20.12.2013 Views

Nota Bene-- C:\DOCUME~1\XPMUSER\MYDOCU~1\NBFILE~1 ...

Nota Bene-- C:\DOCUME~1\XPMUSER\MYDOCU~1\NBFILE~1 ...

Nota Bene-- C:\DOCUME~1\XPMUSER\MYDOCU~1\NBFILE~1 ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

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

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

13<br />

late as the 11c (Hawkins 1988, 106–107; cf. Beckman 2007, 111–112), thus strengthening the<br />

possibility for cultural continuity with the later “Hittite kings” of Que in the 10c.<br />

It is therefore reasonable that later “Canaanites” associated with the name “Hittite” are<br />

descendants of the Neo-Hittites, representing an amalgam of Hattians, Luwians, Hurrians, and<br />

others (Bryce 2009, 62). This type of situation reflects the cultural make-up of Empire era<br />

Hittites and their successor states, for they never possessed a clearly distinct ethnic identity but<br />

functioned as a melting pot of peoples who boasted of themselves as “the land of a thousand<br />

gods.” 21<br />

Onomastica<br />

A handful of personal names provide further evidence of direct Neo-Hittite interference<br />

in early Israel. After David’s defeat of Hadadezer of Zobah and her Aramean allies in Damascus,<br />

Neo-Hittite Toi of Hamat sent tribute to and likely entered a formal alliance with David. 22<br />

“Toi/Tou” ‏ּתִעי/‏ ֹ ‏ּתעּו)‏ ֹ ) is the Semiticized version of the (likely) Hurrian noun e (“man”) which<br />

tah˘<br />

also appears as a PN at Meskene (Emar; Hawkins 2000b, 400n30). 23 While recognizing the<br />

challenges inherent in identifying ethnicity based on linguistic elements alone, 24 there is<br />

———————————<br />

21 This cultural situation is also supported by the clear presence of Hurrian and Luwian influence within<br />

Hatti land at an early time in its political history: “At least during the period covered by the available texts, H˘ atti<br />

was always a multicultural civilization” (Beckman 2007, 109–110).<br />

22 In both accounts (2 Sam 8:10; 1 Chr 18:10) Toi/Tou sent an envoy to David “in order to ask him for<br />

peace and to bless him” ‏ְׁשָאל־לֹו ‏ְל ‏ָׁשלֹום ‏ּוְלָבֲרכֹו)‏ ‏.(ִל While the idiom lišol lô lOšālôm by itself does not technically mark<br />

treaty making language, context can support this interpretation. It can also indicate the necessary precursors for<br />

establishing the relationship necessary to the treaty making process. For discussion see Wiseman (1982, 319). The<br />

current context suggests that diplomacy is in view, either to pursue or to establish treaty relations. After all, it falls<br />

within the purview of a military defeat of a superior enemy, the sending of the royal heir as ambassador, and the<br />

bestowal of lavish gifts.<br />

23 “Toi” probably lacks a theophoric element and is therefore abbreviated, the fuller form following the<br />

pattern “man of X deity” (Younger; personal communication).<br />

24 Apart from other information (such as a distinctive material culture) linguistic data may be indicative of<br />

bilingualism or of a shared language between unique cultures. See the succinct discussion by Goedegebuure as it<br />

pertains to the relationship between Hattian and Hittite in the early second millennium (2008, 137–139).

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!