The Ha-Bi-Ru--Kin or Foe of Israel? - Gordon College Faculty

More documents

Recommendations

Info

HA-BI-RU 67 Albright has concluded that in southern Palestine of the Amarna period the main city-states were Gezer, Lachish, Jerusalem, and Hebron-Keilah. 253 In the period of Joshua there are in this area five additional city-states: Jarmuth, Makkedah, Libnah, Debir, and Eglon, with still others like Jericho, Bethel and Gibeon nearby. Albright then theorizes that from c. 1375-1250 there had been a gradual reduction in the power of the city-states combined with an increase in their number, which he attributes to a settled Egyptian policy of divide et impera. This decrease in the power of the Cana- anite city-states is then judged to have aided Israel in her Conquest. Indeed, this is seized upon as compelling evidence that the Hebrew Conquest was late. It will be recognized that this reconstruction of the 14th century situation in southern Palestine is based in part on silences in the Amarna letters. Such a procedure is precarious, however, for the silences might readily be accounted for by the fact that the authors of the Amarna letters simply had no occasion to mention the towns in question. To the extent, however, that there may actually have been fewer city-states in the Amarna period than in Joshua's day, a more plausible explanation would be that between Joshua and the Amarna situation the Israelites had been encroaching on the territory of the old Canaanite city-states, reducing their number by conquest. Furthermore, the spontaneous confederation of Canaanite kings described in Joshua 10 is difficult to explain if it be supposed that Joshua's campaigns were contemporary with or subsequent to the ha-BI-ru activity of the Amarna letters. For these letters graphically exhibit the mutual distrust and growing antagonism among the Canaanite kings during this period. Is it not apparent that neither in the midst of, nor soon after, such intrigues and civil strife could a king of Jerusalem so easily consolidate the surrounding city-states for were to provide for Pharaoh's archers. Such developments indicate that Israel's permanent acquisition of territory in Canaan was a gradual process only initiated by Joshua's campaigns. 253 Besides these, Jarmuth was a minor independency and an Egyptian garrison and official were stationed at Eglon. BASOR 87, 1942, pp. 37-38. Cf. Wright, op. cit., pp. 75, 76.
68 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL a joint military venture against a common foe? Abdi-Hepa's futile efforts during the struggle with the ha-Bi-ru is a witness that a king of Jerusalem would find such a task impossible. Again a more plausible reconstruction is that the collapse of the five-city alliance against Joshua terminated the southern confederation and prepared for the Canaanite disunity ev- idenced in the Amarna letters. If Joshua is to be placed before the Amarna period, the problem still remains of synchronizing the later Israelite tribal efforts to take actual possession of their allotted inheritances (i. e., the Book of judges) with the Amarna ha-BI-ru move- ments. The arguments already presented against the possibility of identifying the ha-BI-ru with the Israelites of Joshua's day for the most part hold against any such iden- tification at this point as well. However, in view of the known tendency of the authors of the Amarna letters to stigmatize the cause of all enemies (or at least all accused of disloyalty to Egypt) with the SA-GAZ label, we ought not to be too dogmatic in denying the possibility that some Hebrew activity might be hidden in the Amarna letters under that label. More significant is the fact that on the chronology followed here the first oppression of Israel in Canaan 254 falls in the late second and in the third decade of the 14th century B.C. This corresponds with part of the era of the ha-BI-ru in Canaan. 255 Israel's first oppressor was "Cushan-rishathaim king of Aram Naharaim". 256 The area designated by "Aram Naharaim" would include within its southwestern limits the region about Alalah (and probably still farther south) which was a strong ha-BI-ru center in the 14th century B. C. 257 Though styled 254 Judg. 3:9-10. 255 part of this era corresponds to the career of Labaya which can be dated in the second and third decades of the 14th century on either Albright's or Knudtzon's reading of the date on the hieratic docket on Labaya's letter, EA 254. 256 Judg. 3:8. It is possible that the additional MyitafAw;ri, "double wicked- ness", was appended by Cushan's victims, perhaps as a pun on Myirahana Mraxa. Cf. Burney, The Book of Judges, 1920, pp. 65-66. 257 Cf. O'Callaghan, Aram Naharaim, esp. pp. 131-145; cf. p. 122.
Page 1 and 2: Westminster Theological Journal 20
Page 3 and 4: 48 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
Page 21: 66 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
Page 25: 70 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

The Ha-Bi-Ru--Kin or Foe of Israel? - Gordon College Faculty

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?