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

DRAWING ANALOGY BY HISTORICAL PRECEDENCE: MAKING A CASE FOR
CONTACT BETWEEN THE CONSTRUCT “HITTITE” IN THE HEBREW BIBLE
AND ITS SYRO-HITTITE CULTURAL CONTEXT
Abstract
While a number of Hittite canonical, monumental, and archival parallels are suggested
for the early literatures in the HB, the demonstrable contact necessary for strengthening these
analogues remains unclear. Likewise, the typical understanding of ḥittî in HB depends on the
assumptions outlined in early biblical scholarship, where “Hittite” in the majority of cases
refers to an autochthonous people group located in the southern foothills of Palestine. The
discovery of organic connections between the fallen Hittite empire and its Neo-Hittite successor
states call for a fresh clarification of these issues through a text-linguistic analysis of ḥittî in HB,
as well as geographic considerations, relevant onomastics, and summary of the Hittite material
culture of Palestine.
Introduction
In light of the significance of proposed Anatolian typologies to the early literatures in the
Hebrew Bible (HB), 1 it is important to clearly understand what Scripture has in view when
employing the term “Hittite.” It is equally important to demonstrate at least the possibility of
indirect interaction between Israelite and Hittite culture. 2 Neo-Assyrian parallels need little
justification due to the many contacts evidenced in the literatures, artifacts, and geographic
movements relating these cultures at different times and places in Israel’s and Judah’s later
history. By contrast, the expanding scholarly literature regarding the Hittite empire has
———————————
1 For convenient collections of texts in English, summaries and bibliography, see “Hittite Canonical
Compositions” (CoS, 1:145–235), “Hittite Monumental Inscriptions” (CoS, 2:75–132), and “Hittite Archival
Documents” (CoS, 3:41–72).
2 For Collins “Hittite” is rooted in a secondary use taken from northern Israel through Assyrian influences.
“Hittite” reflects an embedded cultural memory manifested in a literary convention. The term therefore represents
indirect historical precursors when applied to assumed populations in the southern Levant, rather than assuming
population displacement for which there is no archaeological evidence (Collins 2007, 197–213). The Hittite
artifacts found in Canaan as well as later cultural influences via Hittite elite are best explained as the product of the
pax Hethitica-Egyptiaca (to borrow an important phrase from Itamar Singer), especially during the thirteenth
century (Collins 2007, 213–218). According to Hoffner, archaeological and textual evidence indicates that
Anatolian Hittite civilization never came into direct contact with the people of Israel. He prefers to limit possible
contacts as indirect based on the extreme limits of official boundaries marked by Kadesh on the Orontes. In this
view, secondary influence rose through Hittite connections with Karkamiš, Aleppo, and Ugarit. These influences
would then have filtered southward prior to the Israelite monarchy, where “elements of Hittite culture in their
‘Neo-Hittite’ after-life may have been brought into David’s court by North Syrian immigrants” (1973, 221; cf.
2004, 191–192).
1