Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Dating the Pentateuch, Madai is Persia ?

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Walter Mattfeld" <mattfeld AT mail.pjsnet.com>
  • To: "Jonathan D. Safren" <yonsaf AT beitberl.ac.il>
  • Cc: "b-hebrew" <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Dating the Pentateuch, Madai is Persia ?
  • Date: Tue, 9 May 2000 20:54:30 +0200


Dear Jonathan,

I suspect you are still sceptical of the idea that Madai in Genesis Table of
Nations is alluding to the Persians, as argued by myself in previous posts.
I want to share with you the observations of widely respected scholar,
J.Simons, who, in his day, wrote extensively on biblical geography and the
identities of the Nations in Genesis 10.

J. Simons, in an article dated 1954, argued that Madai in Genesis 10 was the
Persians ! See below for an excerpt of his important observations:

"The name referred to is that of the Madai. IT IS OF SOME IMPORTANCE TO NOTE
THAT THIS NAME STANDS FOR THE PERSIANS RATHER THAN THE MEDES PROPER. A
specific mention of the Medes with the consequent exclusion of the Persians,
founder of a great empire after the Assyrians and Babylonians, would be a
matter for surprise. Moreover, it is well known that contemporary authors,
such as Herodotus and Thucydides, refer to the Persians by the name of
Medes, and that the same practice occurs, though more incidentally, in the
Old Testament itself (Isa. 13:17; 21:2; Jer. 51:11, 28; elsewhere 'Medes and
Persians' form a single unit: Esther 1:3, inter alia; cp. also Daniel 8:20:
the ram with two horns). Now, if the Madai of the Table of Nations really
refer to the Persian Empire, it should be noticed that such an element
belongs to practically the same late period as the kingdom of Lydia, the
latter coming to an end in the battle between its king Croesus and Cyrus the
Great, the founder of Persian supremacy (546 BC)...More striking and more
objectionable, however, is the presence of the Persians among the 'sons of
Japheth' from a geographical point of view, since the region including Susa
and Persepolis combines far more easily with the countries of the Fertile
Crescent than with the far off Japhethite, and also because the mention of
Elam in the section of Shem there is no use for the Persians in another
section, both Susa and Persepolis being situated in the region which was
previously called Elam."

(p.248, J. Simons, "The Table of Nations (Genesis 10): Its General Structure
and Meaning," [Oudtestamentische Studien 10.155-84, 1954] in Richard S. Hess
& David T. Tsumura, Eds., I Studied Inscriptions From Before the Flood,
Ancient Near Eastern, Literary and Linguistic Approaches to Genesis 1-11,
Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake, Indiana, 1994)

In November of 1997 I first shared my discovery with the schoarly world on
the ANE discusssion list hosted by the University of Chicago, that Greek
genealogies made the Medes descendants of Iapetos (Japheth) as preserved in
Herodotus, Strabo and Diodorus Siculus.

As is obvious from Simons' above observations, he was bewildered as to why
Medes would be made descendants of Japheth and not of Shem, especially as
Susa and Persepolis had lain at one time within the confines of ancient Elam
(Elam being a descendant of Shem). Evidently, the genealogical connection
preserved by the Greek authors, eluded him and others.

If I am correct in my assertion that the Jews at the Persian court picked up
the notion that the Medes were descendants of the Greeks due to Darius I's
Median General, Datis, making just such a claim in 490 BCE, then Genesis, as
we have it, is a 5th century BCE creation.

All the best,

Walter

Walter Reinhold Warttig Mattfeld
Walldorf by Heidelberg
Baden-Wurttemburg
Germany






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page