The Temple and Other Sacred Places in the Ebla Tablets

Mitchell J. Dahood

Mitchell J. Dahood, 鈥淭he Temple and Other Sacred Places in the Ebla Tablets,鈥 in The Temple in Antiquity: Ancient Records and Modern Perspectives, ed. Truman G. Madsen (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1984), 77鈥89.

The Mormon dispensation approach to history tends to reverse some evolutionary accounts of the development of the temple idea: the building of altars, the offering of sacrifice, the sanctuary-sense, and the conviction of both sacred space and sacred time all predate in some form, on the Mormon view, the biblical record. Furthermore, the intertwining of the temple idea with the types and shadows of messianic expectation predates, in Mormon understanding, the Mosaic period. The discovery of tablets by the thousands in Upper Syria which can be dated at least a thousand years earlier than Moses holds a significance, therefore, of first importance. Though the records are mainly of commercial transactions, they are fingerprinted, so to speak, with religious and social and cult practices of the time. Mitchell Dahood鈥檚 skill in Northwest Semitic languages is demonstrated here with examples of sacred names, cult practices, and beliefs which clearly reflect ancient pre-Israelite temple construction and traditions of sacrifice and ceremonial enactment. Not all of Dahood鈥檚 linguistic connections and derivations are presently verifiable, but the foundations of further study are here apparent.

T. G. M.

The texts of the state archives of Ebla, being primarily administrative and economic documents, do not specifically deal with the city鈥檚 religious life. Nevertheless, one can glean information of great value concerning the religion of Ebla around 2,500 BC from a number of particular tablets of the Hall of Archives L. 2769, and also from the documents taken all together. A good idea of the popular religious feeling can be gained from the thousands of personal and place names representing the seventy years or so covered by the tablets. When they are eventually published, the literary texts which have been identified thus far will also afford insight into the religious sentiments of the educated people at Ebla. Clear light on the official religion and the daily cult comes from the four tablets published in 1979 by G. Pettinato in a study entitled Culto ufficiale ad Ebla durante il regno di lbbi-Sipish (=Oriens Antiquus XVIII [1979]: 85鈥215, with twelve photographs). These four tablets list offerings of sheep made to various deities by the king and members of the royal family during the different months of the year. Since these tablets indicate where these offerings were presented, one can get a good idea of the sacred edifices at Ebla, and Pettinato鈥檚 index of 鈥渉ouses, edifices鈥 (page 215b) distinguishes eight different locales where sacrifices were offered or rites performed.

Inasmuch as the archaeologists have unearthed no sacred buildings from the same period as the tablets, we must thank the tablets themselves for the information that many temples existed at Ebla dedicated to individual gods and goddesses. There were also chapels in the administrative buildings. The following discussion limits itself mainly to the four cultic texts mentioned above, and aims to develop some of the points touched upon by Pettinato in his monograph, and especially pages 113鈥16, which are dedicated to 鈥淟uoghi di culto.鈥

The ordinary term for 鈥渢emple鈥 is always written in Sumerian as 茅 d i n g i r, 鈥渉ouse of the god.鈥 But how was it read in Semitic Eblaite? In the bilingual lexical lists, the Sumerian 茅 is left untranslated since the scribes assumed that the Eblaite equivalent was too well known to be spelled out. In 1977 G. Pettinato and I jointly published a short article entitled 鈥淯garitic r拧p gn and Eblaite rasap gunu(m)碍滨鈥 [1] in which we used Eblaite 茅-dra-sa-ap 驳煤-苍耻KI鈥 to supply the missing vowels of Ugar. bt r拧p gn, 鈥渢he temple of Resheph of Gunu.鈥 In our discussions I argued that Ugar. bt, the counterpart of Sum. 茅, warranted the translation of Sumerian 茅 in our text as Eblaite 产脓迟; but Pettinato refused to concede this because 茅 does not appear translated in the Sumerian-Eblaite bilinguals. Though I insisted that he was being too pernickety, he would not allow the purported Semitic equivalent 产脓迟 to appear in the article. This difference of opinion doubtless stems from differing conceptions of the linguistic relationship existing between Eblaite and the other Semitic languages. Though theoretically classifying Eblaite as Paleo-Canaanite, Pettinato is not disposed to treat it as Ugaritically and Hebraically as I would prefer.

The plural form 茅-茅 d i n g i r 鈥 d i n g i r, 鈥渢he temples of the gods,鈥 occurs in TM.75.G.1764 rev. I 18鈥19; 2075 obv. IX 15鈥17; 2238 rev. IV 1鈥2, and seems to imply that each of the deities receiving cultic offerings has his or her own temple. Some of these tablets, however, explicitly state that the worship of one god sometimes took place in a temple dedicated to another divinity. Thus according to TM.75.G.2238 obv. I 10鈥16, the god Hadda received offerings from the king in the temple dedicated to the god Kura: 鈥渢wo sheep for the god Hadda on the part of the king as a good-will offering (nidba) in the temple of Kura during the feast of the ingathering (鈥樏-蝉-辫煤).鈥

This raises a question concerning the identification of the god Qura. Pettinato writes, 鈥淜ura, un dio molto venerato ad Ebla, dal carattere a me oscuro, 猫 presente in tutti e quattro i testi ripetute volte.鈥 [2] An insight into this god鈥檚 character may be afforded by TM.75.G.2238 rev. II 26鈥-III 2, 10: 1 谩鈥3 u d u 拧 h u鈥攄 u8-mash tug:du8 e dk[u-ra], 鈥淪even sheep as 鈥榯ax鈥 of the ropemaker to the temple of Qura.鈥 That a ropemaker should specifically be obligated to furnish sheep for sacrifice in the temple of this deity suggests comparison with the root qwr, 鈥渢o twist鈥, preserved in Arabic as qawrun, 鈥渁 kind of rope,鈥 and in Isaiah 59:5, wequre 鈥榓kkab卯 拧丑 [3] 测别鈥檈谤辞驳没, 鈥渁nd they weave spider-threads.鈥 Hence qura may tentatively be identified as the god of weaving鈥攐r rather the goddess of weaving, as the feminine ending of qura points to the gender of the divinity. The worship of such a deity makes sense in a city like Ebla, where textiles and metalworking were the two chief industries.

To facilitate our understanding of the semantic transition from 辩没谤, 鈥渢hread,鈥 to 辩奴谤腻, 鈥淕oddess Thread,鈥 it may be helpful to discuss the god dir-mu in Materiali epigrafici di Ebla (hereafter MEE) 1, n. 1008, and in the personal name i-ti-ir-mu, 鈥淲ith me is Irmu,鈥 in MEE 1, n. 1494. Who is this god whose name is written ir-mu? The answer is probably supplied by Habakkuk 1:16:

鈥榓l-k膿n y臅zabb膿ah leh erm么

w墨 qatt 膿r le尘颈办尘补谤迟么

k卯 bah膿mm膩h 拧膩m膿n helq么

没ma鈥檃kalo b臅r墨鈥櫮乭

Therefore he sacrifices to his Net,

and burns incense to his Dargnet,

for by these his livelihood is rich,

and his food succulent.

Commentators [4] who seek to explain this passage find the statement 鈥淗e sacrifices to his Net鈥 puzzling because they do not recognize that hermo the divinized Net; in other words, biblical 丑别谤尘么 supplies the initial consonant of Eblaite dir-mu/hirmu/ 鈥淣et,鈥 and 颈-迟颈-颈谤-尘耻/鈥檌迟迟墨-丑颈谤尘耻/ 鈥淲ith me is Net.鈥 This may be employed as an example of mutual elucidation: the divine status of dir-mu helps interpret Habakkuk 1:16 丑别谤尘么 as 鈥渉is Net,鈥 which in turn furnishes the initial consonant of dir-mu.

One gains a further insight into the Canaanite concept of divinity when examining TM.75.G.2238 obv. XII 27鈥31, 2 u d u dAMA-ra dsi4-拧猫-濒耻/蝉颈拧别谤耻/ 鈥渢wo sheep (in the month) AMA-ra for S颈拧eru.鈥 Identification of the deity 蝉颈拧别谤耻 does not come readily, but comparison with the biblical 拧腻拧脓谤, 鈥渞ed dye, vermilion鈥 (Jeremiah 22:14; Ezekiel 23:14), may prove suggestive. Since vermilion in antiquity was gained from the dried bodies of the females of a scale insect, kermes ilices, which lives on certain oaks on the shores of the Mediterranean and adjacent parts of the Near East, [5] 蝉颈拧别谤耻 may have been the divinized kermes ilices. The enormous shipments of multi-colored garments registered in the administrative and economic tablets point to the importance of dyes in the textile operations of Ebla, and since Canaanite red or purple robes were famous in antiquity, the divinization of this source of prosperity becomes comprehensible. Just as the Chaldaean invader offered sacrifices to his Net because it rendered his life prosperous (Habbakuk 1:16), so the Eblaites brought sheep to be sacrificed to 蝉颈拧别谤耻 in return for the luxury that this deity provided. One might also direct attention to the deity witnessed in the personal name 颈拧x-驳颈-产霉-诲耻/测颈艣驳颈-辫奴迟耻/ 鈥淟ofty is Royal Purple鈥 [6] where put is identified with Ugar. pwt, 鈥渞ed, purple dye.鈥 [7]

According to TM.75.G.2075 obv. I 24-II 4, 13 u d u dni-da-kul 鈥榵鈥KI e n nidbax d i n g i r - d i n g i r, 鈥渢hirteen sheep were brought by the king to the temple of Nidakul in honor of all the gods.鈥 Perhaps the most frequently mentioned deity in these four cultic texts, Nidakul is described thus by Pettinato: 鈥淎 most venerated divinity at Ebla, Nidakul is so unknown to me that I cannot even be sure of the reading. He appears alone, but more frequently his name is followed by the name of a place.鈥 [8] Since the Sumerian sign NI has also the vocalic value 矛-, one may read the divine name d矛-诲补-办耻濒 and compare it with Genesis 2:14, hiddeqel, 鈥渢he Tigris river,鈥 and hence normalize Sumerian 矛-诲补-办耻濒 as Semitic h iddaqul, whose meaning might well be 鈥淭he Voice (thunder) brings joy.鈥 What sustains this reading and identification is the information that the divinized Syrian river dba-li-h a receives 鈥渙ne sheep for Palih in the two chapels of Qura鈥 (TM.75.G.2075 obv. V 24鈥27), as does the divinized Euphrates dba-ra-du ma-du, 鈥淭he Great Cold River,鈥 [9] which receives two sheep as an offering from the queen (TM.75.G.2075 obv. IV 28-V 3). If both the Balih and the Euphrates were revered as deities by Eblaite royalty, it stands to reason that the equally important Tigris would have been divinized. Accordingly the reading h iddaqul, 鈥渢he Tigris,鈥 commends itself. [10]

Another of the cultic places discussed by Pettinato [11] is 驳颈-苍补-霉, occurring in TM.75.G.2075 obv. VII 12鈥14, 1 u d u gi-na-u da-dam-ma, 鈥淥ne sheep for the cell of Adamma.鈥 Pettinato renders 驳颈-苍补-霉 鈥渓a cella鈥 without, however, excluding the meaning of 鈥渞egular offering,鈥 one of the meanings of Akk. 驳颈苍没. Since he can propose no explanation for his correct rendition 鈥渓a cella,鈥 it would not be irrelevant to cite Genesis 6:14, 鈥樐兣浤揾 lek膩 t膿bat 鈥樐僺锚g艒per qinn卯m ta鈥櫮僺eh 鈥榚t-h膩tt膿bah, 鈥淢ake yourself an ark of cypress wood; make the ark with cells.鈥 [12] Plural qinn卯m, from q膿n 鈥渘est,鈥 which here has the specific meaning 鈥渃ells鈥 or 鈥渞ooms,鈥 can supply the explanation for Eblaite 驳颈-苍补-霉, to be normalized 辩颈苍苍补丑奴, 鈥渇or his cell鈥; the suffix is the anticipatory -丑奴, [13] referring to the god Adamma.

In some ways the most informative passage in these cultic texts is TM.75.G.2238 obv. XII 21鈥26, l u d u ki-s u r s i d 霉-s i- d 霉 e n鈥攅 n en-na-y脿 拧 u鈥攄 u8, 鈥淥ne sheep for the chapel of the laments for the kings Ennaya has delivered.鈥 [14] When this information is connected with that furnished by TM.75.G.1763 obv. III 7鈥10, s i鈥攄 霉鈥攕i鈥攄 霉 e n鈥攅n in gishk i r i, 鈥渓aments for the kings in the garden,鈥 it would appear that the above mentioned chapel was situated inthe garden where the former kings were buried. As Pettinato observes, 鈥淭he addition of in gishki r i6 of text 1 further specifies the place of the cult of the dead: the garden seems, in fact, to be the burial place of Ebla鈥檚 kings. This calls to mind the gi鈥de n鈥攌 i, 鈥榯he reed-bed of Enki,鈥 mentioned in the texts of Urukagina of Lagash as the burial ground of the inhabitants of Lagash.鈥 [15] Thus these tablets furnish valuable information about the rites for the deceased and about their belief in the afterlife, as well as about the funeral practices of the Eblaites.

These mourning rites for the deceased may consequently point to the correct interpretation of the divine name 拧耻-丑 a, which, in the second cultic tablet studied by Pettinato, receives the offering of ten sheep in the sixth month, i z i鈥攇 a r (TM.75.G.2075 obv. VI 22鈥24). Reading the name as Sumerian, Pettinato understands d拧耻-丑a as 鈥渢he fisher god.鈥 [16] But if taken as Semitic, d拧耻-丑 a signifies the 鈥済oddess of the Pit鈥; in Hebrew the cognate noun 拧补丑 at often designates the netherworld in poetic texts (e.g., Job 17:15).

It was not only the goddess of the underworld who received offerings, however. The administrative text MEE 2, 40 rev. III 12鈥14 lists 鈥11 double fabrics, 11 Aktum fabrics, 11 precious and multicolored robes for the dead in Abaddan (mi-ti a-ba-da-nu).鈥 One cannot be sure of how to interpret this text, but it would seem that at certain recurrences garments were put in the tombs for the dead. Just as the dead were considered to need food and drink, as established by archaeological finds, so too they may have been thought to need protection against the elements of the netherworld.

The translation of mi-ti a-ba-da-nu as 鈥渢he dead in Abaddan鈥 is based on the equation of the latter with the Hebrew (and exclusively Hebrew) 鈥膬产补诲诲么苍, a poetic term for the netherworld occurring in the Bible six times. Once this identification is made, then it becomes possible to analyze mi-ti as the stative participle of mwt, 鈥渢o die,鈥 and comparable to the Hebrew met. Should doubts remain about this interpretation, then Psalm 88:11鈥12 may help dispel them: 鈥淚s it for the dead (尘脓迟卯尘) that you work wonders? Or will the Shades arise to praise you? Is your loving-kindness recounted in the grave, your fidelity in Perdition (鈥膬产补诲诲么苍)?鈥 These lines begin with 尘别迟卯尘 and close with 鈥膬产补诲诲么苍, an inclusio that contains the components of the Eblaite construct chain 尘颈迟颈-鈥檃产补诲诲辞苍. One could scarcely wish for a neater instance of a biblical passage serving to clarify a third-millenniun text from northwestern Syria.

In many of his writings, George Mendenhall stresses that in the ancient as well as the modern Near East it is not continuity but change that needs to be explained. [17] A further illustration of this truth is provided by the mysterious practices described in Isaiah 65:3鈥4:

A people who provoke me

to my face, continually;

offering sacrifices in the gardens, [18]

and burning incense on incense-altars; [19]

who sit among the graves,

and amid the hewn rocks [20] pass the night;

who eat the flesh of pigs,

and the broth [21] of unclean meat is what they consume. [22]

Commentators have not succeeded completely in interpreting the significance of these rites and actions described by the prophet, but the association of gardens and graves recalls the mourning for the deceased kings in the gardens of Ebla, and both passages must now be studied jointly.

The tenacity of religious traditions and practices illustrated by this comparison has a counterpart in the division of Ebla into four quarters, each with its own gate dedicated to the tutelar deity of that quarter. Thus Ebla had four gates respectively dedicated to Dagan, Sipish, Rasap, and Baal, [23] and one supposes that each quarter had its own temple as well. [24] In the middle of the first millennium BC the Phoenician city of Sidon was also divided into four quarters, 拧mm 鈥檇rm = 拧mm rmm, 鈥淢agnificent Heaven鈥 or 鈥淗eaven Most High鈥; 鈥檙s 谤拧辫尘, 鈥淨uarter of Resheph鈥; sdn m拧l, 鈥淪idon of the Ruler,鈥 and s dn 拧d, 鈥淪idon of the Field.鈥 [25] Each quarter had its own temple, and one may suppose that at Ebla a temple graced each precinct even though the temples of the archive period have been destroyed, leaving no archaeological traces. From a later period, however, circa 2,000 BC, three temples and a sanctuary have been uncovered. In his study 鈥淟e temple dans la Syrie du Bronze Moyen,鈥 P. Matthiae compares the structure and function of temple D of Tell Mardikh, dating to circa 2,000 BC, with temples of the same period from other sites in northern Syria and Palestine such as Tell Atshanah, By blos, Hazor, Megiddo, and Tell Balatah (Shechem). He correctly concludes as follows:

En concluant, le th猫me architectural du temple en premier lieu dans sa qualification spatiale, mais aussi dans ses exigences fonctionelles par suite des conditionnements sociaux, re莽it dans le milieu pal茅osyrien du Bronze Moyen une formulation dou茅e d鈥檃spects profond茅ment unitaires, qui lient les experiences de la Syrie du Nord 脿 celles de la Palestine centreseptentrional. Sans que ces aspects se raidissent en une canonisation typologique, et peut-锚tre justement pour cette raison, l鈥檈xperience de la architecture religieuse de la Syrie du Bronze Moyen vient se placer dans le cadre historique du d茅veloppement de la civilization architecturale syrienne comme un moment particuli猫rment significatif, o霉 se retrouvent les matrices plus pures et plus vraies de la conception, sans doute original, mais d鈥檜ne originalit茅 enracin茅e dans l鈥檋istoire, du temple de Jerusalem. [26]

The quadripartite division of Sidon continues the third-millennium tradition that has come to light with the epigraphic and archaeological finds at Ebla. The comparison of k脿 dra-sa-ap, 鈥淕ate of Rashap鈥 in TM.75.G.1438 with 鈥檙s 谤拧辫尘, 鈥淨uarter of Rashap鈥 in Phoenician [27] is surely striking and confirms Mendenhall鈥檚 observation that continuity in the Near East鈥攁nd, I would further specify, continuity in Canaan鈥攏eeds no explanation. Of course the four-gate motif elicits Genesis 2:10, which describes the four headsprings issuing from the Garden of Eden.

Moving beyond these four cultic texts, we can learn more about sacred constructions from those administrative and economic texts which mention toponyms whose first component is the Sumerian 茅, read 产脓迟, 鈥渉ouse, temple,鈥 in Eblaite. Thus 茅 拧耻-尘耻KI (MEE 1, n. 1671) seems to signify 鈥淭emple of the Name,鈥 and bespeaks the local veneration of the divinized Name that corresponds to the veneration manifest in the personal names 迟霉-产铆-拧耻尘, 鈥淢y good is the Name鈥 (MEE 1, n. 722, 760), and 颈拧-m谩-拧耻尘, 鈥淭he Name hears鈥 (MEE 1, n. 5088). The toponym 茅-产补-谤铆-耻尘KI (MEE 2, 40 rev. IV 10), 鈥淭emple of the Creator,鈥 reveals the belief in a Creator god that has its counterpart in 产补-谤补-驳煤KI (MEE 1, n. 1671), 鈥淭he Voice has created,鈥 and the PN 颈产-迟谩-谤补-驳煤 (MEE 2, 7 obv: XIV 14), 鈥淭he Voice has created for itself.鈥 A similar reverence for the Creator is manifested by the place name 茅-尘耻-谤铆-颈辩KI (TM.75.G.1444), 鈥淭he Temple of the Greener,鈥 where the form 尘耻-谤铆-颈辩 is analyzed as the hiphil participle of the root wrq, 鈥渢o be green,鈥 hence 鈥渢he one who makes green.鈥 That this was the function of the Creator may be inferred from Genesis 1:30, 鈥淎nd to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground鈥攅verything that has breath of life in it鈥(I give) every green plant (kol yereq 鈥樐撆沞b) for food鈥 (cf. Gen. 9:3).

From the biblical point of view, perhaps the most dramatic place name is MEE 1, 6523 = TM.76.G.525 rev. VII 茅-诲补-产补谤KI, 鈥淭emple of the Word,鈥 wherein 诲腻-产腻谤 is equated with the Hebrew (and rarely Phoenician) dabar, 鈥渨ord.鈥 In other terms, the Word, the Logos, was already divinized in third-millennium Canaan. When I pointed out this startling name to one of my Roman colleagues, he exclaimed, 鈥淚 don鈥檛 know what da-bar means here, but I do know it cannot mean 鈥榃ord鈥!鈥 What is the likelihood of this signification here? Several considerations come to mind. In the bilingual vocabulary TM.75.G.2284 rev. VII 2鈥3, Sumerian e m e - b a l a, 鈥渢ranslator,鈥 is rendered into Eblaite as 迟谩-诲补-产铆-濒耻/tadabbiru/ from the root dbr, 鈥渢o say鈥; hence tadabbiru would literally be 鈥渁 reworder,鈥 not a bad definition of 鈥渢ranslator.鈥 Then there is the personal name 诲补-产铆-谤耻 in MEE 2, 2 obv. XII 5. In form it is the qal participle, and it will be recalled that in the qal conjugation of this root Hebrew preserves only the qal participle. Consequently this root is witnessed in Eblaite, and since the five phonemes of dabar answer to the biblical 诲腻产腻谤, 鈥渨ord,鈥 one can safely interpret 茅-诲补-产补谤KI as 鈥淭emple of the Word.鈥

Nor should this equation cause surprise in view of the Canaanite divinization of ni-um, 鈥淥racle,鈥 Heb. 苍臎鈥檜尘, witnessed in the toponyms zu-ba-ne-umKI, 鈥淩eturn, O Oracle!鈥 (TM.75.H.1591 obv. XIV 11); ba-h a-ne-umKI 鈥淭he Oracle has inspired鈥 (MEE 1, 737); and wa-li-ni-umKI, 鈥淜insman is the Oracle鈥 (MEE 2, 32 obv. VI 6). [28] Thus the Eblaites raised to divine status the Voice (驳奴), the Voice (辩腻濒耻), the Name (拧耻尘), and the Oracle (苍臎鈥檜尘), as well as the Word (dabar).

In summary, the relatively few published tablets from Ebla have yielded a surprisingly rich harvest of information regarding the importance of the temple in the religious and civic life of the Eblaites in the middle of the third millennium BC. The religious traditions documented at Ebla did not die out with the subsequent destructions of the city, but lived on in Canaan and remained part of the cultural milieu from which both the Old and New Testaments emerged. Today we are still indebted to the ancient Canaanites for making the temple a focal point of their religious lives.

Notes

[1] Orientalia 46 (1977): 230鈥32.

[2] 鈥淐ulto ufficiale ad Ebla durante il regno di Ibbi-Sip颈拧,鈥 Oriens Antiquus 18 (1979):106. It should be noted that this study also appeared as a separate monograph, whose page numbers differ from those in Oriens Antiquus.

[3] It may be observed here that the Hebrew 鈥榓办办补产卯拧, 鈥渟pider,鈥 occurs as the place name a-ga-ga-b铆-颈拧KI in Eblaite texts Materiali epigrafici di Ebla (hereafter MEE) 1 [= G. Pettinato, Catalogo dei testi cuneiformi di Tell Mardikh-Ebla] (Napoli, 1979), 6523, 6527. The identification looks convincing because of the doubling of the second consonant of Heb. 鈥榓kk膩b颈拧 in syllabic a-ga-ga-b铆-颈拧KI. To name a city 鈥淪pider鈥 fits in with the spinning interests of the Eblaites and with their worship of the goddess of weaving, Qura. In other terms, both members of the hapax phrase 辩没谤锚 鈥榓kk膩b卯拧, 鈥渟pider-threads,鈥 in Isaiah 59:5 are found separately in the Ebla records, a further indication of the close lexical kinship between Eblaite and biblical Hebrew. For a semantically comparable toponym one might compare biblical ma鈥櫮僱膿h 鈥榓qrabb卯m, 鈥淪corpion-pass,鈥 in Judges 1:36; Numbers 34:4; Joshua 15:3.

[4] For example, W. S. McCullough, Interpreter鈥檚 Dictionary of the Bible, K-Q, 540b, under 鈥淔igurative use of 鈥榥et,鈥欌 writes, 鈥淭he meaning of Hab. 1:16 (鈥楬e sacrifices to his net鈥) is obscure,鈥 and A. Vaccari, La Sacra Bibbia VII (Firenze, 1955), p. 351, describes the expression as metaphorical. The Ugaritic personal name bn hrm (UT, 400 I 9) may now be interpreted 鈥淪on of Net鈥; contrast F. Gr枚ndahl, Die Personennamen der Texte aus Ugarit (Roma, 1967), 136.

[5] Consult R. A. Donkin, 鈥淭he Insect Dyes of Western and West-Central Asia,鈥 Anthropos 72 (1977), 847鈥80, esp. 859鈥65.

[6] In G. Pettinato, Testi amministrativi della biblioteca L. 2769 = MEE 2 (Napoli, 1980), text 8 obv. I 8. In text 7 rev. IX 13, 辫耻-耻诲-办霉/p奴t-驳奴/ 鈥淩oyal Purple is the Voice,鈥 may semantically be compared with the biblical name 鈥櫮昹卯辫腻锄, 鈥淢y God is refined gold鈥 (Genesis 36:4; Job 2:11), and with the Eblaite toponym 驳煤-产补-锄煤KI/驳奴-pazu/ 鈥淭he Voice is refined gold鈥 (MEE 2, 41 obv. IV 4). Cf. also 矛-补-产霉-诲耻KI/测补-辫奴迟耻/ 鈥淵a is royal purple,鈥 in TM.75.G.2377 obv. V 7, published by A. Archi, Studi Eblaiti I/7鈥8, 1979, p. 108.

[7] Cf. Cyrus H. Gordon, Ugaritic Textbook (Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1956; hereafter cited as UT,) Glossary, no. 2031.

[8] 鈥淐ulto ufficiale,鈥 107.

[9] As I noted in La Civilt脿 Cattolica, 17 May 1978, p. 335, the Eblaite syllabic spelling ba-ra-du reveals the etymology of the much-debated Heb. 辫臅谤补迟, Akk. purattu, and Arab. furat, all names for the Euphrates in which the process of assimilation has obscured to the lexicographer鈥檚 view the underlying root brd, 鈥渢o be cold.鈥 In his book Ebla: Un impero inciso sull鈥檃rgilla, which appeared in December 1979 (Milano: Mondadori), Pettinato also sees in ba-ra-du the explanation of Akk.purattu and Arab. farat, but omits to mention the biblical 辫臅谤补迟 (p. 268).

[10] In the Hebrew Bible hiddeqel, 鈥渢he Tigris,鈥 is mentioned but twice, in Genesis 2:14 and Daniel 10:4, and while there can be no doubt about its identification, the Masoretic vocalization hiddeqel does seem strange and yields to no satisfactory analysis. The adoption of the Eblaite vocalization would result in the reading 丑颈诲诲补辩艒濒 and the tentative interpretation 鈥渢he Voice (thunder) brings joy.鈥 In this instance Hebrew supplies the consonants and Eblaite the vowels to the clarification of both spellings.

In his article 鈥淒iffusione del culto di dNI-da-kul鈥 in Studi Eblaiti 1/7鈥8 (1979): 105鈥13, A. Archi thinks that dNI-da-kul is probably to be read 矛-诲补-办耻濒 but doubts that its Semitic character can be easily proven (p. 106). Since the other two divinized Syrian rivers receiving offerings in these cultic texts turn out to be Semitic鈥攏amely ba-ra-du and ba-li-ha/paliha, the former signifying 鈥渃old鈥 and the latter 鈥渢he cleaver鈥 from plh (cf. Psalm 141:7, k臅m么 p艒l膿ah 没b艒q膿a鈥 b膩鈥 膩res, 鈥渓ike water which cleaves and makes a valley in the land鈥)鈥攖he prospects of the name of the Tigris being Semitic look promising. In fact, since the etymology of the river hitherto spelled Balih turns out to be the Semitic plh. 鈥渢o cleave,鈥 perhaps we should begin writing it Palih, just as scholars are gradually shifting from Hammurabi to Hammurapi in view of the Ugaritic spelling 鈥榤谤辫鈥檌, 鈥淗ammu is the Healer,鈥 the name of the last king of Ugarit, which was destroyed circa 1190 BC.

[11] 鈥淐ulto ufficiale,鈥 p. 115.

[12] The New English Bible renders these clauses 鈥淢ake yourself an ark with ribs of cypress; cover it with reeds,鈥 emending MT qinnim, 鈥渘ests, cells,鈥 to 辩腻苍卯尘, 鈥渞eeds鈥; see L. H. Brockington, The Hebrew Text of the Old Testament: The Readings Adopted by the Translators of the New English Bible (Oxford-Cambridge University Presses, 1973) p. 1. It would appear that Eblaite qinna is antagonistic to this emendation.

[13] Consult Gesenius-Kautzsch, Hebrew Grammar, 搂131 n.

[14] For the philological explanation of this version, see Pettinato, 鈥淐ulto ufficiale,鈥 p. 115.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Ibid., p. 110.

[17] Most recently in his article 鈥淭he Ancient in the Modern鈥攁nd Vice Versa鈥, in Louis L. Orlin, et al., eds., Michigan Oriental Studies in Honor of George C. Cameron (Ann Arbor, 1976), 227鈥53.

[18] Though some versons render 鈥渋n gardens鈥濃攐mitting the article of 产补驳驳补苍苍么迟 (e.g., New International Version)鈥攖he prophet had specific gardens in mind. The feminine plural 驳补苍苍么迟, 鈥済ardens,鈥 now appears as the place name ga-na-atKI in the Ebla tablet Tm.75.G.2377 obv. II 8, published by A. Archi in Studi Eblaiti 1/7鈥8 (1979): 108.

[19] For this definition of 濒臅产脓苍卯尘, see M. Dahood, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 22 (1960): 406鈥8.

[20] Reading b膿n s没r卯m for unexplained MT 产补苍苍臅蝉没谤卯尘, as proposed by me in Catholic Biblical Quarterly 22 (1960): 408鈥9, and accepted by C. Westermann, Das Buch Jesaja (Altes Testament Deutsch, 1966), p. 316, n. 2, and W. Baumgartner, Hebraisches and aramaisches Lexikon zum Alten Testament (Leiden: Brill, 1967), p. 118b. In the emergent parallelism of b//bn in baqq臅bar卯m 没b膿n s没r卯m one recognizes as well the poetic breakup of the construct chain *qeber s没r, 鈥渢omb hewn in the rock鈥 (cf. Isaiah 22:16).

[21] Though the Ketiv has 辫臅谤补辩, 鈥渇ragment,鈥 the Qere reads mrq, 鈥渂roth,鈥 which is also found in IQIsa from Qumran. In the bilingual vocabulary TM.75.G.2000 rev. III 29鈥30, Sumerian a-h a 鈥渄ecoction/broth of fish,鈥 is translated into Eblaite as 迟谩尘-谤铆-驳耻/迟补尘谤墨辩耻/鈥渂roth,鈥 which obviously derives from the same root witnessed in Heb. 尘臅谤补辩, 鈥渂roth.鈥

[22] Commonly understood as 鈥渢heir vessels,鈥 办臅濒锚丑别尘 is better taken as the chiastic counterpart of first-colon 鈥檕办臅濒卯尘; this chiastic parallelism thus matches that of vs. 4a. On the word-pair 鈥腻办补濒//办腻濒腻丑 in Jeremiah 30:16, as well as in 10:15 and Lamentations 4:11, see my note in Vetus Testamentum 27 (1977): 482, and M. Baldacci, Bibbia e Oriente 22 (1980): 237鈥42, on Job 21:23, 25.

[23] Cf. G. Pettinato, Rivista degli studi orientali 50 (1976): 11. The reading of the fourth gate cited here, k 谩鈥斉【-alKI, 鈥渞ione della citt谩,鈥 has been subsequently corrected by Pettinato to ba-al, an error owing to the similarity of the signs 拧颈 and ba.

[24] See P. Matthiae, ibid., 16鈥22.

[25] Consult J. T. Milik, Biblica 48 (1967): 597鈥98.

[26] In Compte rendu de la vingti猫me rencontre assyriologique internationale organis茅e 脿 Leiden du 3 au 7 juillet 1972 sous les auspices du Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten (Nederlands Historisch-Archeologisch Instituut te Istambul, 1975), 72.

[27] For the text and translation with commentary, see H. Donner and W. Rollig, Kanaan盲ische und aram盲ische Inschriften, I, text 15; and II, pp. 23鈥24. I understand the plural 谤拧辫尘 in the phrase 鈥rs 谤拧辫尘 as the plural of majesty, hence the translation as singular 鈥淨uarter of Rashap.鈥

[28] Compare 拧耻-产颈-驳煤KI, 鈥淩eturn, O Voice鈥 (MEE 1, n. 6522) and Ugar. tbg, 鈥淩eturn, O Voice!鈥 in UT, 2068:21, whose analysis compares with that of the PN tbil, 鈥淩eturn, O II!鈥 in UT, 1082:2.