You wrote: “Genesis 14:14 uses the name ‘Dan’ anachronistically.”
Not true. Virtually the oldest name attested in the secular history of northernmost Canaan is “Dan”, or some slight variation thereon, such as “Danel”. At least in a mid-14th century BCE historical context for the Patriarchal Age, which is my view of the case, “Dan”, or some slight variation thereon, is exactly what one would expect to see for a locale far north in Canaan.
1. “One of the most famous of the lesser deities at Ugarit was a chap named Dan’il. “
"The explanation for these Semitic elements [of influence on Mycenean Greece] rests upon the Danuna, investigated in the first section of the book. They represent a West Semitic tribe whose name is to be analyzed as dan-u/ana. The name is to be found in the Biblical tribe of Dan, in the name of the Ugaritic sage Danel [in western Syria in the 14th and 13th centuries BCE], in the El-Amarna da-nu-na [in mid-14th century BCE Egypt], the danym of Phoenician inscriptions, the so-called 'Denyen' of the Egyptian descriptions of Rameses III, and the Homeric Danoi. This West Semitic tribe also probably composed the Hyksos invaders of Egypt, and their migration from Egypt to the Argolid in Greece, which took place sometime between 1550 and 1450, forms the historical background
for the Greek legend involving the fifty sons of Aigyptos and the fifty daughters of Danaos."
I do not necessarily agree that the Danuna were connected to the Hyksos. But it is clear that the name "Dan" was well known in the context of Lebanon and Syria in the mid-2nd millennium BCE.
3. "Dan" is referred to at Genesis 14: 14. Genesis 14: 15 then refers to Damascus. So the geographical area of Syria and Lebanon fits perfectly, historically, for "Dan".
4. In the very same sentence, Genesis 14: 14, the author of the Patriarchal narratives uses a word never used elsewhere in the Bible, and which is not attested in secular history after the 15th century BCE: "chânîykîm". So the historical time period is exactly right as well: the 15th and 14th centuries BCE.
5. Everything about Genesis 14: 14 fits the secular historical context perfectly, including the reference to "Dan" (and the word "chânîykîm", and the opposition to the mid-14th century BCE Hittite threat, where “Tidal” is an authentic Hittite kingly name from the 14th century BCE). Pinpoint historical accuracy is the hallmark of the Patriarchal narratives.
Although Karl W. Randolph's view of Genesis is very different than mine in
most respects, I do agree with his previously expressed view that at Genesis 14: 14, "Dan" probably has little or nothing to do with either (i) any great-grandson of Abraham, or (ii) the later Hebrew tribe of Dan.
There is no historical anachronism here.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.