Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Jonathan D. Safren" <yonsaf AT beitberl.ac.il>]

Dear Walter,
Some notes to your letter:

>
> In a reply you made to this List on 30 March on my thread "Japheth," you
> explained your understandings about who Japheth was in Noah's blessing, and
> when it was written. You failed to note WHY it was written, however.

[JSafren] The best explanation I have read for this is cited by Rashi in his
commentary to Gen. 1:1. He asks why doesn't the Torah begin with Ex. 12:1, 
i.e.,
the laws? The answer he cites, of a certain R. Yitzhak, is that the Holy One
Blesssed be He, created the world and all the nations and families in it, and
out of all these families and peoples he chose one people to give it the Land 
of
Israel, and all this is related so that the Gentiles will not accuse Israel of
having stolen the property of other people.
   In other words, in more modern language, the author begins with the 
creation
of the world and hmanity, describes the nations as they were known to him,
narrows his perspective down to Shem, then to Abraham's family, deals with
Ishmael's genealogy and puts him aside, goes on to the next generation, deals
with Esau's genealogy and lays him aside, and from then on deals only with 
Jacob
and his 12 sons, the ancestors of Israel.
   This is the "toledot" framework of the Book Genesis, and the genealogy of
Japheth, then, has its place within this framework.
   Incidentally, as Cassuto noted, there are 10 generations from Adam to Noah,
and 10 generations from Noah to Abraham. All very Priestly in conception,
execution and style, though Cassuto (and his pupil Loewenstamm) would have
denied this.

>
>
> You proposed two historical scenarios behind the Japheth blessing, one
> occuring in the Late Bronze Age, the peoples being possibly Indo-Iranic, the
> other scenario was the 7th century BCE, based upon the Table of Nations,
> identifying the Neo-Hittite kingdoms as possibly being Japheth.
>
> I have problems with your prosposals for the following reasons:
>
> In making Japheth a dweller in the tents of Shem, in the Late Bronze Age,
> this suggests that when the Exodus occured in this same period (the Humanist
> posited 13th century BCE), that the invading Israelites would have been
> attacking Japheth, who is enjoying Canaan's servitude as he dwells in the
> tents of Shem with God's blessing. Canaan was, after all, to be set aside
> for Abraham's children. I don't recall Japheth, or any Japhethic nation
> appearing in the list of peoples to be conquered, or enumerated as dwelling
> in Canaan at the time of Joshua's invasion. I don't recall Moses or Joshua
> telling the people not to harm Japheth when they attack Canaan. Neither do I
> recall Japheth being an ally of the Israelites when the Conquest of Canaan
> occured. After the initial Conquest, Joshua doesn't enumerate any Japhethic
> peoples as dwelling in unconquered lands.
>
> The Philistines were in Canaan in the Late Bronze Age, but Genesis' narrator
> claims they are the decendents of Ham via Mizraim (Egypt), so they are not
> of Japhethic descent (despite their archaeologically attested origins in the
> Greek areas of Cyprus and the Anatolian littoral). The United Monarchy and
> still later, the Divided Monarchy accounts make no mention of a Japhethic
> nation dwelling in Canaan either.

[JSafren] 1) There is no certainty that the author of the poetic Noah's 
Blessing
is tha same as the Priestly author of the Table of Nations, so they need not 
be
consistent.
2) Canaan was, in the LB Period, subservient to Egypt (perhaps even as late as
Solomon), so the author may be aware of this.
3) In Iron I, the Philistines gained control of much of Canaan, as attested by
both Biblical and extra-Biblical evidence.
4) Later (or earlier, according to Joshua and Judges 1 and elsewhere), the
Canaanites came under Israelite control.
   So according to 2), 3) and 4), Canaan was indeed a slave to his brothers.
5) El Amarna texts indicate the presence of Indo-European and Hurrian speakers
in what was to be later Israel.
6) According to the Bible, there were Hittite populations in cities such a
Hebron, and Hurrian populations in places such as Shechem(and also Edom, if 
they
are indeed the same Horites).
7) According to Joshua 1, the Israelite-controlled territory includes "the 
Land
of the Hittites", apparently the Neo-Hitite kingdoms of Syria, in which there
were Semitic-speaking populations..
     So one can claim, one the basis of 4), 6), or 7), that Japheth is indeed
"dwelling in the tents of Shem".
   And remember, the author of Noah's Blessing is not necessarily to be
identified with the author of the Table of Nations.

>
> Your second proposal, that Neo-Hittite kingdoms might be alluded to as being
> Japheth in the 7th century BCE also has problems. In the 7th century (your
> date for the Table of Nations) the kingdom of Israel is in Exile (ca. 721
> BC), this leaves Judah as the probable place for the writing of Noah's
> blessing of Japheth. Yet, historically this is a very tumultuous period,
> Judah, in the course of the 7th century, is an unwilling vassal of first,
> Assyria, then Saitic Egypt, followed by a Chaldean Babylonian empire.  You
> noted that the statement "Japheth will dwell in the tents of Shem," seemed
> to indicate a peaceful settlement, not one accomplished by military might (I
> agree with you on this).

[JSafren} So, what's the problem? TIf the author of the Blessing is the same 
as
the author of the Table, he  may be mentioning only the peoples that came 
within
his ken in the 7th century, but he is directing the fulfillment ofhhis
"Blessing" at a much earlier period, that of the Conquest/Settlement. If the 
two
are not identical, then the Blessing would date from a much earlier period, in
which such a statement could easily have been made.

>
> The Neo-Hittite states are under Assyrian control at this time (the 7th
> century BCE) and suffering oppression like Judah. True, the bible does say
> that Hittites dwelt in Canaan, and they might possibly be seen as Japhethic
> by some scholars (Hittites being from Anatolia), but Genesis makes Heth a
> descendant of Ham, Egypt and Canaan, so the Hittites are not portrayed as
> being Japhethic, but are Hamitic.

[JSafren] This problem does not exist if the Blessing and the Table are of
different authorship. In any case, the Table makes Heth (the Hittites) a 
second
son of Canaan, les important than Sidon. This would not have happened had the
Hittite Empire still have been around, but would have happened in the 7th
century, when all that remained of the Hittites were some populations in the
Land of Israel (like Hebron)m or some minor principalities in Northern Syria.

> Yet, Judah as an oppressed vassal state,
> is in no position to be inviting anybody to settle peaceably in the tents of
> Shem, for this area, Syro-Palestine, is under foreign control (Assyrian,
> Egyptian, Babylonian). Sorry, but I just don't see your proposals as making
> any historical sense.

[JSafren] Neither the Table nor the Blessing are explicitly referring to 
events
in their own time(s). The Blessing is referring to the "distant future" 
{though
written ex post facto), and the tttttable is referring toahat had transpired
before his own time.

>
> I believe that identifying Japheth is related to the correct dating of
> Genesis, including its Table of Nations. You already have my Japheth paper,
> so you know my arguments for Japheth being an allusion to Cyrus and his
> Persians.

[JSafren] Regarding the importance of Japheth in dating Genesis, there is much
in favor of your opinion; though the Joseph Narrative, according to Redford at
least, is later, reflecting the Saitic Dynasty in Egypt. Not being an
Egyptologist, I am incapable of assessing that opinion.
   And you know my arguments against the Persians being referred to in the 
Table
of Nations.

>
> I know that you are aware that some scholars believe Ezra may have had a
> hand in the final redaction of the Pentateuch, and you may perhaps, be
> persuaded yourself, that there is some validity. If so, why couldn't Japheth
> be an allusion to Cyrus and his Persian empire, leaving aside the notion
> Persia doesn't appear in the Table of Nations ? As you are well aware, other
> scholars have posited redactional elements within Genesis dating from the
> Persian period. If their hypotheses are of any validity, why wouldn't
> Japheth as Cyrus, be a clue to a 5th century BCE Genesis, as we have it ?
> Why must the non-appearance of Persia in the Table of Nations be "the sole
> clue" to Genesis not being redacted later than the 7th century BCE ?

{JSafren} Different parts of the Torah took shape at different periods. There 
is
definitely late material in there, such as the tripartite division of Israel
into Priests, Levites and everybody else, which couldn't have happened before
the Josianic Reform, and is first reflected in Ezekiel. There is definitely
First Temple material in the Torah, such as the Priestly Blessing, a 7th 
century
copy of which was discovered in archaeological excavations at Ketef Hinnom.
There is even pre-Israelite material. such as the victory song of Sihon over 
the
Moabites in Num. 21 (who would have written such a thing, if notan Amorite
loyalist?)
   When the Torah was finally signed, sealed and delivered, some of this stuff
was edited, some left in its original form.
   So the probably late redaction of the Torah does not mean that the Table of
Nations, written at an earlier time, wasn't left in its originaL form.
Sincerely,
--
Jonathan D. Safren
Dept. of Biblical Studies
Beit Berl College
Beit Berl Post Office 44905
Israel

BTW, nothing I have said is very original, it's all been said before. So why 
are
we carrying on this discussion. You won't succeed in convincing me, and I
probably won't succeed at convincing you either. So let's agree to drop the
matter, OK?