[b-hebrew] Salt Sea

JimStinehart at aol.com JimStinehart at aol.com
Wed Mar 3 10:58:06 EST 2010


George Athas asked me off-list whether I have any objective basis for 
seeing “salt sea” at Genesis 14: 3 as referring to the Mediterranean Sea, rather 
than the conventional view which sees such reference as being to the Dead 
Sea.  Since this is a question of Biblical Hebrew nomenclature, I thought 
that it might be of general interest to the b-hebrew list.
 
1.  Let us first consider the issue of Bronze Age nomenclature.
 
(a)  Many scholars see chapter 14 of Genesis as having been composed in the 
Bronze Age, long before the later books in the Bible were composed.  “
Genesis xiv stands alone among all the accounts in the Pentateuch, if not indeed 
in the Bible as a whole.  …The date of the narrative has been variously 
estimated.  …A fresh re-examination of all the available scraps of evidence, 
both internal and external, favors an early date, scarcely later in fact than 
the middle of the second millennium [BCE].”  E.A. Speiser, “Genesis” (1962), 
at pp. 105-106.  “The most enigmatic chapter in Genesis, chapter 14, seems 
to stand utterly alone and without connection to any of the sources or 
strands of tradition found elsewhere in the book.”  Walter Brueggemann, Genesis 
(1980), at p. 134.  “Generally it has been held that it [chapter 14 of 
Genesis] does not belong to any of the usual pentateuchal sources, but that it 
comes from a special source.  Its annalistic style and international 
perspective set it apart from J,E, D, or P.  …[T]he chapter consists largely of pre-J 
material….  [I]t represents old tradition.  The presence of…some stylistic 
idiosyncrasies suggests that it may be based on an older written source.”  
Gordon J. Wenham, “World Biblical Commentary:  Genesis 1-15” (1987), at pp. 
306-307.  Since it is a realistic possibility that Genesis 14: 1-11 may be 
very old and may have been composed by an early Hebrew who is not the author 
of any other books in the Bible, it then follows that it is also a realistic 
possibility that the author of chapter 14 of Genesis may have used Late 
Bronze Age geographical nomenclature, rather than using the geographical place 
names we see in later books of the Bible.
 
(b)  In a Bronze Age historical context, I myself know of no people who 
ever referred to the Dead Sea as “salt sea”.  By sharp contrast, the 
Mediterranean Sea was often seen by ancient peoples as being the quintessential salt 
sea, the embodiment of the salt water that surrounded the earth.  The most 
obvious example of that way of ancient thinking is at Ugarit.  “Yam, the 
owner of salt water, gave place to Baal as the genius of rainfall and 
vegetation....”  “World Mythology Dictionary”.  Note that Yam is associated with salt 
sea/salt water/the Mediterranean Sea.  Scholar Mark Smith draws a direct 
parallel here to the Bible:  
 
“Baal confronts four foes with basically the same names in the Ugaritic 
material and Yahweh in the Bible:  Sea (Hebrew yam, Ugaritic ym)….  [J]ust as 
these cosmic enemies are mentioned as Baal’s or Anat’s old enemies, they are 
known in Israelite tradition as enemies of Yahweh, the warrior god.  Three 
of these enemies appear in Psalm 74: 12-17:  ‘Yet, O God, my king from of 
old,/Maker of deliverance throughout the world,/You are the one who smashed 
Sea [YM] with your Might….’”  Mark Smith, “The Origins of Biblical 
Monotheism: Israel's Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts”, at p. 36.
 
2.  Secondly, in the specific context of Genesis 14: 3, the early Hebrew 
author needed to clarify whether the “Valley of Tilled Fields”/%DYM he is 
referencing there is the Beqa Valley or the Orontes River Valley, since 
historically the Hittites fought in both places in Year 14.  By referencing “salt 
sea”, the Hebrew author clarifies that the “Valley of Tilled Fields” at 
Genesis 14: 3 is not the Beqa Valley, because although that valley of tilled 
fields is fairly near a freshwater lake (Lake Merom, north of the Sea of 
Galilee), it is nowhere near any salt sea.  Rather, the Orontes River Valley is 
being referenced at Genesis 14: 3;  the Orontes River Valley (in western 
Syria) is a valley of tilled fields that is near the salt sea, that is, the 
Mediterranean Sea.  (The Orontes River empties into the nearby Mediterranean 
Sea.)  The Jordan River Valley, by contrast, though being near a salt sea (the 
Dead Sea), is definitely  n-o-t  a “Valley of Tilled Fields”, as the land in 
the Jordan River Valley is generally too poor for settled agriculture (as 
opposed to the Jezreel Valley, the Beqa Valley, and the Orontes River Valley, 
all of which are “valleys of tilled fields”).  I go with the view of most 
scholars that the root of %DYM is %DD, meaning “to plow (a field)”.  Thus 
the Valley of Siddim/%DYM at Genesis 14: 3 must be a valley of tilled fields, 
like the Beqa Valley or the Orontes Valley, not the Jordan River Valley or 
the Arabah.
 
3.  Thus on balance, a review of the objective facts reveals that in a Late 
Bronze Age historical context, and in the context of what is being 
described at Genesis 14: 1-11, the reference at Genesis 14: 3 to “salt sea” is more 
likely to the Mediterranean Sea than to the Dead Sea.  Since many scholars 
see chapter 14 of Genesis as being older than the rest of the Bible, and as 
having been composed by a different author than the rest of the Bible, it 
does not make sense to insist that “salt sea” at Genesis 14: 3 must of 
necessity have the same meaning as “salt sea” in later books in the Bible, which 
likely were written long after the Bronze Age.  Rather, we should look to 
Bronze Age usage of the term, while also examining how the term is being used 
in the specific context of Genesis 14: 1-11.  In my view, an objective 
review of the relevant facts favors “salt sea” at Genesis 14: 3 as referencing 
the Mediterranean Sea, not the Dead Sea.
 
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois 



More information about the b-hebrew mailing list