Tel Aviv vol. 38, 2011 83–93

© Friends of the institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 2011 DOi 10.1179/033443511x12931017059503

Textual and Historical Notes on the Eliashib Archive from Arad

Nadav Na’amanTel Aviv University

The first part of the article discusses in detail some letters addressed to eliashib, possibly the commander of the fortress of Arad. New readings and interpretations are suggested for Ostraca Nos. 3, 5, 10, 12 and 18 and their structure and contents are clarified. The second part of the article offers new solutions for some problems in the history of the Negev in the late years of the Kingdom of Judah. it suggests that the elite troops of Kittiyim were hired by one of the last kings of Judah and sent to the Negev in an effort to curtail the edomite danger. However, the efforts to defend the Negev failed and its centres were destroyed some time before the Babylonian 588–587 BCe campaign against the Kingdom of Judah. The heavy destruction brought about by the edomites was deeply engraved in the collective memory and provides the background for the distinctive negative attitude to edom in biblical prophecy of the exilic and post-exilic periods.

Keywords Arad, Beersheba, Eliashib, Kittiyim, Edomites

In the course of his excavations at Tel Arad, Yohanan Aharoni unearthed a small archive of 18 ostraca addressed to or concerning a certain officer called Eliashib, possibly the commander of the fortress. Initially, Aharoni (1966, 1968: 13–18; 1970) published some of the ostraca in articles, and then included them in a Hebrew edition of all the inscriptions discovered at Arad (Aharoni 1975). Five years after Aharoni’s untimely death (1976), an English translation of the book was published (Aharoni 1981). In the following years, scholars suggested textual corrections, philological notes and new interpretations of the letters. Noteworthy is André Lemaire’s translation, commentary and interpretation of the 18 ostraca (Lemaire 1977: 155–184), which significantly advanced their understanding. Dennis Pardee (1978, 1982) published a valuable detailed commentary of all the Arad Letters, including the Eliashib archive. Three comprehensive editions of all the pre-exilic Hebrew inscriptions have been published in the last 15 years (Renz 1995: 353–384; Dobbs-Allsopp et al. 2005: 8–41; Aúituv 2005: 82–111). Thus, we may conclude that the archive has been thoroughly studied.

84 Nadav Na'amaN

The first part of this article aims to further advance understanding of some letters included in the Eliashib archive. In the second part some major problems in the history of the Negev will be re-examined and new solutions will be offered to the date and historical circumstances that brought about the destruction of the Negev in the late years of the Kingdom of Judah.

Notes on some letters from the Eliashib Archive

A | When looking carefully at the photograph of Ostracon 3 (Aharoni 1975: 19; 1981: 17; Aúituv 2005: 88), a few blurred letters are visible in line 6b. I suggest restoring them as <w [l]ú[m] (“or [br]ea[d]”). Lines 1–9 of the ostracon might be rendered as follows:

To Eliashib: And now, give from the wine 3 bath-jars,1 for Hananiahu commands you to Beersheba with a load of a pair of donkeys. And you shall pack with them dough or [br]ea[d]. Calculate (the amount of) the wheat and the bread and take for yourself2 from [the store?].

The restoration in line 6b helps to explain the structure of the letter. Hananiahu sent an order to bring a load of two donkeys as supply to Beersheba, and Eliashib’s superior (whose name is unknown) elaborated his order. According to his instructions, the pair of donkeys should carry three bath-jars of wine as well as dough or bread. Eliashib should calculate how much wheat or bread is required for the dispatch and take it out, possibly from the store.

The number 3, followed by the bath and abbreviation signs, appears in line 2. The number 3 appears for a second time in line 11 and was probably followed by a bath sign. Edomites are mentioned in the next line. In this light, I suggest the following scenario for the letter: a unit of soldiers (whose identity will be discussed in the second part of the article) was sent to Beersheba, probably to confront an Edomite danger. Hananiahu, a high commander in Beersheba, ordered the dispatch of supplies for the unit. His order was delivered to Eliashib by his superior, who probably stayed at Tel Malúata, half way between Beersheba (Bīr es-Seba>, under the modern town) and Arad. The dispatch of dough indicates that the food was sent for immediate consumption;3 hence, this was an ad hoc order for an irregular situation.

B | Lines 1b–7a of Ostracon 5 may safely be restored on the basis of Ostracon 1 lines 5–9a as follows (some restorations were already suggested by Aharoni 1981: 20):

1 Mittmann (1993: 46) demonstrated that the bath-sign designated at once both a standard wine jar and its capacity. “Diese Schreibweise ermöglichte eine Übersicht nicht nur über die Liefermenge, sondern auch über die Liefergefässe, die ja durchaus auch ihren Wert hatten.”

2 On the basis of Exod 27:20 and Lev 24:2, Levine (1978: 289) suggested that the expression wlqút <lk means “assemble”, “accumulate”.

3 Aúituv (1995: 382–383) suggested that b§q is an abbreviated form of b§ql, “fresh grain”. However: first, the noun is rendered b§qln* in 2 Kings 4:42; second, there is no evidence that the noun was written in an abbreviated form.

TEXTUaL aNd HISTORICaL NOTES ON THE ELIaSHIB aRCHIvE FROm aRad 85

ומעוד הקמח הראשן תרכב ε\4 קמח לעשת להם לחםועת שלח מאתך מעוד הקמח ה[ר]א[שן א]שר [תרכב ε?\] קמ[ח לעשת] לחם ל[כתים]/ל[הם]

And now, send from you from the rest of the [choi]s[est] flour that you [grind, a úomer-measure?] of flo[ur to make] bread to [the Kittiyim]/to [them].

There is a fragmented letter before the h in line 8 that looks like a dalet (Aharoni 1975: 21; Aúituv 2005: 93). I tentatively restore it [h>b]dh, in accordance with the text of line 14, ytr […] h>bdh (“the remaining … of the labour”). At the end of line 10, a fragmented taw is visible after the yōd. Given this, I tentatively suggest restoring the second half of Ostracon 5 (lines 7b–15) as follows:

(7) [שלח?] את (8) [.... העב]דה (9) [לע]ב[ד]יהו? כ[ל] (10) [ה...] אשר ית (11) [נו למ]לך אתה מע (12) [שר] ב\ 3 בטרם י (13) עבר החדש ומ (14) יתר [....] העבדה (15) [.... ו]ח[ת]ם

[Deliver?] the [portion?? of the lab]our [to O]ba[d]iahu?, a[ll the wine??] that they use to gi[ve] it (<ōtô)5 to [the ki]ng? as ti[the] – 3 bath-jars – before the month passes. And from the remaining [portion??] of the labour, [(imperative verb) and] s[ea]l …

According to the restoration, admittedly quite uncertain, Eliashib was ordered to send the three bath-jars tithe, a portion of the field labour that was usually sent to the king, to Obadiahu, possibly father of the officer in charge of the Kittiyim (see below). The rest was sealed and possibly kept at the store. It might indicate that the fort of Arad supervised fields and vineyards possibly located in the Hebron highlands whose produce was used to sustain the troops who lived in the fort and in other places, and that tithe of the crop was sent to the king.6 The letter was sent in the summer, the harvest time, and the total yield of the month was about 30 bath-jars of wine.

In lines 1b–4a of Ostracon 7, his superior ordered Eliashib thus: “And now, give to the Kittiyim for the tenth month a bath-jar for the New Moon Day (lúdš)”.7 The archive of Eliashib covers a short time-span (see discussion in the second part of the article). The combination of Ostraca 5 and 7 indicates that months at Arad were counted according to a winter calendar. The tenth month fell in the post-exilic month of Tammuz, which is indeed the month of the grape harvest and the preparation of the new wine. As such, the Arad letters help resolve the long debate as to which month opened the calendar year in Judah in the late monarchical period.8

C | Lines 1–5a of Ostracon 10 might tentatively be restored as follows:(1) [אל אלי]שב ועת (2) [נתן לכת]ים יין ב\ 3 [ב] (3) [טר]ם? א[ס]בת?? ים ושמן 1 (4) [ח]תם לבן עבדיהו

ש (5) [ר?] כתים

4 For the measurement, see Wimmer 2008: 27, 254–255.5 Aharoni (1981: 20 n. 1) already considered the reading <th, “it”.6 For the tithe in the Bible, see Jagersma 1981; Crüsemann 1985; Wilson 1992; North 2001, with

earlier literature. For the tithe in Babylonia in the first millennium BCE, see Jursa 1998.7 For the translation, see Na’aman 2006. For a different translation, see Dobbs-Allsopp et al.

2005: 22–23; Shveka 2005.8 For the many works written on the pre-exilic Judahite calendar, see Segal 1957, 1961; Clines

1972, 1973; Hughes 1990: 159–182; Wagenaar 2003, 2004, 2005, with earlier literature.

86 Nadav Na'amaN

[To Elia]shib: And now [give the Kitti]yim 3 bath-jars of wine [befo]re? the tu[rn]ing?? of the day. And 1 (jar) oil [s]eal for the son of Obadiahu, offi[cer?] of the Kittiyim.

As noted by Dobbs-Allsopp et al. (2005: 26), in line 2 there are traces of three faint diagonal lines after the abbreviation for bath (see photograph in Aharoni 1981: 24–25). The restoration of line 3, admittedly uncertain, rests on lines 5–6 of Ostracon 2: whsbt múr (“and turn it tomorrow”) and Lachish letter 4, rev. 1: btsbt hbqr (“in the turning of the morning”).9 The noun <sbt is presumed to be hapax legomenon from the verb sbb. It is a temporal expression indicating “the turning (of the day)”. For the text, compare Ostracon 5 lines 12–13, b‹rm y>br húdš (“before the month/new moon passes”);10 also letter 40 line 10, [b‹rm y]rd ym (“[before su]nset”).

Aharoni’s restoration š[lú] at the end of line 4 is unlikely as there is no space there (see photograph).11 As only one letter is missing at the beginning of line 5, I tentatively suggest restoring it ś[r] ktym (“officer of the Kittiyim”). Assuming that the restoration is correct, it indicates that a Judahite officer was in charge of the Kittiyim mercenary unit.

D | I tentatively suggest restoring lines 3b–4 of Ostracon 12 as follows: צ[רר? ויקח] אל ב[תה?] צד[ה?]

Lines 1–4 may be translated as follows (see Aharoni 1981: 26):

[To Elia]shib: Take 1 (jar of) oil and [seal it and take (x)]+2 (measures of) flour and give the[m to Qau]s>anal. P[ack? (it) and let him take] the provi[sion?] to his ho[use?].

The text illustrates the intricate contacts of Judahites and Edomites in the late monarchical period, when many Edomites lived in places located along the border zone of the Kingdom of Judah. The role of Qaus>anal in the relations between Judah and Edom is unknown (for the name on the seal impressions unearthed at Tell el-Kheleifeh, see recently Zuckerman 2004: 237–249).

E | Aharoni (1981: 35–36) translated lines 3b–6a of Ostracon 18 as follows: “And now, give (tn) to Shemariahu a letek-measure (of meal) and to the Qerosite (wlqrsy) give (ttn) a úomer-measure”. Other scholars have discussed the interpretation of the measure signs,12 which is not my concern here. Aharoni interpreted qrsy as a nisbe formation of the name Qeros, a member of the ‘sons of Qeros’ family mentioned in the Books of Ezra (2:44) and Nehemiah (3:9; 8:16, 19). As the Qerosites are one of the clans of the netînîm, Aharoni suggested that the Qerosite in the letter from Arad was a member of the family that served in the Temple in Jerusalem in the monarchical period. The interpretation was accepted by some scholars.13

9 For the verb sbb and its derivatives, see Sasson 1982: 105–111; Dobbs-Allsopp et al. 2005: 14, 318.

10 See Lemaire 1977: 207; Pardee 1978: 323, 325; Aharoni 1981: 71; Renz 1995: 147–148.11 Aharoni’s restoration (1981: 24) was accepted by Lemaire 1977: 170; Renz 1995: 371; Aúituv

2005: 101; and Dobbs-Allsopp et al. 2005: 26.12 Lemaire 1977: 158, 181; Pardee 1978: 296, 316–317; Dobbs-Allsopp et al. 2005: 11, 39, with

earlier literature; Wimmer 2008: 256.13 Levine 1969; Lemaire 1977: 181; Pardee 1978: 317; Renz 1995: 383; Dobbs-Allsopp et al.

2005: 39.

TEXTUaL aNd HISTORICaL NOTES ON THE ELIaSHIB aRCHIvE FROm aRad 87

However, Ran Zadok (1980/81: 110–116) demonstrated that the netînîm and Solomon’s slaves mentioned in the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah were non-Judahite foreigners whose name is in a way a ‘microcosmos’ of the Semitic-speaking neighbours of Israel and Judah during the first millennium BCE. The netînîm were a mixed group of non-Judahite origin that arrived with the Returnees from Babylonia. Thus, they could not have been a clan or family in the monarchical period.

Garfinkel (1988) suggested that the qrsy should be identified with the krsym mentioned in inscriptions from Kition and southern Egypt. He assumes a qoph/kaph shift, which theoretically is possible for a non-Semitic foreign name. According to his interpretation, the qrsy in the Arad letter refers to a member of an ethnic group originating in Cyprus and serving as mercenaries in the army of Judah. His suggestion was elaborated on by Zadok (1992: 53 n. 5; 2005), who identified the qrsy with the Karsāja, i.e., Carians, mentioned frequently in the Neo-/Late Babylonian documents (see recently Waerzeggers 2006). Zadok explained the shift of kaph to qoph as the result of the r that follows the k (Zadok 1992: 53 n. 5; 2005: 80). However, if this were indeed the case, why are all references to Akkadian Karsāja, Aramaic Kirkāja/Krky< and Phoenician krsym written with the kaph and never with a qoph? Moreover, in pre-exilic biblical historiography, the Carians are called kry, written with a kaph (2 Samuel 20:23; 2 Kings 11:4).14 In my opinion, the identification of the putative qrsy in the Arad letter with the Carians is unlikely. Other suggestion must be offered for the enigmatic name.

I suggest rendering lines 5b–6a, ├ תן ”and give Qrsyt a kor-measure“ ,ולקרסית (Wimmer 2008: 256). The name Qrsyt might be analyzed as the noun qrs (“hook”?) plus the compound suffix of vowel + consonant (-īt) (Zadok 1977: 163). This compound suffix is known from the names Kmšyt (Reed and Winnett 1963: 7–8) and Mlkmyt (Yassine and Texidor 1986: 49), as well as from some Late Hebrew names (Zadok 1977: 163, 308–309). Qrsyt was either a Judahite carrying a rare name or a foreigner originating from the east of the Jordan area.15

The Kittiyim mercenaries and the destruction of the Negev of Judah

Greek mercenaries from western Anatolia were first integrated into the Egyptian army during the time of Psammetichus I and their numbers in the Egyptian army grew rapidly in the late 7th–6th centuries BCE (Ray 1995, with earlier literature; Fantalkin 2001: 128–147, with earlier literature).16 It is widely accepted today that the Kittiyim, mentioned in the Arad letters and in the Bible, were Greeks who arrived in the Levant from the mainland and the eastern Mediterranean islands. Although their name is derived from the city of Kition (Kty), the designation Kittiyim refers to people from a vast region and not Cyprus alone (Loewenstamm 1962; Lemaire 1977: 159–161, 233; Na’aman 1991: 47–48; Dion

14 See Cogan and Tadmor 1988: 126.15 It is tempting to ‘improve’ the text and render the name qwsyt (Qausyît) parallel to the names

Kmšyt and Mlkmyt. But the resh is clear and there is no textual justification for such an ‘improvement’.

16 For Babylonia, see Zadok 2005; Waerzeggers 2006.

88 Nadav Na'amaN

1992, with earlier literature). The date of their arrival in the Negev and their function is not related in the letters and should be investigated.

Aharoni (1981: 12–13, 144b) regarded the Kittiyim of the Arad ostraca as “Greek or Cypriot mercenaries serving in the Judaean army, perhaps especially in garrisons of the more remote fortresses”. He further pointed out the Eastern Greek pottery that was unearthed at Me§ad îashavyahu and suggested that the garrison of Greek mercenaries was under the command of King Josiah. Finally, he suggested that Eliashib was commander of the fortress of Arad in Stratum VII–VI and that the place was destroyed in the third or fourth year of Zedekiah (Aharoni 1981: 149–150). Hence, he concluded that Greek mercenaries were in the service of the kings of Judah from the time of Josiah until the final years of the kingdom.

Contrary to Aharoni’s historical reconstruction, it is clear now that Me§ad îashavyahu was built and supervised by the Egyptians and that the mercenaries staying there were under Egyptian supervision (Na’aman 1991: 47–48; Fantalkin 2001: 128–147).

Redford (1992: 444–445) noted that in addition to their service in the Egyptian army, Greek mercenaries were also used to garrison Egyptian strongholds such as Me§ad îashavyahu. In this light he interpreted the presence of the Kittiyim at Arad “as the result of Egyptian imperial encroachment”. However, the Arad ostraca were discovered in the destruction level of Arad VI, which is dated by all scholars to the early 6th century. The Kittiyim mentioned in the ostraca served in the Negev in the time of the Babylonian occupation of the Kingdom of Judah and could not have been Egyptian mercenaries.

Is it possible that the Kittiyim were Babylonian mercenaries? Contrary to the rich data of the central place of Carians and Greeks in the Egyptian army, very limited evidence of their inclusion in the Babylonian army exists (Fantalkin 2001: 130–131; 2008: 411–414, with earlier literature). Caroline Waerzeggers (2006: 1–4) suggested that the ethnic group called Karsāja in the Babylonian documents were Carians who arrived from Egypt, whereas the Bannēšāja were Carians who arrived from Anatolia. Most of these Carians were war captives and hence do not reflect participation of mercenaries in the Babylonian army. The minimal participation of mercenaries of Western origin in the Babylonian army and the Kittiyim’s service in the periphery of the Kingdom of Judah indicate that they were hired by a king of Judah (pace Van Seters 2009: 94–103, 115–118)17 This fits my reconstruction of the name of a Judahite (the son of Obadiahu) as commander ([ś]r) of the unit of Kittiyim in Ostracon 5.

Lemaire (1977: 230–231) suggested that Eliashib’s archive encompassed the registration of around one month’s expenses, at the end of which all the orders he received were collected and checked by the royal administration (cf. Mittmann 1993: 44). The month number is registered only in Ostracon 7, whereas in other ostraca only the day was recorded. Following the assessment and registration of the necessary data on papyrus, the ostraca were probably discarded. If this was indeed the case, Eliashib’s archive represents the expenditures of the last days of the store, and shortly after Arad was destroyed and abandoned.

When was the fortress of Arad destroyed? Its final destruction cannot be separated from that of the other Negev settlements, including major fortified towns such as Tel >Ira, Tel

17 Aharoni (1981: 12–13: 144b) and Lemaire (1977: 159–161, 233–234) have already suggested this.

TEXTUaL aNd HISTORICaL NOTES ON THE ELIaSHIB aRCHIvE FROm aRad 89

Malúata and Tel >Aroer and the four forts that were built in the 7th century (îorvat >Uza, îorvat Radum, îorvat Tov and îorvat >Anim) (Lipschits 2005: 224–229, with earlier literature; Beit-Arieh 2007: 331–334). Lipschits (2005: 229–230) suggested that the border forts and fortified towns, and with them the entire array of Judahite settlements in the Negev, collapsed when Judah was no longer able to provide defense, namely, after the 587/86 BCE destruction of Jerusalem. The process of collapse was gradual. Some sites were entirely or partially destroyed and others abandoned with no sign of destruction detected there. Lipschits recognized that Edomite tribal groups might have plundered and destroyed some Negev settlements, but he criticized the attribution of all destructions to the Edomites.

However, the references to the Kittiyim in the Arad ostraca do not correspond well with the hypothesis of a late collapse of the Negev settlements. The Kittiyim served in the army of Judah and during times of emergency must have joined the troops in defending the centres of the kingdom, and in particular the capital of Jerusalem. This is indicated by all biblical references to mercenaries, who were always stationed with the king (e.g., 2 Samuel 18:15, 20:7; 1 Kings 1:38, 44; 2 Kings 11:4, 19; see references in de Vaux 1965: 123–124, 219–220). Also Sennacherib wrote that after his surrender, Hezekiah sent him to Nineveh his elite troops and his band of refugees? (urbi) (Na’aman 2000), “which he had brought into Jerusalem, his royal residence, in order to strengthen (it)” (Oppenheim 1969: 288a). If Jerusalem and the other centres of the kingdoms were conquered and destroyed before the destruction and abandonment of the Negev settlements, we would not expect the mercenaries to be posted in the Negev. Thus, the sequence of events must be reversed: Arad and the other Negev settlements were destroyed before the downfall of Jerusalem and the other major centres, in a situation whereby the king could still send his elite troops to defend the kingdom’s southern front.

The Arad ostraca show clear signs of the growing tension between Judah and Edom at that time. I have suggested that Ostracon 3 reflects the arrival of reinforcement in face of the Edomite danger (see above). In letter 24, a commander urged Eliashib to urgently dispatch reinforcement to Ramat-negeb “lest Edom should come there”. (Aharoni 1981: 46–49; Dobbs-Allsopp et al. 2005: 47–53; Na’aman 2003: 202–203). Some years ago I suggested restoring lines 13–15 of letter 40 as follows: “The king of Judah should know [that we are un]able to send the [troops? until] the evil that Ed[om devises? dis]appears” (Na’aman 2003). In this light, I posit that Ostracon 3 marks the arrival of the Kittiyim mercenaries to the Beersheba Valley and their stationing at Beersheba (Bīr es-Seba>), the major local town. Other ostraca of the Eliashib archive deal with the provisioning of this mercenary unit, which is attested to in the Beersheba Valley for about one month. It is thus clear that the Edomite attack was launched at a time when the kingdom was still strong, well organized and able to provide for the mercenary unit.

The efforts of the King of Judah to defend the southern front of his kingdom failed. Not long after the delivery of letter 24 to Arad, the Edomites attacked and utterly destroyed the fort, possibly taking advantage of the dispatch of its guard to Ramat-negeb. Other forts and fortified settlements were probably destroyed at that time.18 The heavy destruction

18 For the evidence of destructions and abandonment, see Lipschits 2005: 224–228.

90 Nadav Na'amaN

inflicted by the Edomites on the Negev district was deeply engraved in the collective memory and provides the background for the distinctive negative attitude to Edom in biblical prophecy of the exilic and post-exilic periods.19

Finally, some scholars tried to estimate the number of members within the Kittiyim unit in light of the amount of supply they received. Thus, Aharoni (1981: 145) estimated their numbers at around 50–100 men; according to Lemaire’s calculation (1977: 229–230), the unit included approximately 75 men; and Siegfried Mittmann (1993: 46–48) estimated 18–25 men. The differences in estimations result from the uncertainty regarding the volume of the dry and wet measures mentioned in the ostraca and the amount of bread and wine assigned daily to each soldier.

Recently, Paolo Gentili (2002–2005) examined the Assyrian palatine lists of supplies, and on the basis of a large body of evidence suggested that the daily quota for professional workers in the court was about 1 qû bread and 0.2 qû wine (qû corresponds to approximately one litre). The bread and wine were assigned monthly, usually to groups of workers (groups of palatine workers were usually composed of 25–50 men).

Assuming that the amount of daily supply of bread and wine to individuals in Judah was roughly the same as in Assyria, on the basis of the Judahite measures we may calculate the number of Kittiyin troops. Lemaire (1977: 169, 229–231) demonstrated that the Kittiyim received three bath-jars of wine every six days. According to David Ussishkin (1983: 160–163), the volume of eight lmlk jars is between 39.75 and 46.75 litres, with one exceptional jar of 51.80 litres. If for the sake of simplicity we assume that each jar was filled with about 40 litres, we arrive at a unit of approximately 100 men who received 20 litres per day.20

Marvin Powell (1992: 903) estimated the pre-exilic dry measure of úomer at about 100–200 litres; Mittmann (1993: 47) calculated it at about 160 kg and Lemaire (1977: 158 n. 17, 229–230) estimated the kor-measurement at about 450 kg. An estimated úomer (kor) of 450 kg corresponds to a unit of 75 men, whereas an estimation of 200 kg corresponds to a unit of 33 men (cf. Renz 1995: 376). Not only are the differences of estimations made on the basis of the dry measures great, but the calculations of the bread do not fit well those of the wine. Thus, given the present state of research, we are in fact unable to arrive at a conclusive number of Kittiyim and leave this matter to future research.

In sum, although much research of the Arad ostraca has already been conducted, there is still room for additional investigation, which might improve our understanding of the texts and further explore the contribution of this important archive to the study of the Negev in the late years of the Kingdom of Judah.

19 Haller 1925; Myers 1971; Cresson 1972; Dicou 1994; Glazier-McDonald 1995.20 An internal contrast exists in Mittmann’s calculations. On the one hand, he suggests that the

designation bath refers to a standard jar, while on the other hand he calculates the volume of the bath to 19.5 litres—less than half the volume of a standard Judahite jar. See Mittmann 1991: 64–66; 1993: 47. For detailed discussion of the volume of bath measure, see Lipschits et al. forthcoming.

TEXTUaL aNd HISTORICaL NOTES ON THE ELIaSHIB aRCHIvE FROm aRad 91

ReferencesAharoni, Y. 1966. Hebrew Ostraca from Tel Arad. IEJ 16: 1–7.Aharoni, Y. 1968. Arad: Its Inscriptions and Temple. BA 31: 2–32.Aharoni, Y. 1970. Three Hebrew Ostraca from Arad. BASOR 197: 16–42.Aharoni, Y. 1975. Arad Inscriptions. Jerusalem (Hebrew).Aharoni, Y. 1981. Arad Inscriptions: Jerusalem.Aúituv, S. 1995. Flour and Dough: Gleanings from the Arad Letters. In: Zevit, Z., Gitin, S. and

Sokoloff, M., eds. Solving Riddles and Untying Knots. Biblical, Epigraphic, and Semitic Studies in Honor of Jonas C. Greenfield. Winona Lake: 379–383.

Aúituv, S. 2005 HaKetav VeHaMiktav. Handbook of Ancient Inscriptions from the Land of Israel and the Kingdoms beyond the Jordan from the Period of the First Commonwealth, Jerusalem (Hebrew).

Beit-Arieh, I. 2007. Historical Overview. 1. The Iron Age. In: Beit-Arieh, I., ed. îorvat >Uza and îorvat Radum: Two Fortresses in the Biblical Negev (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 25). Tel Aviv: 331–334.

Clines, D.J.A. 1972. Regnal Years Reckoning in the Last Years of the Kingdom of Judah. Australian Journal of Biblical Archaeology 2: 9–34.

Clines, D.J.A. 1973. The Evidence for an Autumnal New Year in Pre-Exilic Israel Reconsidered. JBL 93: 22–40.

Cogan, M. and Tadmor, H. 1988. II Kings. A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (The Anchor Bible 11). Garden City.

Cresson, B.C. 1972. The Condemnation of Edom in Postexilic Judaism. In: Efird, J.M., ed. The Use of the Old Testament in the New and Other Essays. Studies in Honor of William Franklin Stinespring. Durham: 125–148.

Crüsemann, F. 1985. Der Zehnte in der israelitischen Königszeit. Wort und Dienst 18: 21–47.Dicou, B. 1994. Edom. Israel’s Brother and Antagonist. The Role of Edom in Biblical Prophecy

and Story (JSOT.S 169). Sheffield.Dion, P.-E. 1992. Les KTYM de Tel Arad: Grecs ou Phéniciens. RB 99: 70–97.Dobbs-Allsopp, F.W., Roberts, J.J.M., Seow, C.L. and Whitaker, R.E. 2005. Hebrew Incriptions.

Texts from the Biblical Period of the Monarchy with Concordance. New Haven and London.

Fantalkin, A. 2001. Mezad îashavyahu: Its Material Culture and Historical Background. Tel Aviv 28: 3–165.

Fantalkin, A. 2008. Contacts between the Greek World and the Southern Levant during the Seventh–Sixth Century BCE (Ph.D. dissertation, Tel Aviv Univerity). Tel Aviv (Hebrew).

Garfinkel, Y. 1988. MLê HKRSYM in Phoenician Inscriptions from Cyprus, the QRSY in Arad, HKRSYM in Egypt, and BNY QYRS in the Bible. JNES 47: 27–34.

Gentili, P. 2002–2005 . Preliminary Remarks on the Palatine Distribution System in the Neo-Assyrian Empire. State Archives of Assyria Bulletin 14: 89–111.

Glazier-McDonald, B. 1995. Edom in the Prophetical Corpus. In: Edelman, D.V., ed. You Shall Not Abhor an Edomite for He Is Your Brother. Edom and Seir in History and Tradition. Atlanta: 23–32.

Haller, M. 1925. Edom im Urteil der Propheten. In: Budde, K., ed. Vom Alten Testament: Karl Marti zum siebzigsten Geburtstage, Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, Beifeft 41. Giessen: 109–117.

Hughes, J. 1990. Secrets of the Times. Myth and History in Biblical Chronology (JSOT.S 66). Sheffield.

Jagersma, H. 1981. The Tithes in the Old Testament. Oudtestamentische Studiën 21: 116–128.Jursa, M. 1998. Der Tempelzehnt in Babylonien vom siebenten bis zum dritten Jahrhundert v.

Chr. (AOAT 254). Münster.Lemaire, A. 1977. Inscriptions hébraïques, Vol. 1: Les ostraca (Littérature anciennes du Proche-

Orient 9). Paris.Levine, B.A. 1969. Note on a Hebrew Ostracon from Arad. IEJ 19: 49–51.

92 Nadav Na'amaN

Levine, B.A. 1978. On the Arad Inscriptions. Shnaton. An Annual for Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies 3: 283–294 (Hebrew).

Lipschits, O. 2005. The Fall and Rise of Jerusalem. Judah and Babylonian Rule. Winona Lake.

Lipschits, O., Koch, I., Shaus, A. and Guil, S. Forthcoming. The Enigma of the Biblical Bath and the System of Liquid Volume Measurement during the First Temple Period. BASOR.

Loewenstamm, S.E. 1962. Kittiyim. Encyclopaedia Biblica 4. Jerusalem: 394–398 (Hebrew).Mittmann, S. 1991. “Königliches bat” und “‹ēt-Symbol”. Mit einem Baitrag zu Micha 1.14b und

1 Chronik 4,21–23. ZDPV 107: 59–76.Mittmann, S. 1993. “Gib den Kittäern 3 b(at) Wein.” Mengen und Güter in den Arad-Briefen.

ZDPV 109: 39–48.Myers, J.M. 1971. Edom and Judah in the Sixth–Fifth Centuries B.C. In: Goedicke, H., ed. Near

Eastern Studies in Honor of William Foxwell Albright. Baltimore and London: 377–392.

Na’aman, N. 1991. The Kingdom of Judah under Josiah. Tel Aviv 18: 3–71.Na’aman, N. 2000. ïabiru-Like Bands (lúurbi) in the Assyrian Empire and Bands in Biblical

Historiography. JAOS 120: 621–624.Na’aman, N. 2003. Ostracon No. 40 from Arad Reconsidered. In: den Hertog, C.G., Hübner, U.

and Münger, S., eds. Saxa loquentur. Studien zur Archäologie Palästinas/Israels. Festschrift für Volkmar Fritz zum 65. Geburtstag (AOAT 302). Münster: 199–204.

Na’aman, N. 2006. Ostracon No. 7 from Arad Reconsidered. In: Gitin, S. Wright, J.E. and Dessel, J.P., eds. Confronting the Past: Archaeological and Historical Essays on Ancient Israel in Honor of William G. Dever. Winona Lake: 265–267.

North, R. 2001. ‛eśr, ‛śr, ma‛śēr. In: Botterweck, G.J., Ringgren H. and Fabry, H.-J., eds. Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, Vol. 11. Grand Rapids and Cambridge: 404–409.

Oppenheim, A.L. 1969. Babylonian and Assyrian Historical Texts. In: ANET: 265–317, 556–567

Pardee, D. 1978. Letters from Tel Arad. UF 10: 289–336.Pardee, D. 1982. Handbook of Ancient Hebrew Letters. A Study Edition. Chico, Calif.Powell, M.A. 1992. Weights and Measures. In: Freedman, D.N., ed. The Anchor Bible Dictionary,

Vol. 6. New York: 897–908.Ray, J.D. 1995. Soldiers to Pharaoh: The Carians of Southwest Anatolia. In: Sasson, J.M., ed.

Civilizations of the Ancient Near East 2. New York: 1185–1194.Redford, D.B. 1992. Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times. Princeton.Reed, W.L. and Winnett, F.V. 1963. A Fragment of an Early Moabite Inscription from Kerak.

BASOR 172: 1–9.Renz, J. 1995. Die althebräischen Inschriften, Teil 1: Text und Kommentar (Handbuch der

althebräischen Epigraphik, Vol. 1). Darmstadt.Sasson, V. 1982. The Meaning of whsbt in the Arad Inscription. Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche

Wissenschaft 94: 105–111.Segal, J.B. 1957. Intercalations and the Hebrew Calendar. VT 7: 250–307.Segal, J.B. 1961. The Hebrew Festivals and the Calendar. Journal of Semitic Studies 6: 74–94.Shveka, A. 2005. Arad Ostracon No. 7: In Search of the True Solution to the Riddle. Hebrew

Studies 46: 49–70.Ussishkin, D. 1983. Excavations at Tel Lachish 1978–1983: Second Preliminary Report. Tel Aviv

10: 97–175.Van Seters, J. 2009. The Biblical Saga of King David. Winona Lake.de Vaux, R. 1965. Ancient Israel, Vol. 1: Social Institutions. New York and Toronto.Waerzeggers, C. 2006. The Carians of Borsippa. Iraq 68: 1–22.Wagenaar, J.A. 2003. Post-Exilic Calendar Innovations: The First Month of the Year and the Date

of Passover and the Festival of Unleavened Bread. Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 115: 3–24.

TEXTUaL aNd HISTORICaL NOTES ON THE ELIaSHIB aRCHIvE FROm aRad 93

Wagenaar, J.A. 2004. Passover and the First Day of the Festival of Unleavened Bread in the Priestly Festival Calendar. VT 54: 250–268.

Wagenaar, J.A. 2005. The Priestly Festival Calendar and the Babylonian New Year Festivals: Origin and Transformation of the Ancient Israelite Festival Year. In: Gordon, R.P. and de Moor, J.C., eds. The Old Testament in Its World (Oudtestamentische Studiën 52). Leiden and New York: 218–252.

Wilson, J.C. 1992. Tithe. In: Freedman, D.N., ed. The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 6. New York: 578–580.

Wimmer, S. 2008. Palästinisches Hieratisch. Die Zahl- und Sonderzeichen in der althebräischen Schrift (Ägypten und Altes Testament 75). Wiesbaden.

Yassine, K. and Texidor, J. 1986. Ammonite and Aramaic Inscriptions from Tell El-Mazār in Jordan. BASOR 264: 45–50.

Zadok, R. 1977. On West Semites in Babylonia during the Chaldean and Achaemenian Periods. An Onomastic Study. Jerusalem.

Zadok, R. 1980/81. Notes on the Biblical and Extra-Biblical Onomasticon. Jewish Quarterly Review 71: 107–117.

Zadok, R. 1992. Onomastic, Prosopographic and Lexical Notes. BN 65: 47–54.Zadok, R. 2005. On Anatolians, Greeks and Egyptians in ‘Chaldean’ and Achaemenid Babylonia.

Tel Aviv 32: 80–95.Zuckerman, B. 2004. Shading the Difference: A Perspective on Epigraphic Perspectives of the

Kheleifeh Jar Stamp Impressions. Maarav 11: 233–252.