Epic
(CTA 4-5-6). AOAT 206; Kevekaer: Butzon & Bercker/ Neukirchen-
Vluyn: Neukircherner Verlag, 1980a.
———. “Death and Dying in the Ugaritic Epics.” Pages 243-54 in Death in
Mesopotamia. Edited by B. Alster. CRRAI 26. Copenhagen: 1980b.
———. The Ugaritic Poem of Aqhat. Berlin-New York: Walter de Gruyter,
1989.
Marks, J. H. and Good, R. M., eds. Love and Death in the Ancient Near East:
Essays in Honor of Marvin H. Pope. Guilford: Four Quarters, 1987.
Marsman, Hennie J. Women in Ugarit and Israel: Their Social and Religious Posi-
tion in the Context of the Ancient Near East. Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2003.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 209
McAfee, Eugene Clifford. “The Patriarch’s Longed-for Son: Biological and

Social Reproduction in Ugaritic and Hebrew Epic.” Ph. D. diss., Har-
vard University, 1996.
McClendon, James Wm. Jr. Systematic Theology: Ethics. Nashville: Abingdon,
1986.
Mendelsohn, I. “The Family in the Ancient Near East.” BA 11 (1948): 24-
40.
Mendenhall, George E. Law and Covenant in Israel and the Ancient Near East.
Pittsburgh: The Presbyterian Board of Colportage of Western Penn-
sylvania, 1955.
Miller, Patrick D. Jr. “El the Warrior.” HTR 60 (1967): 411-431.
———. The Divine Warrior in Early Israel. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Uni-
versity Press, 1973.
de Moor, J. C. The Seasonal Pattern in the Ugaritic Myth of Ba‘lu According to the
Version of Ilimilku. AOAT 16. Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker;
Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1971.
———. “El, The Creator.” Pages 171-187 in The Bible World: Essays in
Honor of Cyrus H. Gordon. Edited by Gary Rendsburg et al; New York:
KTAV Publishing House, 1980.
———. An Anthology of Religious Texts from Ugarit. Nisaba 16. Leiden: Brill,
1987.
———. “The Seasonal Pattern in the Legend of Aqhatu.” SEL 5 (1988):
61-77.
———. The Rise of Yahwism: The Roots of Israelite Monotheism. Leuven: Leuven
University Press, 1990.
———. “Standing Stones and Ancestor Worship.” UF 27 (1995): 3-10.
Mullen, E. Theodore. The Assembly of the Gods: The Divine Council in Canaanite
and Early Hebrew Literature. HSM 24. Calif.: Scholars Press, 1980.
Negbi, Ora. Canaanite Gods in Metal: An Archaeological Study of Ancient Syro-
Palestinian Figurines. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, 1976.
Niditch, Susan. War in the Hebrew Bible: A Study in the Ethics of Violence. New
York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993.
Oldenburg, U. The Conflict between El and Ba‘al in Canaanite Religion. Leiden:
Brill, 1969.
Pardee, Dennis. “A Further Note on PRU 5, no. 60.” UF 13 (1981): 151-6.
———. “Marziḥu, Kispu, and the Ugaritic Funerary Cult: A Minimalist
View.” in Ugarit, Religion and Culture: Proceedings of the International Collo-
quium on Ugarit, Religion and Culture, Edinburgh, July 1994: Essays Presented
in Honour of Professor John C.L. Gibson. Edited by N. Wyatt, W. G. E.
Watson and J. B. Lloyd. Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996.
———. Ritual and Cult at Ugarit. SBLWAW. Atlanta, Ga: Scholars Press,
2002.
Parker, Simon B. “Death and Devotion: The Composition and Theme of
Aqhat.” Pages 71-83 in Love & Death in the Ancient Near East: Essays in
Honor of Marvin H. Pope. Edited by John H. Marks and Robert M.
Good. Connecticut: Four Quarters, 1987.
———. “The Birth Announcement” Pages 133-49 in Ascribe to the Lord:
Biblical and Other Studies in Memory of Peter C. Craigie. Edited by L. Eslin-
ger and G. Taylor. JSOTSup 67; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1988.
———. The Pre-Biblical Narrative Tradition: Essays on the Ugaritic Poems Keret
and Aqhat. Atlanta, Ga: Scholars Press, 1989.
———. “The Literature of Canaan, Ancient Israel, and Phoenicia: An
Overview.” Pages 2399-2410 in vol. 4 of Civilizations of the Ancient Near
East. Edited by Jack M. Sasson. 4 vols. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson,
1995.
———. ed. Ugaritic Narrative Poetry. Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1997.
Paul, Shalom. Amos: A Commentary on the Book of Amos. Minneapolis: For-
tress, 1991.
Peels, H. G. L. The Vengeance of God: The Meaning of the Root NQM and the
Function of the NQM-Texts in the Context of Divine Revelation in the Old Tes-
tament. Leiden, New York, Koln: E.J. Brill, 1995.
Pope, M. El in the Ugaritic Texts. VTSup 2. Leiden: Brill, 1955.
———. “The Cult of the Dead at Ugarit.” Pages 159-79 in Ugarit in Retro-
spect: Fifty Years of Ugarit and Ugaritic. Edited by Gordon D. Young. Wi-
nona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1981.
———. “The Status of El at Ugarit.” UF 19 (1987): 219-230.
———. “Rezensionen: Klaas Spronk, Beatific Afterlife in Ancient Israel
and in the Ancient Near East.” UF 19 (1989): 452-63.
Pritchard, James B. ed. The Ancient Near East: An Anthology of Texts and Pic-
tures. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1958.
———. ed. The Ancient Near East: An Anthology of Texts and Pictures. vol. II.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1975.
Raniey, A. F. “The Social Stratification of Ugarit.” Ph. D. diss., Brandeis
University, 1962.
———. “A Canaanite at Ugarit.” Israel Exploration Journal 13 (1963): 43-45.
———. “Ugarit and Canaanite Again.” Israel Exploration Journal 14 (1964):
101.
———. “Family Relationships in Ugarit.” Or 34 (1965): 11-22.
Reiner, Erica. Your Thwarts in Pieces, Your Moorings Rope Cut. Michigan:
Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies, 1985.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 211
Rhoads, David and Donald Michie. Mark as Story: An Introduction to the Nar-
rative of a Gospel. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1982.
Robins, Gay. Women in Ancient Egypt. Cambridge: Harvard University, 1993.
Ryken, Leland. How To Read the Bible as Literature. Grand Rapids, Mich..:
Zondervan, 1984.
Sasson, Jack M. ed. Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Vol I & II. Peabody,
Mass.: Hendrickson, 1995.
Segert, Stanislav. A Basic Grammar of the Ugaritic Language. Berkeley, Los An-
geles, London: University of California, 1984.
Sherlock, Charles. The God Who Fights: The War Tradition in Holy Scripture.
Edinburgh: Rutherford House, 1993.
Singer, Itamar. “A Political History of Ugarit.” Pages 603-733 in Handbook
of Ugaritic Studies. Edited by Wilfred G. E. Watson and Nicolas Wyatt.
Sivan, Daniel. A Grammar of the Ugaritic Language. Leiden. New York. Koln:
Brill, 1997.
Smith, Mark S. “Divine Travel as a Token of Divine Rank.” UF 16 (1984):
359.
———. The Ugaritic Baal Cycle. vol 1. Leiden, NewYork, Koln: E. J. Brill,
1994.
———. “Anat’s Warfare Cannibalism and the West Semitic Ban.” Pages
368-386 in The Pitcher is Broken. Edited by Steven W. Holloway and
Lowell K. Handy. JSOTSup 190, 1995.
———. “The Baal Cycle.” Pages 81-176 in Ugaritic Narrative Poetry. Edited
by Simon B. Parker. Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1997.
———. The Origins of Biblical Monotheism. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2001.
———. The Early History of God. 2nd Ed. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans,
2002.
Smith, Morton. “The Common Theology in the Ancient Near East.” JBL
71 (1952): 135-47.
Spronk, Klaas. Beatific Afterlife in Ancient Israel and in the Ancient Near East.
AOAT 219. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener and Kevelaer: Butzon &
Bercker, 1986.
———. “The Incantations.” Pages 270-286 in Handbook of Ugaritic Studies.
Edited by Wilfred G. E. Watson and Nicolas Wyatt. Leiden-Boston-
Koln: Brill, 1999.
Sternberg, Meir. The Poetics of Biblical Narrative: Ideological Literature and the
Drama of Reading. Bloomington: Indiana University, 1985.
Swartley, Willard M. Slavery, Sabbath, War, and Women: Case Issues in Biblical
Interpretation. Scottsdale, Penn.: Herald Press, 1983.
Sukenik, Yigael. “The Composite Bow of the Canaanite Goddess Anath.”
BASOR 107 (1947): 11-15.
Sun, Chloe. “How Ethical is Anat and How Do We Know It? A Teleologi-
cal View at Anat’s Violence in the Story of Aqhat.” Paper presented at
the Pacific Coast Region of the SBL. Whitter, Calif., March 22, 2004.
———. “How Does the Portrayal of Ugaritic Deities Shed Light on the
‘Dark Side’ of God in the Hebrew Scriptures?” Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the SBL. San Antonio, Tex., November 20, 2004.
______ “Ethical Disparity of El and Baal in the Story of Aqhat.” Paper
presented at the annual Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature,
Philadelphia, Penn., November, 21st, 2005.
Thiselton, Anthony C. New Horizons in Hermenutics: The Theory and Practices of
Transforming Biblical Reading. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1992.
Tropper, Josef. “‘Anat Kriegsgeschrei (KTU 1.3 II 23).” UF 33 (2001): 567-
571.
Tullock, John Harrison. “Blood-Vengeance Among the Israelites in the
Light of Its Near Eastern Background.” Ph. D. diss., Vanderbilt Uni-
versity, 1966.
Uspensky, Boris. A Poetics of Composition: The Structure of the Artistic Text and
Typology of a Compositional Form. Translated by Valentina Zavarin and
Susan Wittig. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California,
1973.
Van der Toorn, Karel. Family Religion in Babylonia, Syria and Israel. Continuity
and Change in the forms of Religious Life. Leiden: Brill, 1996.
Van Rooy, H. F. “The Relation between Anat and Baal in the Ugaritic
Texts.” JNSL 7 (1979): 85-95.
Van Selms, A. Marriage & Family Life in Ugaritic Literature. London: Luzac &
Co., 1954.
Van Soldt, W. H. “Tbṣr, Queen of Ugarit?” UF 21 (1989): 389-92.
———. “Ugarit: A Second-Millennium Kingdom on the Mediterrannean
Coast.” Pages 1255-1266 in vol. II of Civilizations of the Ancient Near
East. Edited by Jack M. Sasson. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1995.
Van Zijl, Peter J. Baal: A Study of Texts in Connection with Baal in the Ugaritic
Epics. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Verlag Butzon & Bercker Kevelaer, 1972.
Vanhoozer, Kevin J. Is There a Meaning in This Text? Grand Rapids, Mich.:
Zondervan, 1998.
Vaux, Roland de. Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions. Translated by John
McHugh. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1961.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 213
Virolleaud, Charles. La Legende Phenicienne de Danel. Paris: Librairie Orientali-

ste Paul Geuthner, 1936.
Vita, J. P. “The Society of Ugarit.” Pages 455-498 in Handbook of Ugaritic
Studies. Edited by Wilfred G. E. Watson and Nicolas Wyatt. Leiden-
Boston-Koln: Brill, 1999.
Walls, Neal H. The Goddess Anat in Ugaritic Myth. Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars
Press, 1992.
Waltke, Bruce K. and M. O’Connor. An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax.
Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1990.
Walzer, Michael. Thick and Thin: Moral Argument at Home and Abroad. Notre
Dame and London: University of Notre Dame, 1994.
Watson, W.G. E. “Puzzling Passages in the Tale of Aqhat.” UF 8 (1976):
371-8.
——— and Nicolas Wyatt. eds. Handbook of Ugaritic Studies. Leiden, Boston,
Koln: Brill, 1999.
Weimann, Robert. Structure and Society in Literary History: Studies in the History
and Theory of Historical Criticism. Charlottesville: University of Virginia,
1976.
Whitaker, Richard E. A Concordance of the Ugaritic Literature. Mass.: Harvard
University Press, 1972.
Wink, Walter. Engaging the Powers. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992.
Winn, A. C. Ain’t Study War No More. Louisville: Westminster John Knox
Press, 1993.
Winter, Urs. Frau und Gottin: Exegetische und ikonographische Studien zum weib-
lichen Gottesbild im Alten Israel und in dessen Umwelt. OBO 53. Vanden-
hoeck & Ruprecht Gottingen: Universitatsverlag Freiburg Schweiz,
1983.
Wright, Christopher J. H. Old Testament Ethics for the People of God. Downers
Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 2004.
Wright, David P. Ritual in Narrative: The Dynamics of Feasting, Mourning, and
Retaliation Rites in the Ugaritic Tale of Aqhat. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisen-
brauns, 2001.
Wyatt, Nicolas. “The ‘Anat Stela from Ugarit and Its Ramifications.” UF 16
(1984): 327-337.
———. “The Titles of the Ugaritic Storm-God.” UF 24 (1992): 403-424.
———. Myths of Power: A Study of Royal Myth and Ideology in Ugaritic and Bibli-
cal Tradition. UBL 13. Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996.
———. “Ilimilku’s Ideological Programme.” UF 29 (1997): 775-96.
———. “The Story of Aqhat (KTU 1.17-19).” Pages 234-258 in Handbook

of Ugaritic Studies. Edited by Wilfred G. E. Watson and Nicolas Wyatt.
Leiden-Boston-Koln: Brill, 1999a.
———. “The Religion of Ugarit: An Overview.” Pages 529-585 in Hand-
book of Ugaritic Studies. Edited by Wilfred G. E. Watson and Nicolas
Wyatt. Leiden-Boston-Koln: Brill, 1999b.
———. “Asherah.” Pages 99-105 in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the
Bible. Edited by Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van
der Horst. Rev. and enl.ed. Leiden, New York, Koln: Brill, 1999c.
———. Religious Texts from Ugarit. 2nd ed. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic
Press, 2002.
Wyatt, N., W. G. E. Watson and J. B. Lloyd. eds. Ugarit, Religion and Culture:
Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Ugarit, Religion and Culture. Ed-
inburgh, July 1994. UBL 12; Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996.
Xella, Paolo. “Death and the Afterlife in Canaanite and Hebrew Thought.”
Pages 2059-2070 in vol. 3 of Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Edited
by Jack M. Sasson. 4 vols. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1995.
INDEX
a pantheon of disillusion, 39 behind-the-text-oriented approach, 2,

ambiguity, 3, 15, 16, 32, 39, 44, 55, 7, 22, 25, 50
59, 70, 71, 90, 117, 155, 159, 188, biological reproduction, 32
191, 192, 193, 195, 196 bipolar interpretations, 35
an eye for an eye, 148, 195 birds of prey, 49, 71
Anat’s autonomy, 60, 64 blood-guilt, 126
Anat’s violence, 1, 2, 3, 12, 13, 14, 15, blood-vengeance, 23, 144, 145, 147,
18, 19, 27, 30, 34, 35, 36, 37, 39, 148, 153, 195, 196
41, 42, 43, 44, 50, 53, 55, 59, 60, bow, 1, 15, 27, 28, 29, 31, 34, 47, 49,
61, 62, 65, 68, 70, 71, 72, 77, 78, 55, 56, 75, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97,
79, 83, 84, 85, 89, 90, 91, 92, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 105, 106, 109,
98, 100, 101, 102, 106, 110, 111, 110, 112, 113, 115, 116, 117, 120,
114, 115, 117, 119, 120, 125, 126, 127, 150, 151, 152, 155, 165, 183,
127, 128, 130, 131, 133, 135, 137, 186, 194, 195
140, 143, 144, 149, 153, 154, 155, Bull of Heaven, 64, 65, 68
159, 165, 169, 183, 185, 186, 187, burial rite, 126
188, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195 challenge of authorities, 182, 183
Aqhat’s epithet, 17 characterization, 1, 3, 7, 8, 11, 14, 16,
aside, 12, 20, 70, 77, 78, 79, 180 18, 21, 30, 34, 36, 45, 50, 53, 55,
Athirat, 42, 44, 65, 68, 74, 80, 84, 88, 70, 71, 90, 91, 119, 155, 168, 188,
106, 110, 139, 162, 163, 167, 174 191, 192, 193, 195, 196, 197
Atrahasis, 65 Characterization of El, 54
authority, 3, 19, 40, 54, 55, 58, 59, 64, characters’ emotions, 15, 18, 188
65, 90, 96, 98, 107, 110, 116, 155, Code of Hammurabi, 76
159, 163, 166, 167, 168, 169, 177, conception of authority, 24
179, 181, 182, 183, 184, 186, 187, conception of deities, 3, 24, 159, 160
192, 196 conception of violence, 2, 25, 45,
Baal Cycle, xii, 19, 28, 35, 36, 39, 40, 135, 148, 149
44, 53, 57, 59, 63, 67, 69, 73, 76, contextual point of view, 66
84, 85, 89, 104, 106, 108, 110, 128, Contextualization, 15
131, 139, 143, 144, 160, 165, 166, Dan’il’s epithets, 17
168, 170, 180, 181, 182, 197, 198, death and afterlife, 3, 24, 159, 170,
199, 207, 213 184
Baal’s epithet, 17, 87 deities as protectors, 161
Baal’s protestation, 77, 85 deities as providers, 162
215
development of characters, 18 Ilimilku, 18, 19, 21, 45, 53, 59, 72,
diminishing of nature, 20, 78, 79, 89, 128, 185, 209, 211, 215
138 immortality, 1, 47, 55, 64, 92, 93, 94,
disguise, 112, 140, 142 95, 96, 151, 152, 172
divine punishment, 37, 44, 89, 90, 96, implied audience, 1, 3, 7, 20, 21, 50,
97, 100, 115, 116, 154, 163, 169, 53, 54, 70, 90, 91, 119, 155, 159,
194 188, 191
divine-human order, 61, 62, 64, 65, implied author, 18
89, 90, 96, 97, 163 Job, 13, 29, 63, 130, 172, 206
Ea, ix, xi, xii, 9, 14, 19, 25, 27, 28, 29, king Ammurapi, 182
30, 31, 33, 35, 37, 45, 48, 53, 60, king Kirtu, 42, 44, 60, 65, 66, 67, 68,
65, 69, 73, 74, 82, 85, 94, 95, 96, 75, 80, 84, 121, 128, 136, 143, 160,
97, 102, 109, 124, 127, 133, 143, 162, 163, 167, 177
155, 160, 166, 177, 192, 194, 197, Kothar wa-Khasis, 67
198, 199, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, Mot, 38, 41, 67, 84, 85, 88, 97, 107,
206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 108, 109, 110, 143, 147, 160, 164,
213, 214, 216 170, 174, 180, 208, 210
El’s authority, 54, 55, 168, 181, 182 mourning rite, 33, 49, 173, 174
El’s epithets, 17, 69 mourning rites, 33
El’s permission, 54, 59, 60, 61, 66, 79, Naboth’s vineyard, 94
84, 111, 132, 149, 169, 181, 188, narrative poetics, 10, 11, 14, 34
192, 193 points of view, 1, 3, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14,
emotional distance, 13, 66, 84 15, 20, 34, 36, 37, 44, 50, 53, 80,
Enkidu, 64, 68, 138 89, 90, 91, 116, 119, 120, 135, 154,
Enuma Elish, 44, 65, 69, 123, 147, 155, 159, 165, 188, 192, 193, 194,
198, 199 195, 201
Erra Epic, 76 predator deity, 163
ethical norms, 35 preference for sons, 178
ethical understanding, 1, 2, 3, 10, 14, Pughat’s role, 38, 139, 187
34, 44, 50, 191 Pughat’s threefold epithet, 17, 137
family values, 3, 177, 181, 184, 187 Pughat’s vengeance, 2, 30, 32, 120,
full-fledged character, 16, 18, 71, 114, 133, 139, 140, 141, 143, 145, 146,
120, 137, 150, 153 147, 149, 177
gender role, 1, 32, 95, 96 Rapiuma texts, 35, 36, 87, 129, 168
gender stereotype, 95 reader-elevating, 20
Gilgamesh, 64, 65, 68, 95, 138, 143, reticence of the author, 1
203, 206 ritual infelicity, 34
Gilgamesh Epic, 64, 65, 68, 95, 138, rituals in the story, 33, 34, 97, 132
143, 203 self-interest, 4, 66, 153, 163, 164, 165,
hypothetical actual audience, 1, 3, 7, 169, 194, 195, 196, 199, 200, 201,
21, 22, 23, 25, 45, 50, 159, 162, 202
165, 169, 170, 183, 184, 188, 191 Shapshu, 67, 74, 89, 131, 141, 161,
ideological point of view, 20, 55, 154 168, 181
social reproduction, 32
INDEX 217
socio-scientific point of view, 39 the list of Ideal Sonship, 27, 28, 122,
Story of Attis, 65 123, 124
Story of Kirtu, 32, 42, 65, 66, 74, 80, the modern audience, 21
84, 163, 167, 170, 179, 180, 182, the normative point of view, 55, 66,
185, 197 80, 84, 90, 154, 155
structural analysis, 14, 31, 32 the reticent author, 20
suffering of nature, 73, 77, 138 the type, 16, 197
text-oriented approach, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, underworld, 76, 82, 88, 108, 131, 173,
11, 15, 18, 22, 25, 27, 29, 42, 50 174, 175, 180, 181
the agent, 16 vegetation and fertility, 35
The Descent of Ishtar to the Yamm, 60, 67, 84, 85, 106, 107, 108,
Underworld, 68 132, 162, 166, 167, 170, 171
The Doomed Prince, 29 Yatpan, 3, 12, 17, 18, 20, 32, 48, 50,
the ethics of violence, 2, 3, 191, 194, 69, 91, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115,
196, 197, 198, 199, 201 116, 137, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144,
the historical audience, 21, 22, 24, 70, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 154, 183,
159, 191 186, 187, 192, 193, 194
the interest point of view, 80, 116,
202

(Gorgias Ugaritic Studies) Chloe Sun - The Ethics of Violence in The Story of Aqhat-Gorgias Press (2008)

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

(Gorgias Ugaritic Studies) Chloe Sun - The Ethics of Violence in The Story of Aqhat-Gorgias Press (2008)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Ethics of Violence in the Story

Sun, Chloe, 1967-

Printed in the United States of America

PART THREE: RELIABILITY CHECK......................................................155

ents who sacrificed much to make it possible for me to receive a higher

ABD Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by David Noel Freedman. 6

HSM Harvard Semitic Monographs

1 For example, Margalit describes Anat as a capricious, immoral, cunning and

2 James Wm. McClendon, Systematic Theology: Ethics (Nashville: Abingdon, 1986),

London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1972), 255.

Part Two is concerned with implementation. Chapters three to five

Defining a Text-Oriented Approach

proach” rather than “literary approach” to differentiate it from “source

author use a literary text to communicate to its reader or audience? And

The Benefits of the Text-Oriented Approach

2. It expresses truthfulness to life and reality: Literature can be true

Discovering the Narrative Poetics in the Story of Aqhat

11 Longman, Literary Approaches, 59-62.

12 Adele Berlin, Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative (Sheffield: Almond,

Theory of Historical Criticism (Charlottesville: University of Virginia, 1976), 236.

19 Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative, 129-130.

24 KTU 1.18 I:19.

of Keret and Aqhat (Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1989).

and versification, poetic formulae, epic repetition and the non-conventional

28 Kenneth T. Aitken, “Formulaic Patterns for the Passing of Time in Ugaritic

Narrative.” UF 19 (1987): 1-10; “Oral Formulaic Composition and Theme in the

1. Perception: how the character perceives the events such as Anat’s

31 Chatman, Story and Discourse, 154.

Character and Characterization

33 Ryken, How To Read the Bible, 24.

of their epithets, but most frequently, he “shows” the characters by present-

38 KTU 1.17 I:23; VI:49; 1.18 I:15.

37, 38-39, 46-48; II:41; IV:17, 18-19, 35.

Author, Implied Author, and Narrator

und Titel des Schreibers Ilmlk von Ugarit,” UF 12 (1980b): 387-9.

hears their conversations; he is there when Anat appeals to El at his abode;

52 Rhoads and Michie, Mark as Story, 37.

55 Drawing upon Goldingay, Models for Interpretation, 37.

Act of Reading, 20-50.

However, in Part Three, we will speak of the hypothetical actual audi-

Defining the Behind-the-Text-Oriented Approach

60 Longman, Literary Approaches, 22.

Thorkild Jacobsen, “Primitive Democracy in Ancient Mesopotamia,” in Toward the

volved in marriage relationships.68 The divine family shares similar family

Method of Reconstructing the Hypothetical Actual Audience

68 Smith, The Origin of Biblical Monotheism, 86-7.

The Significance of Determining the View of the Hypothetical Actual

THE BENEFITS OF THE COMBINATION APPROACH

70I owe this concept of “a check on reliability” to Marsman’s work. In this

PREVIOUS WORKS ON THE TEXT-ORIENTED APPROACHES TO

1 The first publication of the Story of Aqhat is by Ch. Virolleaud, La Legende

Phenicienne de Danel: texte cuneiforme alphabetique avec transcription et commen-

flichen im Alten Orient,” in Kleine Schriften (Edited by Otto Eissfeldt; Tubingen:

Critical Interpretation,” (Ph. D. diss. New York University, 1977); C. H. Bowman,

flected in “Aqhat” in Ugaritic Narrative Poetry (Edited by Simon B. Parker;

8 Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 102-04.

14 Aitken, The Aqhat Narrative, 21-22.

17 Aitken, The Aqhat Narrative, 95, 107.

means “the maintenance of social fabric through the innovative actions of a

21 McAfee, “The Patriarch’s Longed-for Son,” 121.

25 Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 228.

PREVIOUS INTERPRETATION OF ANAT’S VIOLENCE

Anat’s Violence Is Negative