Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: Chronicles article

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Ian Hutchesson" <mc2499 AT mclink.it>
  • To: <biblical-studies AT yahoogroups.com>, "Biblical Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: Chronicles article
  • Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 09:36:05 +0200



Walter wrote:

>Available at my website (click on the url in my signature line if
>interested) is an article titled "Dating 1 & 2 Chronicles via Archaeological
>Anomalies and Anchronisms."

Dear Walter,

The article seems based on the one anomaly and that is of Tadmor not existing
in the
Iron Age while Chronicles refers to Tadmor at the time of Solomon, ie in the
period,
we are led to believe, of the Iron Age.

This problem could easily be explained as a scribal error in a later epoch
which
became the source text for the surviving copies used.

However, the importance of Tadmor needs to be understood: it was a permanent
spring
in the middle of the desert. It still produces a high quantity of water, so
it has
always had the propensity for supporting a sizable community. It's not
strange that
Tiglath-Pileser I found such a community there circa 1110 BCE. It is strange
though
to think that, after TPI finished his military exercise, the Aramaeans who
lived
there didn't return to take up their relatively comfortable life again. This
doesn't
mean that they built structures of stone in that era.

Note that although the Nabataeans lived in the area around Petra for many
centuries,
the only structures that survived there were the tombs which were cut into
the rock.
No public or private dwellings were found until the Roman era.

While Tadmor didn't have the sort of geographic location which allowed the
cutting
of such tombs it had its very attractive spring and a large oasis which
guaranteed
(and still guarantee) the necessities of life.

Arab and Aramaean tribes tended not to live in permanent structures. One would
therefore not expect to find traces of such structures in the Iron Age, even
though
a semi-permanent population almost certainly lived at Tadmor -- despite the
argument
from silence which says that no Iron Age sherds have been found there.

Returning to the possibility of a scribal error, we are now familiar with the
fact
that variant traditions of OT/HB texts exist. Such traditions obviously exist
due to
scribal intervention and have no necessary connection with the writer(s) of
the
"original" texts concerned. Myers in the opinion you cited seems unaware of
this
possible explanation for the existence of Tadmor in the text (where Kgs has
Tamar)
and opts for blaming his hypothesized "Chronicler".

As the difference between <hebr>tmr</> and <hebr>tdmr</> is one consonant,
this may
not even have been a conscious scribal intervention.


I may even agree that Chronicles is a very late text, but I don't think there
is any
hope of dating Chronicles through the single mention of Tadmor.


Ian







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page