Dierk,

    A few comments on your analysis of Jub. 34:4 (which VanderKam translates, 
based on extensive textual analysis:  "And there came the kings of Tafu and 
the kings of Aresa and the kings of Seragan and the kings of Selo and the 
kings of Ga'as and the kings of Betoron and the kings of Ma'ansakir..."):
    Just for your info, VanderKam's identifications (Textual Studies, 219ff) 
are as follows:
    Tafu = Tappuah (Josh. 16:8); Aresa, usually identified with Hasor, he 
considers a corruption of Adesa = Adasa; Seragan (related texts have Srtn) he 
identifies with Piraton, but as reviewers pointed out this site is better 
identified with Biblical Zaratan (Josh. 3:16); Selo is Shiloh; Ga'as is 
Biblical Ga'as (Josh. 24:30); Betoron is Beth Horon; Ma'ansakir is Mahanayim 
(per VanderKam perhaps not the Transjordanian site, but another near Shechem, 
near modern Khirbet Mahneh - he cites Wright, Shechem 12-13, 245) and Sychar.

>  >Ma'ansakir of Jub. 34:4 is often taken to be a combination of the names of
>  two cities, Ma'an and Sakir.<
>  
>  Not really, for Ma'anisakir is to be identified as Hirbat al-Mahana al-Foqa
>  (Hirbat an-Nabi, Nabi Isma'il), ca. 4 km ssw of Sechem (Tal Balata) and 4.5
>  km s of Nablus.
>  Sakir indeed refers to Sychar (Joh 4.5) = 'En Swkr (Mishna Menahot 10.2), a
>  location ~1 km nw Sechem and 2 km wnw Nablus. The southern plain of Ma'an /
>  al-Mahna isn't meant here, for acc. to TestJud 6.3 and Midrash 693 the
>  village is located on top of a mountain (as I've mentioned already ealier).

    I'm a little confused, as there is no independent mention of Sakir 
alongside Ma'ansakir in Jub. 34:4 in the textual traditions I'm aware of, 
only Ma'ansakir by itself (or variants), or "Shabir king of Mahanayim", which 
reflects Ma'an and Sakir as originally distinct cities.
  
>  The destruction of Shechem indeed ignores the general conditions of the
>  Maccabean military scenario, nevertheless it fits perfectly into to the
>  local geography and the military spirit of the narration and was, thus,
>  important enough to be added (as an anti-Samaritan anecdote? cf. Ant XIII
>  275) in a later stage of political redaction, that is, in the end phase of
>  the 'true' Jewish military epoch 110 -76 BC. 

    I agree that Jubilees underwent a considerable textual evolution.  (The 
earliest, pre-Maccabean edition appears to have concerned itself mainly with 
polemics against Pseudo-Eupolemus along with alleged patriarchal practice of 
Mosaic legislation.)  I wouldn't exclude the possibility of further 
developments as late as you suggest, if the evidence warrants it.
    A problem I have in dating this passage by the presence of Sychar rather 
than  Shechem is that we don't really know why the author collected these 
placenames.  VanderKam noted that some of these were fortresses built by 
Bacchides (and hence though Jubilees dated c. 161 BCE), but this conclusion 
was based on some of his site identifications which seemed forced, such as 
Pirathon.  Is this, instead, a reminiscence of locations in a historical 
military campaign or campaigns (perhaps Maccabean)?  If so, then one can 
conceive of a guerilla battle fought at Sychar rather than at the larger city 
of Shechem, and Shechem's absence loses its significance.  Unless one 
understands the background of the list as a whole -- an unsolved and perhaps 
unsolvable problem -- one cannot draw firm conclusions from this passage IMO.
    Also, while Shechem was captured by Hyrkanus (Ant. 13.255), it was not 
said to have been leveled like Samaria, and Josephus refers to Demetrius's 
army in his campaign against Jannaeus in 88 BCE as encamped "near the city of 
Shechem" (Ant. 13.377).  This is in the period when you have suggested Sychar 
had superceded a destroyed Shechem, if I understand you correctly.  I have 
not read Wright's _Shechem_ -- is your reconstruction of Shehem's history 
based on his archaeological conclusions?  And how do you interpret the data 
from Antiquities?
  
>  PS. What's up with your legionaries in 1QM? Enough panis militaris left for
>  a decisive breakthrough this year?

    Between campaigns at the moment.

    Best regards,
    Russell Gmirkin
For private reply, e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from Orion, e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the
message: "unsubscribe Orion." Archives are on the Orion Web
site, http://orion.mscc.huji.ac.il.

Reply via email to