Who Is a Canaanite? a Review of the Textual Evidence Author(S): Anson F
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Who Is a Canaanite? A Review of the Textual Evidence Author(s): Anson F. Rainey Reviewed work(s): Source: Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, No. 304 (Nov., 1996), pp. 1-15 Published by: The American Schools of Oriental Research Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1357437 . Accessed: 04/01/2012 03:25 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The American Schools of Oriental Research is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. http://www.jstor.org Who is a Canaanite? A Review of the Textual Evidence ANSON E RAINEY Institute of Archaeology Tel Aviv University Ramat Aviv, Tel Aviv 69978 Israel rainey @ccsg.tau.ac.il In view of recent attemptsto vaporizethe Canaanitesand to erase the land of Canaanfrom the map-principallyin N. P. Lemche's1991 volume,The Canaanitesand their Land:The Traditionof the Canaanites-a reviewof the crucial evidenceis in order.The present study will concentrateon documentsfrom the Late BronzeAge in particular,with some allusionsto evidencefrom otherperiods, to providean under- standingof the textswithin the semanticframework in whichthey were composed-the simple,straightforward meaning of thepassages as intendedby the ancientscribes. THE PHANTOM CANAANITES that the Egyptians did have a good grasp of their geography. A glance at the famous "poetical Stela" emche (1991: 50) contendsthat the ancient of Thutmose III (Sethe 1909: 611; Wilson 1955: L Egyptian and Levantine scribes of the second 373-75) should convince any objective reader that millennium B.C.E. used the terms "Canaan" the scribes knew their world and had it organized. and "Canaanite"in "imprecise ways." He believes The same is true of that Pharaoh'slong topographical that they have no understanding of any clear-cut lists (Sethe 1909: 779-94). The Onomasticon of social, political, or geographical meaning for such Amenemope has many geographical entities (Gardi- terms. On the other hand, those of us who do see ner 1947) and there can be no doubt that their inclu- definite significance to such terms are accused of sion in that "encyclopedic" list reflects a knowledge reading our own understanding of nationalism and of geography. It should be obvious that the everyday ethnicity into the ancient documents (Lemche 1991: administrationof the Egyptian-controlledterritories, 50-51). Instead, Lemche himself cites anthropolog- with its profoundconcern with revenues, would have ical studies pertaining to an African group that mod- requiredan intimateknowledge of the social and geo- ern ethnographershad denoted by a term currentnot political entities. It is purely a matter of chance that among the members of the group, but rather among many inscriptional contexts simply take for granted their neighboring groups (Lemche 1991: 51 with ref- that the writer and the recipient or user of the text erences). One could compare this with the use of knew the geographical and "ethnic" entities men- the term "Indians"applied by the first Europeans to tioned. There was no need for them to go into de- the natives they encountered in the Western Hemi- tailed definitions. The route descriptions in Papyrus sphere. But in fact, his entire argument is irrelevant Anastasi I (I, lines 18, 2-25, 2) demonstratebeyond to the interpretationof the ancient documents. Else- all possible doubt that geographical knowledge was where, Lemche says "all Egyptian references to 'the nurtured in Egyptian scribal (and thus administra- Canaan' are rather imprecise and leave many prob- tive) circles. It is only Lemche's comprehension of lems to be solved" (Lemche 1991: 48-49). What he the evidence from the second millennium sources that might have said was that the sporadic references to is imprecise. The following discussion of the spe- Canaan in Egyptian documents do not provide suf- cific texts will demonstratethat they do indeed give ficient information to define the exact geographical an accurate picture of a geographical entity known limits of Canaan.The haphazardnature of the mate- to the ancients as Canaan and a people known to rials available in no way prejudices the assumption them and to themselves as Canaanites.Lemche's most 1 2 ANSONE RAINEY BASOR304 Carchemish DANUNA ISH 4.MUG * Alalakh *oJalab Emar IGARIT L" Ugar ALASHIA *Himath * Qatna -) *edesh , H/ ,ZZdad'* Mt. - -Ziphron*Hazar enan ,* Lebo' \ ?Ammiya* Byblos Apheka Bleirut* CANAAN Sidoan(9 SDamascus Ty UPE *Hazor 'Akko / HainnIathon Megiddoe / i shean "/ eBeth- "'--.......... ... J Dekel ? Fig. 1. Canaan in relationto the surroundingareas. 1996 WHO IS A CANAANITE? 3 glaring mistake is his misunderstandingof the pas- All but two of the men on the list are defined by sage in EA 151:49-67 (see discussion below) and their town or country of origin. One of the other men that failure has distorted all of his other judgment happens to be from URU Am-mi-ia, a city located calls. in Canaan by the Idrimi inscription (cf. discussion below). Patronymics, i.e., the name of the father, are ADMINISTRATIVE AND LEGAL not applied to such persons because they do not have DOCUMENTS standing. Incidentally, Lemche is still laboring under the misapprehensionthat Capiriican be equated with The linguistic designations for people defined as "Hebrews" (Lemche 1991: 27). There is nothing in Canaanites are often nisbe forms, i.e., the gramma- the 800 years of documentation (from the Tigris to tical constructions utilizing one of the Semitic suf- the Nile) to support such an assumption (Loretz fixes to convert a noun into an adjective, used in 1984; Rainey 1987; 1995). All the linguistic, his- antiquity mainly to create appellatives pertaining to torical, geographical, and sociological evidence is family, tribal, national, or other social entities. An- against it. other method is to designate someone as "man of A third reference to a Canaanite, Ia(?)-am-bd-li Canaan,"or "son of Canaan."The practice is wide- (AT 154:24), is on a fragmentof an unpublishedtab- spread in the Semitic languages and the semantic let on which 33 names have been preserved. Other function was well understoodand agreed upon by the people on the same list are designated by their patro- ancient scribes. It was their way of defining people nymics, e.g., HIa-na-ag-giDUMU A-na-ni "Hanaggi and groups in relation to themselves and to one an- son of Anana" (AT 154:15). On the edge of the other. Modern anthropological theories of ethnicity tablet, a colophon reads [DUB]? sa EN GIS.GIGIR are irrelevantto the everyday practiceof these scribes. "[tablet]? of owners of chariots." This is an appropriateplace to cite the autobiog- Alalakh raphy of Idrimi. Although it is a "literary"inscrip- tion and not an administrative text, it has some From the Hurro-Akkadianadministrative docu- crucial geographical and sociological testimony. The ments found in StratumIV at there are some Alalakh, passage in question begins with the hero's leaving listed with the "man of Canaan" people appellative his place of exile in Emar: or "son of Canaan."One of these is ANSE.KUR.RA-iaGI8.GIGIR-ia Ui LUj.KUST-ia I 'Bd-a-la-ia Lobd-i-ru/ LU URU Ki-in-a-ni7KI el-te-q-s'u-nu u i-lam ma-at hu-ri-ib-teKI/ e-te- a bdiiru soldier,a man of the [sic!] "Baclaya, city ti-iq i~ li-bi ERIN.ME?Su-tu-dKI / e-te-ru-ub it-ti- of Canaan"(AT 48:4-5; Wiseman1953: 46, pl. 13), su a-na li-bi / GI8.GIGIRsa-lilil-te bi-td-kui-na sa-ni / an-mu-uk-mau a-na ma-at Ki-in-a- who, along with his wife and son, took a loan from u4-mi a local citizen of Alalakh. If should fail to ni7KI/ al-li-ik i-na ma-atKi-in-a-ni7KI / URU Am- Baclaya mi-iaKIal-bu i-na URUAm-mi-iaKI / DUMU.ME? the interest on time, he would be repay imprisoned. URUHa-la-abKI DUMU.ME? ma-at I The use of URU instead of KUR is Mu-gis-iK-be "city" "country" DUMU.ME?URU ma-at Ni-PKI i [DUMU].ME? an unusual error but probably derives from the ma-at/ A-ma-eKIal-bu / i-mu-ru-un-ni-ma/ i-nu- use of KUR URU for names of countries frequent ma DUMU be-li-su-nua-na-ku i' a-na UGU-ia / (Labat 1932: 14-15; Huehnergard 1989: 84). One ip-hu-ru-nim-maa-ka-a-na DUG4 ur-tab-bi-a-ku / may compare the use of KUR URU A-mur-ri in a le- a-ra-akU' a-na li-bi ERIN.ME LU.SA.GAZ/ a-na gal document from Carchemish (e.g., RS 1957.1:9; MU.7.KAM.MESal-ba-ku Fisher 1972: 11-12). Another Canaanite at Alalakh is: "I took my horse and my chariotand groomand went away;I crossedover the desertand entered in ISar-ni-ia DUMU KUR Ki-in4-a-niKI"Sarniya, a amongthe Suti warriors.I spentthe night with them son of the land of Canaan"(AT 181:9;Wiseman in my coveredchariot; the next dayI wentforth and 1953:71; 1954: 11), came to the landof Canaan.The town of Ammiya is located in the land of Canaan.In the town of who appears on a list of people defined by the first Ammiyathere dwelt people of the city of line caption as L•alab, people of the land of MugiS,people of the land of ERIN.MESLU.SA.GAZ EN GIS.TUKUL.MES= Ni'i, and people of the land of Ama~e.