Análisis en detalle de expedientes de derechos pendientes de cobro

T o suggest that the Jo rd a n (h-yrdn) o f the H e b re w Bible was n o t at all a river (H ebrew and Arabic nhr) m u st seem arrogant, if n o t blasphem ous. Yet, as all Biblical scholars k n o w , no w h ere is it actually cited as being o n e .1 H o w the w ell-k n o w n Pales­ tinian river came to be k n o w n by this nam e is an intriguing question in itself, b ut n o t one w hich will be touched upon here.2 M y concern is to determ ine w hat the Jo rd a n o f the H e b re w Bible really was, i f n o t a river, and to show h o w the confusion cam e about.

Etym ologically, the Biblical yrdn is a n o u n derivative from the ro o t yrd (Arabic rdy, vocalised rada), m eaning ‘descend, fall, fall d o w n ’. Fro m this same ro o t comes the Arabic substan­ tive ryd (rayd) and its fem inine fo rm rydh o r rydt (raydah), the form er being a general term denoting the ‘skyline o f a m o u n ­ tain, escarpm en t’, and the latter a particular term denoting a ‘m o u n ta in p rotrusion o r ridge’. T h e use o f the tw o term s in relation to m o untain terrain, th o u g h general in theory, is in practice restricted to W est and South Arabia. H ere Raydah and Raydan (rydn, w h ich is ryd w ith the suffixed archaic definite article n, cf. Biblical yrdn) are co m m o n place-names, or to p o ­ graphical term s that enter into the form ation o f com posite place-names. In Asir alone, at least five m o u ntain villages in different regions are called R aydah (or Raydat such and such); at least tw o villages are called Raydan; and at least one is called Ridan (rdn, possibly a contraction o f rydn).

In Biblical usage, h-yrdn, traditionally taken to be the nam e o f the particular river in Palestine, is n o t always a nam e b ut (as in Arabic) a topographical term m eaning ‘escarpm ent’ or

8 4 T H E BI BLE C A M E F R O M A RA BI A

‘ridg e’. In the construction ‘br h-yrdn (‘across’ o r ‘b e y o n d ’ the

yrdn), so far taken to m ean ‘T ransjo rd an ’ (i.e. the territory east

o f the Palestinian Jordan), h-yrdn invariably denotes the m ain Sarat escarpm ent o f Asir (see C h apter 3), ru n ning from Taif, in the sou th ern Hijaz, to the D hah ran region, near the Y em en border. In m o st instances, ‘br h-yrdn refers to inland Asir, as distinct fro m coastal Asir, w hich was the Israelite land o f Judah (see C h a p te r 8). W ithou t the ‘br, how ever, h-yrdn can refer to any part o f the Asir escarpm ent; it also refers frequently to any one o f the countless isolated ridges on the m aritim e side o f the Asir range, and indeed to m ountain ridges o r escarpments elsewhere (for example, that o fjab al A bu H am d an in the N ajran region; see C hapter 15). This is clear fro m constructions such as

yrdn yrhw - n o t ‘the Jo rd a n at Jerich o ’ (RSV), b u t ‘ridge o f yrhw’, yrhw here being the present village o f W arakh (wrh) in

the Z ahran highlands (see below). T h e fact that there was m ore than one yrdn (not ‘J o rd a n ’) in question is also indicated by the expression h-yrdn hzh (‘this rid ge’, n o t ‘this J o rd a n ’), which occurs no less than six tim es in the Hexateuch (Genesis 32:11; D e u te ro n o m y 3:27, 32:2; Joshua 1:2, n , 4:22). H ad h-yrdn been the nam e o f a particular river, o r for that m atter o f a particular ridge, one can hardly think o f a reason for it to be so often particularised as ‘this yrdn, unless there w ere oth er rivers or ridges k n o w n by the same n a m e .3 Actually, the expression

h-yrdn hzh sim ply means ‘this escarpm ent’ or ‘this ridge’, to

distinguish it from another ridge or ridges.

T o dem onstrate the fact that the Biblical ‘J o rd a n ’ was n o t a river by this nam e, but sim ply a topographical term referring to m oun tain escarpm ents and ridges in the southern Hijaz and Asir, let us see h o w the term occurs in conjunction w ith different sets o f West A rabian place-names in different passages o f the Bible. T he first exam ple I take is from the detailed account o f the Israelite crossing o f the ‘Jo rd a n ’ under the leadership o f Joshua, fro m the m o m e n t the Israelites set o u t for the crossing from Shittim , until the mass circumcision o f the ‘people o f Israel’ at G ibeath-haaraloth (Joshua 3:1—5:3). First, let us fix the exact points o f departure and arrival. T he point o f departure, Shittim (Biblical spelling h-stym), was apparently a ridge in the

8 6 T H E BI BLE C A M E F R O M ARA BI A

vicinity o f W adi Wajj (probably present-day Jabal Suw ayqah, directly n o rth o f Taif), w ho se nam e is attested in the Arabic historical literature as Jabal Shatan (stn).4 T h e location o f Shit- tim there can be further corroborated from the identification o f the area w hich the Israelites had reached u nder the leadership o f M oses, w hich clearly com prised the parts o f the T a if region east o f the w ater divide.5 T he point o f arrival, w here the mass circum cision o f the uncircum cised Israelites was perform ed, is to day the village o f D h l G h u lf (Arabic dglp), literally ‘the one o f the foreskins’. T h e Biblical nam e o f the place, G ibeath-haaraloth (H ebrew gb‘t h -‘rlwt), means ‘the hill o f the foreskins’. While Jabal Shatan lies east o f the W est Arabian w ater divide, D hl G h u lf lies w est o f it, in the valley o f W adi A dam , in the upper reaches o f the Lith region. T o reach D h l G h u lf from Jabal Shatan, one has to proceed southw ards, then turn w est to cross the w ater divide at the col o f W adi Buqran, south o f Taif.

From Jabal Shatan to D h i Ghulf, the Israelite crossing o f the ‘J o rd a n ’, as described in the bo o k o f Joshua, can be retraced d o w n to the last detail in its W est Arabian setting. W e should also bear in m in d that it has never been successfully retraced in its traditionally assum ed Palestinian setting (see Kraeling, pp. 132-134). T h e Israelites reportedly set o u t for the crossing at harvest tim e (probably late spring), w h en the wadis o n either side o f the yrdn, or ‘escarpm ent’, were ru nning w ith torrential floods (3:1s).6 W hen they arrived at the point w here they could cross, the w aters receded (or w ere m ade to recede by judicious dam m ing) to let the Israelites pass (3:16). F ro m the original H ebrew , the event is reported in the standard translations as follows:

T h e w aters com ing d o w n fro m above (m-l-m‘lh) stood and rose up in a heap far o ff (nd ’hd h-rhq m ’d) at A dam (’dm), the city that is beside Z areth an (srtn), and those flowing d o w n to w a rd the sea o f the A rabah ( 7 ym ‘rbh), the Salt Sea (ym h-mlh), w ere w holly cut off; and the people passed over

T H E J O R D A N Q U E S T I O N 87 Traditionally, the H e b re w ym ‘rbh ym h-mlh, w ro n g ly trans­ lated as ‘the sea o f Arabah, the Salt Sea’, has been taken to refer to the Palestinian D ead Sea. In H ebrew , how ever, ym can m ean both ‘sea’ and ‘w e st’. Therefore, the p ro per translation o f the full phrase 7 ym ‘rbh ym h-mlh w o uld be ‘w est o f ‘rbh (a place),

west o f h-mlh (another place)’. T he locations in question are G hurabah (grbh) in W adi B uqran, ju s t east o f the w ater divide, and the nearby village o f al-M ilhah (mlh, w ith the Arabic definite article). O th e r m istranslations in the passage ju s t quoted are the following:

1 The Hebrew m-l-m‘lh is a most awkward way o f saying ‘from above’, as it literally means ‘from to above’. Correctly, it must read

m-lm‘lh, meaning ‘from lm‘lh’, the name o f a place which is today

al-Ma‘lah (’l-m‘lh), in the Taif region, near Ghurabah and al-Milhah. 2 The Hebrew nd ’hd, contextually, should be translated ‘one dam’ instead o f ‘a heap’. It actually features here as an adverbial phrase, meaning ‘in one dam’.

3 The Hebrew h-rhq m’d, read as such, would mean ‘the distance much’, which is why it has been translated ‘far off’. Read h-rhq m-’d, however, it would mean ‘the (one) extending from ’d', the name of a place which is today Wadd (wd), in the same part o f the Taif region as Ghurabah, al-Milhah, and al-Ma‘lah.

T h e places still to be identified are A dam , Zarethan and Jericho, bearing in m in d the reported p ro x im ity betw een the first tw o. A d am today m u st be A dam (’dm, c o rru pt form o f the Biblical ’dm), the village w est o f the T a if w ater divide after w hich the valley o f W adi A d am is called. Zarethan (srtn) m ust be present-day Raznah (rznt), also in W adi A dam . As for Jericho (here yryhw n o t yrhw), it is no d o u b t the present village o f R akhyah (rhy), in W adi A dam . In the light o f all this, Joshua 3:16 m ust be retranslated as follows:

T h e waters com ing d o w n fro m al-M a‘lah stood, they rose up in one dam extending fro m W add, at A dam , the city that is beside Raznah, and those flow ing d o w n w est o f Ghurabah, w est o f al-M ilhah, w ere w holly cut off; and the people passed o ver opposite Rakhyah.

Clearly, the w aters that receded (apparently because they were dam m ed) to perm it the Israelites to cross the escarpm ent

88 T H E BI BLE C A M E F R O M A RA BI A

at the B uq ran col w ere those o f W adi A dam , w hich flowed from the w ater divide w estw ards, from the heights o f the T a if region to w ards the sea. T ranslated in this w ay, the point o f crossing is defined w ith stunning precision.

As they crossed the B u q ran col betw een G hurabah and A dam , the m en o f Israel (if the H eb rew text is read correctly) ‘to ok up tw elve stones’ o u t o f the escarpm ent (h-yrdn), ‘accord­ ing to the n u m b er o f the tribes o f the people o f Israel’ (4:18). W hen th ey reached Gilgal (glgl), Joshua to o k these tw elve stones and set th em up as a m em orial o f the crossing o f h-yrdn hzh (‘this escarpm ent’, o r ‘this rid g e ’). This anecdote, as reported, is no d o u b t an a ttem p t to explain h o w the rocky hillock o f Jabal Juljul (glgl) cam e to stand in the plain o f Sahl Juljul (also glgl),

in W adi A dam . T h e plain and the hillock are b o th there to this day, w ith their identical Biblical names unchanged.

T o reach the plain o f Juljul, o r ‘Gilgal’, the Israelites m ade their descent d o w n W adi A d am ‘opposite Jericho (yryhw)’ (3:16), i.e. opposite the village o f Rakhyah, w hich is geographi­ cally correct. Juljul (or ‘G ilgal’), w here they encam ped, was ‘on the east b o rd er o f Je ric h o ’, as the standing translation o f the H e b re w b-qsh m-zrh yryhw (4:19) w ou ld have it. H ere the H ebrew

qsh, taken to m ean ‘b o rd e r’, and zrh, taken to m ean ‘east’, are

actually the names o f tw o villages in W adi A dam : Q asyah (qsy) and Sarhah (srh). T h e second village, Sarhah, is identified in relation to the neighbouring Rakhyah (as zrh yryhw) to dis­ tinguish it from another village called Sarhah in the same area. T h e p ro p er translation o f the verse in question m u st therefore be: ‘they encam ped in Juljul, in Qasyah, fro m the Sarhah o f R ak hy ah ’. T h e full extent o f the en cam pm ent is thus indi­ cated.

Like the story o f the tw elve stones o f Juljul or ‘Gilgal’, the story o f the mass circumcision o f all the uncircum cised m en o f Israel at G ibeath-haaraloth (today D hl Ghulf, see above) merely represents an a tte m p t to explain an unusual p h eno m en on - in this case, the strange nam e o f a place called ‘the hill o f the foreskins’. W h y the place was actually called by this nam e is n o t a m atter for concern h ere.7 W hat is im p o rta n t is that the present W est A rabian village o f D h l G h u lf - like Rakhyah (or

‘J e ric h o ’), Juljul (or ‘G ilgal’), Q asyah and Sarhah - is located in W adi A dam , w hich m atches exactly the p ro per geographic interpretation o f the Israelite crossing o f the ‘J o rd a n ’ u nder the leadership o f Joshua. Incidentally, the co-ordinates o f the point o f the crossing, along the col o f W adi B uqran, south o f Taif, are 2 i° N by 40°30'E.

W hile the ‘J o rd a n ’ o f Joshua was a m ou n tain col in the so uth ern Hijaz, along the m ain West A rabian escarpm ent, that o f L ot (Genesis 13:10-12) was the ridge o fja b a l H arub, about 450 kilom etres aw ay to the south-southeast, in the coastal region o f Jizan, w here a village called R aydan (cf. H eb rew

h-yrdn) is still to be found. F rom a starting po int in ‘the N e g e b ’

(1h-ngb), betw een ‘B ethel’ (byt 7) and ‘A i’ (h-‘y) (Genesis 13:2),

Lot repo rted ly parted co m pany w ith his uncle A bram the H e b re w (see C hapters 12, 13 and 15) and w ent to settle in an area described as kkr h-yrdn, w hich is usually rendered in translations as ‘the circle o f the Jo rd a n ’, o r ‘the Jordan valley’. G ranted that kkr m eans ‘circle’, w hich seems to be the case, the

kkr h-yrdn m u st have referred to the fertile and w ell-irrigated

valleys radiating fro m the H arub ridge, w hose original nam e, as h-yrdn, appears to survive in that o f the village o f Raydan.

T h a t the kkr h-yrdn actually com prised the valleys at the foot o fja b a l H aru b , in th e jiz a n region o f southern Asir, rather than ‘the Jo rd a n valley’ in Palestine, is borne out by the itinerary o f L o t’s m ovem ents, as rep o rted in Genesis. T h e ‘N e g e b ’ (ngb) from w h ich Lot set o u t to reach the kkr h-yrdn was certainly n o t the N eg eb desert in southern Palestine. It was the village o f al-N aq b (nqb), w hich still stands today on the slopes o f Rijal A lm a ‘, w est o f the city o f A bha (see C h ap ter 4). H ere also exists, to this day, the villages o f Batllah (btl), the Biblical Bethel, and al-G hayy {gy, w ith the A rabic definite article, cf. the H e b re w h-‘y), the Biblical A i.8 T o reach the kkr h-yrdn, Lot had first to go to Jabal H arub , then descend from there to the valleys. In Genesis 13:11, it is actually said that Lot jo u rn ey ed ‘fro m qdm’ (H ebrew m-qdm) to reach his destination, qdm being to day a w aterin g place called G ham ad {gmd), near Raydan, on the H a ru b ridge. T o d ay, it is actually the m ain w atering place

o f the local Raydan (or ‘J o rd a n ’) tribe. T h e translators o f the Bible could hardly have k n o w n that qdm was a place-name, and therefore had goo d reason to take it literally to m ean ‘east’. A ssum ing, how ever, that Lot had set out from Palestine, and that he had to m ov e eastwards to reach a kkr h-yrdn, th ou gh t to be the Jo rd a n valley, these translators seem to have m iscon­ strued the H e b re w m-qdm to m ean ‘eastw ards’ or ‘east’ (RSV), k n o w in g that it could only m ean ‘from the east’, if, indeed,

qdm m ean t ‘east’. N o t o u t o f dishonesty, b ut out o f sheer

ignorance, th ey have invariably translated the story in Genesis 13:10-12 m o re o r less as follows:

A n d L ot lifted up his eyes, and saw that the Jord an Valley

(kkr h-yrdn) was well w atered everyw here (klh msqh) like the

garden o f the Lord (k-gn yhwh), like the land o f E gypt in the direction o f Z o a r (k-’rs msrym b-’kh s‘r); this was before the L ord destroyed Sodo m and G o m o rrah (l-pny sht y h w h ’t

sdm w -’t ‘mrh). So Lot chose for him self the Jordan Valley,

and Lot jo u rn e y e d east (m-qdm) . . . Lot dw elt in the cities o f the valley (‘ry h-kkr) and m o ved his tent as far as Sodom

(w -y’hl ‘d sdm) (RSV).

A part fro m arbitrarily taking kkr h-yrdn to be the Jordan Valley, and m istranslating m-qdm as ‘east’ rather than ‘from the east’ (it actually means ‘from G h am ad ’), the translators o f this passage have understo od the H eb rew yhwh, occurring twice in this passage as the archaic im perfect o f the verb ‘be’ (see C hapter 6, note 9), as the nam e o f the G od o f Israel (Y ahw eh, co m m only rendered as ‘the L o rd ’). Likewise, they have taken the H ebrew

sht to be a verb in the perfect tense, m eaning ‘destroyed’,

whereas it actually features in the context as a place-name (see below). A ltho u gh the H e b re w original makes perfect sense as it stands, Biblical scholars, w o rk in g w ithin the fram ew ork o f a preconceived geographic structure, have further resorted to the rem oval o f the phrase l-pny sht yhwh ’t sdm w -’t ‘mrh from its p ro p er place. In the original it comes directly after klh msqh, or ‘all o f it w atered ’, b u t they have transposed it, p utting it after k - ’rs msrym b-’kh s‘r, w here it does n o t belong. Further­

m ore, they have taken for granted that Vs msrym means ‘the land o f E g y p t’. In the last verse, they have invariably assum ed that ‘ry h-kkr m eans ‘the cities o f the valley, circle, plain, district’. H o w ev er, the original H eb rew refers to the ‘caves’ (Arabic gr, vocalised gdr, ‘cave’) o r ‘valleys’ (Arabic gwr, vocal­ ised gawr, ‘depth, valley’) o f the place in question. ‘C aves’ is p ro b ab ly correct in this context, as Lot is depicted as dwelling in a cave, in this case a m ‘rh,9 in Genesis 19:30. H ere is m y retranslation o f the same text, keeping the place-names m en ­ tioned in their original H e b re w fo rm for subsequent identific­ ation.

A n d Lot lifted up his eyes and saw that all the kkr h-yrdn was irrigated in the direction o f sht (l-pny sht)-, it is beside sdm and

‘mrh (yhwh ’t sdm w -’t ‘mrh). It is like a garden (k-gn yhwh)\

like the land o f msrym in the direction o f s‘r. So Lot chose for h im se lf all the kkr h-yrdn, and Lot jo u rn e y e d from qdm . . . Lot dw elt in the caves o f the kkr, and set up camp as far as

sdm.

W hat this fresh translation from the consonantal H eb rew text presents are tw o sets o f place-names, one referring to three locations in the ‘circle o f R aydan’ (krr h-yrdn, i.e. in the valleys aro u n d the Jabal H a ru b ridge), those being sht, sdm and ‘mrh, and the o th er referring to tw o locations elsewhere, msrym and

s ‘r, the locations in the first set being favourably com pared w ith msrym in fertility. All five locations survive by nam e in m odern

Asir: the first three in th e jiz a n region, w here one w ould expect to find them ; the oth er tw o in the highly fertile vicinity o f A bha, the p art o f the Sarat blessed w ith m ost rain. Here are the five locations identified by their present names:

1 Sht: t o d a y S h a k h it (sht), in J a b a l B a n i M a lik , s o u th e a s t o f Ja b a l H a r u b , a n d d ir e c tly east o f W a d i S abya.

2 Sdm, o r ‘S o d o m ’: th e n a m e s u rv iv e s in m e ta th e sis as th a t o f W a d i D a m i s (dms), th e w e s t e r n m o s t tr ib u ta r y o f W a d i S abya (see C h a p t e r 4). 3 ‘Mrh, o r ‘G o m o r r a h ’: G h a m r (gmr), o n th e slopes o f J a b a l H a r u b u p h ill f r o m W a d i D a m is . 4 Msrym: h e r e c e r ta in ly n o t ‘E g y p t ’, b u t p r e s e n t M is ra m a h (,msrm), n e a r A b h a (see C h a p t e r 4). T H E J O R D A N Q U E S T I O N 91

5 S ‘r, o r ‘Z o a r ’: h e r e n o d o u b t al-S a‘r a ’ (s'r), also n e a r A b h a , th e re b e in g o t h e r ‘Z o a r s ’ e ls e w h e re in A sir.

T o su p p o rt m y transposition o f L o t’s sto ry in Genesis from Palestine to W est Arabia, I cite evidence o f a different kind. T h e ‘S o d o m ’ and ‘G o m o rra h ’ in the list, according to Genesis 19:24, w ere destroyed during the lifetime o f Lot by a rain o f ‘b rim sto n e ’ - a ‘fire o f death from heaven’ (see C hapter 6, note 9). This seems to im ply a volcanic eruption. There are several possible Sodom s in Asir, one o f them S udum ah (exactly sdm), in the Bani Shahr region; none, how ever, is close to a volcano. N o t so W adi Dam is, w h o se low er course runs through the thick o f the laval field o f the ‘A kw ah volcanoes. Biblical archaeologists w h o continue to search for the rem ains o f Sodom (or those o f G om orrah) in the vicinity o f the Dead Sea in Palestine should rem em b er that no traces o f protovolcanic activity have as yet been found there. These tw o tow ns m ust lie buried beneath the lava o f W adi D am is in th e jiz a n region, dow nhill from Jabal H arub, although there is a G h am r (gmr) w hich could have been the Biblical G o m o rra h on the slopes o f Jabal H a r u b .10 T h e yrdn or ‘J o rd a n ’, w ith w h ich the tw o places

are associated in the story o f L o t’s m igration, can only be the H a ru b ridge w ho se Biblical nam e (meaning the ‘ridge’) is still carried there by the village o f Raydan. T h e ‘circle’ (kkr) m ust have been the collective term used to indicate the valleys radiat­ ing from the various sides o f the H arub ridge, form ing the basins o f W adi Sabya and Wadi Baysh; also L o t’s qdm is n o t the ‘east’, b u t the spring o f G ham ad, near R a y d a n .11

W ith respect to the place-nam e msrym, it m u st be emphasised that it is rarely used in the H eb rew Bible to refer to E gypt, as co m m o n ly assu m ed .12 W here it does n o t refer to M isram ah near A bha (see C hapters 4 and 13), it refers to M asr, in Wadi Bishah, o r to M a d ru m (mdrm), in the G h am id highlands (see C hapter 14). T h e Biblical ‘P harao h ’ (p r‘h), as will be suggested later, was n o t the ruler o f E gypt, but a W est Arabian god associated w ith M isram ah and M asr, am o n g other places,13 and was perhaps also the designation o f the chiefs o f a tribe o f the locality. T h e Biblical msr could also have been the nam e o f a W est A rabian tribe, called in Arabic the M u d a r (mdr, ‘soured

m ilk ’). C ertainly, a ‘P h a rao h ’ tribe, called the Far‘a (pr'), is still to be found in W adi Bishah today, carrying the nam e o f the