Israelite Literacy Interpreting The Evid PDF

Israelite Literacy: Interpreting the Evidence: Part II
Author(s): Ian M. Young

Source: Vetus Testamentum, Vol. 48, Fasc. 3 (Jul., 1998), pp. 408-422
Published by: Brill
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1585241
Accessed: 08-12-2015 10:28 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1585241?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
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 support@jstor.org.
Brill is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Vetus Testamentum.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 129.78.139.29 on Tue, 08 Dec 2015 10:28:27 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ISRAELITE LITERACY: INTERPRETING THE EVIDENCE
PART II1
by
IAN M. YOUNG
Sydney
(5) Interpretation
(a) "Reading"and "writing"

In view of the comments in Part I of this article, we must now try
to suggest what we may know about the extent of literacy in ancient
Israel. Interestingly, the list of those who are said to read in our sources
largely overlaps with those who are said to write. There is, however,
the case of the skilled craftsmen in Exod. xxxix 30 who engrave the
simple statement "Holy to the Lord" on the high priest's crown. Our
evidence does not allow us to see craftsmen reading, or even writing
longer texts. It is possible to interpret that the skilled craftsman mastered
only those literacy skills which were necessary for his trade. It is
important to note that epigraphic evidence suggests that some crafts-
men at least worked with outlines already traced for them by scribes.2
This one verse is all the biblical evidence we have to go on, however.
Nevertheless, with this possible exception, our literary sources from
ancient Israel portray the same groups-scribes, administrators and
priests-as being the ones who both write and read. Thus if this is
evidence for literacy, we may see that in ancient Israel literacy implied
skills in both reading and writing.
Here we come to the crucial issue. Even for these three clearly
For Part I see VT48 (1998), pp. 239-253.

2
J. Prignaud, "Scribes et Graveurs a Jerusalem vers 700 AvJ.-C.", in R. Moorey
and P. Parr (ed.), Archaeologyin the LevantEssaysfor KathleenKenyon(Warminster, 1978),
pp. 136-48. M. Haran, SVT 40 (1988), pp. 91-5, would connect many of the occasional
texts, such as abecedaries inscribed in stone, with the writing of skilled craftsmen who
had a practical knowledge of writing.
? Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 1998 XLVIII, 3

VetusTestamentum
ISRAELITELITERACY 409
defined groups who are said both to read and to write: can we be
certain that they were really literate, in view of our finding that Hebrew
katab can mean "to have someone write", and qdrd' can mean "to
have something read"? It must be frankly admitted that in only a
minority of cases can we prove that the people in our lists (scribes
obviously excepted) did not use a scribe's services.3 We would empha-
size again, however, that this situation was quite normal in antiquity,
where it was regular practice e.g. for a written work of any type to
be dictated to a scribe or secretary.4 We cannot expect our ancient
sources unambiguously to show non-professionals regularly writing for
themselves. This point made, however, is it still of some worth that
our sources consistently show us scribes, administrators and priests as
"reading" and "writing"?Apart from the functional literacy of crafts-
men, we have argued that there is not one reference in the literary
sources to an individual from outside these groups either reading or
writing. Even taking into full account the common use of scribal inter-
mediaries we still suggest that it is possible to talk in terms of a definite
literate group in ancient Israel. What is meant by the expression "literate
group" in this context is to indicate that those people who regularly
dealt with written material in ancient Israel belonged to certain definite
segments of society. This formulation is, of course, unsatisfying in that
it raises but does not answer the question whether those members of
society who regularly used written material would be encouraged to
see the point of learning to use those skills themselves. Furthermore,
even this cautious formulation is subject to the general problem of
whether our written sources talk of these groups alone as reading and
writing because they were the only members of the literate group, or
whether the focus of the texts is simply on these groups anyway, to
the exclusion of other possibly literate groups in society, albeit of lesser
social status (note: there is only one mention of craftsmen).Nevertheless,
it seems to be a reasonably formulated conclusion based on the evidence
presented thus far.
3 E.g. Hoshaiah in Lachish letter 3 (discussed below) seems to make an explicit claim
not to have used a scribe to read; Moses does not seem to have had a scribe with
him on Mt Sinai. Also note that David's message to Joab concerning Uriah in 2 Sam.
xi 14-15 seems to have been secret, and hence we may suggest that Joab alone read
it, even though this is not explicitly described.
4 See Harris
(below, n. 12), Achtemeier (below, n. 27), and S. Franklin, "Literacy
and Documentation in Early Medieval Russia", Speculum60 (1985), p. 9.
410 IAN M. YOUNG
(b) LachishLetter3
How far we can advance beyond this position of uncertainty rests
largely on the interpretation of Lachish Letter 3.4-13, which seems to
deal with the question of the attitude to literacy at the end of the
monarchic period in Judah. F.M. Cross renders lines 4-8a of the letter
as follows:5 "And now let be opened, pray, the ear of your servant
concerning the letter which you sent to your servant yesterday evening;
for the heart of your servant has been despondent since you sent (it)
to your servant, and that my lord said... ." It is what follows that is of
vital importance for the present discussion. The first problem is: what
is it that the lord Yaush has said to Hoshaiah that has made him liter-
ally "sick at heart"? The reading of the next letters is not in dispute:
I'yd'th/qr' spr (lines 8b-9a). Cross translates: "you did not understand
it. Call a scribe!" against the more common reading: "Don't you know
how to read a letter?"6These translations are commonly taken to refer
to Hoshaiah's inability to read. That this was not merely sarcasm on
Yaush's behalf can be inferred by the seriousness with which Hoshaiah
treats the charge; he is "sick at heart" and responds with a vehement
oath. We propose to read this sentence even more starkly. It seems
clear from Isa. xxix 11-12 that Hebrew expressed the idea of "to be
literate" by the phrase yd' spr "to know book", its reverse in the same
passage being "not to know book". We suggest that this is the very
same idiom used in the Lachish passage (in a more prosaic form with
the explicit addition of the word for reading qr'). We therefore translate
Yaush's charge as simply "You are illiterate!".
Hoshaiah responds to Yaush's charge with an oath, which all re-
cent translators have understood to be "As the Lord lives, no one has
ever tried to read me a letter". This is strange if the subject of the
dispute is confined to general literate ability alone since, as we have
5 "A Literate Soldier: Lachish Letter

III", in A. Kort and S. Morschauser (ed.),
Biblical and RelatedStudiesPresentedto SamuelIwry (Winona Lake, 1985), p. 43.
6
J.C.L. Gibson, Textbookof SyrianSemiticInscriptionsI: Hebrewand MoabiteInscriptions
(Oxford, 1973), p. 39; A. Lemaire, InscriptionsHebraiquesI (Paris, 1977), pp. 100-1;
D. Pardee, Handbookof AncientHebrewLetters(Chico, 1982), p. 84; S. Ahituv, Handbook
of AncientHebrewInscriptions(Hebrew) (Jerusalem, 1992), p. 37. Cross's interpretation
rests largely on his contention that the final -h ofyd'th cannot be merely taken as an
alternative, plenespelling of the second-person masculine singular perfect suffix -td. Cross
claims that the variation in spelling with or without the -h is systematic ([n. 5] p. 46
n. 4), although this would be hard to demonstrate. The alternative is to assume that
pre-exilic orthography was not quite so rigid as Cross assumes, and this is the position
favoured in this article.
ISRAELITELITERACY 411
seen, it was normal for even literate people to be read to in antiquity.

Hoshaiah's "ever" could be taken as an exaggeration for the sake of
effect, but what he is defending against, in any case, is unlikely to
have been the argument that he was illiterate simply because he had
people read to him. Rather, there may have been some common
knowledge understood by both writer and recipient of the letter which
is hidden from us. Pardee makes the plausible suggestion that Hoshaiah
was being charged with allowing confidential information to leak out
by using (gossiping) readers.7 The implication would be that a man of
Hoshaiah's rank was expected to have the educational qualifications
to deal (at need) with the sort of formulaic administrative Hebrew
found in military correspondence like the Lachish letters without need-
ing to call in the aid of a professional. Hoshaiah's vehemence in defend-
ing his literacy abilities shows another side to this situation. It could
be seriously questioned whether a junior army officer was literate
enough to read a short letter. For an army officer it was a matter of
pride-and possibly a requirement of his rank-that he could do so.
The ability to read was a matter of social standing at the end of the
monarchic period in Judah. That is, members of the upper class in
Judah at this time prided themselves on being part of a literate elite.
Thus, here we suggest we have evidence that the picture emerging
from the biblical sources about the extent of literacy corresponded to
some sort of reality in the biblical period.
The evidence from Lachish Letter 3 could be even furtherstrengthened
by the following lines of the text which continue Hoshaiah's defence.
Unfortunately, however, the interpretation of these lines is open to dis-
pute. Cross has recently collated the text and has declared the grammati-
cally difficult 'tnnhw/'lm'wmhin lines 12-13 as being "beyond question"
([n. 5] p. 45). This would invalidate some older interpretations (e.g.
that of Gibson [n. 6]). Cross translates lines 10b-13a as follows: "and
furthermore, any scribe (soper)who might have come to me, I did not
summon him and, further, I would pay him nothing!" Pardee, following
7 P. 87. Pardee's other

suggestion, that the charge was that Hoshaiah was not reading
the letters sent to him and hence was not obeying orders, fits in better with Cross's
translation, since the natural response to this situation would have been: "call a scribe!"
One aspect of his military role seems to have required that Hoshaiah be able to read
a letter without the normal recourse to a scribe. As Cross points out: "there is every
reason to believe that the skilled and elegant hand of the letter which appears on
Ostracon III is not the hand of Hoshaiah, but the hand of an army scribe" ([n. 5]
p. 47). Scribes would certainly have been used for any day-to-day business.
412 IAN M. YOUNG
Lemaire, translates: "Moreover, whenever any letter (seper)comes to

me and I have read it [,] I can repeat it [down] to the smallest
det[ail]".8 Lemaire comments that Hoshaiah's reply vaunts having
received a good education in that he was not only able to read, but
also to repeat the message word for word.9 These interpretations of
the passage certainly do not conflict with our understanding of what
was said in the earlier lines, but the uncertainties of translation prevent
any final decision.'0
However the Lachish text is precisely rendered, it seems to show
that literacy skillswere a matter of some social standing in late monarchic
Judah. It adds weight, therefore, to the suggestion derived from the
biblical data that scribes, administrators and priests formed a special
class of people who both possessed and used skills in both reading and
writing, i.e., were literate. Interestingly, we have arrived, in many
respects, at an analogous picture to that painted by Harris for the
more advanced literate societies of the classical world.
and chronology
(c) Archaeology
The predominance of people of high social standing in our lists of
literate people fits in well with the picture given by D.W. Jamieson-
Drake derived from an archaeological perspective. He suggested that
we see direct (i.e. epigraphic) evidence of writing in the kingdom of
Judah only in sites dependent on Jerusalem and its central administration:
forts (e.g. Lachish), economically specialized sites (e.g. Gibeon), and
royal sites (Ramat Rahel). He sees writing skills tied to the administra-
tive needs of the kingdom of Judah, which increased greatly when
Judah became a fully-fledged "state", in Jamieson-Drake's opinion, in
the 8th and 7th centuries B.C. It was thus in those sites with close
8 Cross (n. 5), p. 43; Pardee (n. 6), p. 84; Lemaire (n. 6), p. 101.
9 P. 107. Lemaire takes this as a reference to the education of
high officials who
learnt to repeat a message word for word. For the use of recitation in Egyptian edu-
cation see RJ. Williams, "Scribal Training in Ancient Egypt", JAOS 92 (1972), p. 216.
10 The most intractable
(but not the only) problem is the form 'tnnhwin line 12.
Suggested etymologies include: (i) ntn "give" (Cross [n. 5], p. 46), although the non-
assimilation of nun to the following he would be unusual (cf. GKC ? 58k: "rare, and...
only in poetic or elevated style"). (ii) tnh "repeat" (Lemaire [n. 6], p. 103), again the
problem of the second nun necessitates suggesting perhaps an unusual form of the inten-
sive. The root tnh, furthermore, seems to be a dialectal form parallel to the standard
Hebrew snh. (iii) tnn, the root of the biblical noun 'etnan "a (harlot's) fee" (Cross,
p. 46), the problem being lack of attestation of the word in the more general sense of
"professional fee (for any profession)".
ISRAELITE LITERACY 413
administrative ties to Jerusalem where residents would have had the

opportunity and, more importantly, the motivation to learn to read
and write.'1
Jamieson-Drake's data raise an important question: that of chronol-
ogy. We have presented our lists in roughly chronological order,but with-
out explicitly dividing them into historical periods. Taking all the lists
for "writing" together we get the following chronological spread for
those references which are securely datable: (i) before the monarchy:
5; (ii) 10th-9th centuries: 5; (iii) 8th century-586: 11; (iv) the post-exilic
period: 2. Reading: (i) before the monarchy: 3; (ii) 10th-9th centuries: 1;
(iii) 8th century-586: 8; (iv) the post-exilic period: 3. Thus it might be
seen that the trend of these figures fits in with the growth of admin-
istrative complexity charted by Jamieson-Drake which he relates to the
undoubted rise in the volume of epigraphic remains from the 8th cen-
tury onwards. The figures given above should, however, be treated
with caution on account of a number of factors: (i) the possibility that
a later writer may have imputed the literacy of his own age to a figure
from an earlier age. (ii) The logical problem whether more people are
mentioned as literate in the 8th and 7th centuries because there are
more written sources from those centuries in which to name them, or
whether there are more written sources because there were more liter-
ate people?
(d) Armyofficers
We note the number of army officers in our lists, boosted in number
by the epigraphic evidence. It seems reasonable to expect a high degree
of literacy among this group. First of all, it would be natural for
appointments to army commands to be given to those with connec-
tions to the ruling class, if for no other reason than to protect the
control by the elite of the monopoly of force. Secondly, armies tend
to be bureaucratic.'2 It is perhaps no accident that our two major
caches of ostraca from the southern kingdom are batches of military
correspondence. We discussed above at length the passage from Lachish
Letter 3, where the author seemed to be defending his literacy skills
to his superior. Cross comments on the level of literacy implied by
" D.W.
Jamieson-Drake Scribesand Schoolsin MonarchicIsrael: a Socio-Archaeological
Approach(Sheffield, 1991), pp. 147-9.
12 For the
bureaucracy of the Roman army (obviously on a much larger scale):
William V. Harris, AncientLiteracy(Cambridge, Mass., and London, 1989), pp. 217, 253.
414 IAN M. YOUNG
this text: although scribes are near and ever-present, a "minor army
officer is 'sick at heart' if his ability to read accurately and easily is
questioned" ([n. 5] p. 47). We pointed out that Cross's argument can
be reversed: a senior army officer could expect a junior officer to be
illiterate or semi-literate. In no case, we emphasize, is the issue the lit-
eracy of the common soldiers under the command of these officers.
(e) Priests
Regarding the list of priests the question must be asked whether all
priests should be presumed to be literate, or whether the literate priests
belonged to the highest stratum of society? Moses and Samuel come
under the category of community leaders, obviously. Jeremiah, being
from Anathoth could be from the former high priestly family of Abiathar
(1 Kings ii 26); and regarding Ezekiel, being taken into exile in 597
would also imply high social standing (2 Kings xxiv 14-16). Of much
more importance, therefore, are the references to the priest investigating
adultery who writes curses in a book, and the priests (in general) of
Moses' time and Levites of Nehemiah's time who read the Law to the
people. It could be suggested that in the post-exilic period the priests
took over the role of royal administratorsand hence their literacy skills,
if we took the Numbers and Deuteronomy passages to be post-exilic
along with that from Nehemiah.'3 However, many scholars see these
passages as containing ancient material, no matter how they were used
by later editors.'4On this basis a case could be made for a wide literacy,
at least, among the priesthood even in the pre-exilic period. This would
to be tied to their task as guardians and propagators of the Mosaic
Laws. This again would not be surprising on the basis of analogies
13 For the ascription of Num. v to the "P-document", which is usually assumed to

be post-exilic, see e.g. G. Fohrer, Introductionto the Old Testament(Nashville and New
York, 1968; London, 1970), p. 180 = Einleitungin dasAlte Testament (12th edn, Heidelberg,
1979), p. 195. For Deut. xxxi as an exilic/post-exilic supplement see p. 176 = German,
p. 191.
14 M.
Noth, Numbers.A Commentary (London, 1968), p. 49 = Das vierteBuch Mose,
Numeri(Gottingen, 1966), pp. 45-6, thought that in the law regarding the priest inves-
tigating adultery we have "what is obviously a traditional text" which "has been lightly
reworked" and "the whole gives a markedly primitive impression and certainly goes
back to a fairly ancient practice". Deut. xxxi 9-13 is often considered an original part
of the pre-exilic Deuteronomy book, e.g. by S.R. Driver, A Criticaland ExegeticalCom-
mentaryon Deuteronomy (Edinburgh, 1895), p. lxxvi; M. Noth, The Deuteronomistic History
(2nd edn, Sheffield, 1991), pp. 28-9 = Uberlieferungsgeschichtliche
Studien(Halle, 1943), p. 43;
cf. R.D. Nelson, TheDoubleRedactionof theDeuteronomistic History(Sheffield, 1981), p. 21.
with literacy in other societies, where the priest is often the possessor
of learning.'5 One problem with assuming a widespread literacy among
priests that might be suggested is the lack of many texts clearly written
by priests, as opposed to the mass associated with government. Never-
theless, a corpus of inscriptions possibly or probably associated with
priests can be assembled.'6 It should also be remembered that preser-
vation of epigraphic remains depends greatly on the material used
priests may not have written on ostraca.'7 It is also possible that the
task of the priests was more involved with reading and interpreting
the Laws orally to the masses than with the writing of great volumes
of ephemera, which is the task of governments. However, even granted
all this, it must be admitted that we cannot prove that all priests were
equally capable of, for example, performing the duty of writing the
curse for the suspected adulteress. Thus, we cannot be completely
15J. Goody, Literacyin TraditionalSocieties(Cambridge, 1968), p. 16: "The priest was

the man of learning, the literate, the intellectual, in control of natural as well as super-
natural communication".
16 The Gezer Calendar: I.
Young, "The style of the Gezer Calendar and some
'Archaic Biblical Hebrew' passages", VT 42 (1992), p. 367, with reference to W. Wirgin,
"The Calendar Tablet from Gezer", Eretz-Israel6 (1960), pp. 9*-12*. For a cultic expla-
nation of the Kuntillet 'Ajrud texts see, e.g., W.G. Dever, "Asherah, Consort of Yahweh?
New Evidence from Kuntillet 'Ajrud", BASOR255 (1984), pp. 21-37. The cultic function
of the site is denied by J.M. Hadley, "Kuntillet 'Ajrud: Religious Centre or Desert
Way Station?", PEQ 125 (1993), pp. 115-24. She makes a connection with Judean and
Phoenician merchants. Merchants would, in fact, be prime candidates for a "literate
class". However, our evidence suggests that trade in ancient Israel and Judah was
largely a royal prerogative, so that local merchants might form a sub-class of the "gov-
ernment officials"; see, e.g., R. de Vaux, AncientIsrael:Its Life and Institutions(London,
1961), p. 78 = Les institutionsde I'AncienTestamentI (Paris, 1958), pp. 121-2. F.M. Cross,
"The Cave Inscriptions from Khirbet Beit Lei", in J.A. Sanders (ed.), Near Eastern
Archaeology in the TwentiethCentury:Essays in Honor of Nelson Glueck(Garden City, New
York, 1970), p. 304: "the oracle and the petitions may have been the work of a prophet
or his amanuensis", or indeed, a cult prophet or a priest. See especially A. Lemaire,
"Une inscription paleo-hebraique sur grenade en ivoire", RB 88 (1981), pp. 236-9;
A. Yardeni, "Remarks on the Priestly Blessing on two ancient amulets from Jerusalem",
T 41 (1991), pp. 176-85; G. Barkay, "The Priestly Benediction on Silver Plaques from
Ketef Hinnom in Jerusalem", Tel Aviv 19 (1992), pp. 139-94; idem, "A Bowl with the
Hebrew Inscription qdf", IEJ 40 (1990), pp. 124-9 and other similar inscriptions listed
in G.I. Davies, AncientHebrewInscriptionsCorpusand Concordance (Cambridge, 1991), pp.
478-9; G. Barkay, "'Your Poor Brother' A Note on an Inscribed Bowl from Beth
Shemesh", IEJ 41 (1991), pp. 239-41. Seals of (important) priests: N. Avigad, "The
Priest of Dor", IEJ 25 (1975), pp. 101-5; J. Elayi, "Le Sceau du Pretre Hanan, Fils
de Hilqiyahu", Semitica36 (1986), pp. 43-6.
17 The point about perishable writing materials has been well made a number of
times by A.R. Millard, e.g. in "An Assessment of the Evidence for Writing in Ancient
Israel", in Janet Amitai (ed.), BiblicalArchaeologyToday(Jerusalem, 1985), pp. 304-5.
416 IAN M. YOUNG
certain that our evidence demonstrates anything more than that certain
senior priests (government appointees?) belonged to the literate stratum
and used literacy skills in their professional activities.
Excursus: The Uses of Literacy

For this article to focus solely on the question who could and could
not read and write in ancient Israel would be misleading. This would
be mainly because it may thus carry the implication that once we have
an idea of who possessed literacy skills, we know exactly how they
would have used them. In other words, we should be in danger of
assuming that writing had the same functions in ancient Israelite society
as it does in modern western society. Recent work has emphasized,
however, that literacy is grafted on to different societies in different
ways. Rather than transforming the society instantly, it is more usually
the potentialities of writing which are harnessed in traditional ways,
i.e., within the established structures of the society.18 Before attempting
to draw together the present discussion, therefore, it seems worth paus-
ing to describe the ways in which writing was used in ancient Israel.
Obviously, this section can be no more than an outline, given the
complex questions that are involved. Indeed, it is true to say that each
time we attempt to interpret one of the epigraphic remains of the
period, or every time the Bible describes writing as being done, we
must free ourselves of our modern presuppositions about "what writ-
ing is for" and try to understand what the ancient Israelite thought
of writing.'9 This is the task for a monograph, and so the much more
modest aim here is to present some of the ways in which we see the
literate groups in Israel using their literacy skills.
The first sphere of literate activity that has been outlined above is
that of the priest and the cult. The most commonly mentioned written
document in the Old Testament is the Law of Moses, the divine
instruction given by God on Mt Sinai. This is referred to and read
numerous times by cultic functionaries (e.g. Moses, Exod. xxiv 7; Ezra
and Levites, Neh. viii 1ff.),but also by people more generally describable
as community leaders (still nevertheless "sacral", e.g. Joshua, Josh. viii
34-5;Josiah, 2 Kings xxiii Iff.). Indeed, in the Deuteronomic Law, the
18
For an excellent study of the uses of literacy in relation to ancient Greece see
R. Thomas, Literacyand Oraliy in Ancent Greece(Cambridge, 1992).
19 See, for example, the discussion below on aspects of the Siloam Tomb inscription.
king must himself make a copy of the law, and read it (Deut. xvii
18-20). The divine Law is thus in the custody of the priests and the
leaders of the people, whose task it is to impart the written words of
God orally to the rest of the people. Indeed, oral discussion seems to
be the focus of Deut. vi 6-9, whether we take the commands to bind
the words of God to the body and write them on the doorposts as
figurative or literal: "You shall repeatthem to your son; and you shall
speakabout them when you sit in your house and when you go on
the way, and when you lie down and when you get up" (vs. 7). The
"oral text" of the Bible is the living one, at least for the majority of
the people.
Writing is used in the service of the cult in other ways. The priest's
crown has engraved upon it the inscription "Holy to the Lord" (Ex.
xxxix 30). The Chronicler mentions written records of the organization
of the priesthood and the Levites (1 Chron. xxiv 1-6; 2 Chron. xxxv
1-6) as well as a written plan of the temple (1 Chron. xxviii lff.). We
hear of genealogies and registers of priests (Ezra ii 62; Neh. vii 5), lists
of Levites (Neh. xii 22), and a record of the weight of the temple
vessels (Ezra viii 34). The supernatural potency of writing is evident
when the suspected adulteress is made to drink a written curse (Num.
v. 23-4). Here it becomes evident that writing for the ancient Israelite
was more than "just words": it gave a concrete and tangible form to
the terrifying words of the curse. The interpretation of the Gezer Cal-
endar as a blessing tablet is relevant here (see n. 16), as is the writing
of the Lord's wrath against Amalek in a book (Exod. xvii 14-16). A
similar concept, but with empowering consequences, is behind Ezekiel's
swallowing of God's scroll, covered in writing (Ezek. ii 8-10). Finally,
perhaps at least in part connected to the religious powers of writing,
we have funerary inscriptions (e.g. Khirbet el-Qom 1 and 2), and
prayers (e.g. Kh. el-Qom 3).
We have suggested above that those prophets who used writing
came from a background in the literate sections of the community-
priests and the upper class. We have already seen writing used by
these prophets for various means: public display (e.g. Hab. ii 2), prophetic
letters (e.g. Jer. xxix), and writing down (often quite extensive) proph-
ecies (Jer. xxxvi; Dan. vii 1). Ezekiel uses writing also as part of his
message (xxiv 2, xxxvii 16).Jeremiah (of priestly background) uses writ-
ing in a way reminiscent of the priestly curse when he gives a book
with curses against Babylon in it to Seraiah, with instructions to read
it in Babylon and then to symbolize Babylon's sinking by hurling it
418 IAN M. YOUNG
in the river (Jer. li 59-64). Writing was fully integrated by these prophets
into the traditional oral/symbolic ways in which their message was
delivered. Writing could provide greater distance for the spread of the
prophetic word, whilst itself functioning as a powerful symbol. Finally,
late in the biblical period we see the prophetic writings themselves
being studied, and inspiring fresh prophetic insight (Dan. ix 2: study-
ing Jeremiah).
It is in the field of administration again that we have our most fre-
quent attestations of the use of writing. Writing is used for the making
of lists-whether a description of the land (Josh. xviii 8), delivery
records (Samaria Ostraca), or accounts of stores distributed (Arad 1.3).
Writing is used to denote ownership and official measures, for example,
on the many seals, stamps and weights uncovered by archaeology.
Long distance communication is facilitated by letters, either international
(e.g. 2 Kings v. 5-7) or military (e.g. the Lachish letters). Official decrees
could also be written (Isa. x 1). Noteworthy for their absence from
Israel are royal inscriptions glorifying the king, although a commemo-
rative text for some stone masons could be set up (Siloam Tunnel).20
The legal system also used writing, whether it be a judicial plea (Yavneh
Yam ostracon), or an indictment (Job xxxi 35?). Legal documents also
make an appearance, in the case of divorce (Deut. xxiv 1-4) or land
transfer (Jer. xxxii). However, it would be a grave error to think that
these few attestations are the tip of the iceberg revealing a society
where documentation is as ubiquitous as it is in our own. Indeed, the
most efficient record keeper in biblical literature turns out to be God,
who keeps detailed records of the deeds of men, and the names of
those who fear him are written in the book of life (e.g. Isa. iv 3, lxv 6;
Jer. xvii 1, 13; Dan. vii 10, xii 1; Mal. iii 16; Ps. lxix 28, lxxxii 6,
cxxxix 16). Once again, God turns out to be the most efficient user of
written documentation in ancient Israel, and the model administrator.
Finally, the Bible is evidence for the production of literature, albeit
religious literature, produced, we suggest, by the previously mentioned
literate groups in society. Within the Bible we have mentions of the
production of such literature and of other books, no longer extant,
whether a "history"of the reign of Uzziah by Isaiah (2 Chron. xxvi 22),
poetic collections (e.g. Josh. x 13), royal annals (e.g. 1 Kings xiv 19),
20
Note the focus of the text solely on the moment the stone-masons completed the
tunnel, without any mention of the king, the reason for building the tunnel etc., cf.
V. Sasson, "The Siloam Tunnel Inscription", PEQL114 (1982), pp. 111-17.
or laments for the dead kingJosiah (2 Chron. xxxv 25). Surveying the
inscriptions, finally, we find texts which can fit into the definition of
"literature",although it should always be borne in mind that literature
may have borne a "function" rather different from that in the modern
world (e.g. the Gezer Calendar again).
(6) Final Considerations

What has been proposed, therefore, in this article, is that, as a work-
ing hypothesis, we should take it that ancient Israelite scribes, priests
and the upper classes of society had skills in both reading and writing.
The rest of the population in general did not have such skills. The
evidence at our disposal has been interpreted to give no hint that the
"ordinary"Israelite had any literate abilities at all. Certainly, the crafts-
men mentioned in Exodus are evidence of some professional groups
who would have possessed an intermediate level of ability, but the vast
majority of the population should be expected to have been illiterate
throughout the biblical period. This hypothesis has not been arrived
at by interpretation of the written material only. Rather, we have
allowed the biblical and epigraphical sources to speak only in the con-
text of more general theoretical considerations. A number of converging
lines of argument-arguments from comparable cultures, from biblical
and epigraphic sources, and from archaeology-would seem to indicate
that the picture presented here is likely to be basically correct.
It must be emphasized again that this is meant to be only a work-
ing hypothesis, subject to modification in the face of new discoveries.
It has numerous weaknesses, which are due largely to the weakness of
the sources available to us. It is possible, for example, that the focus
of especially the biblical texts on issues to do with the upper echelons
of society has caused those texts to fail to mention other social groups
who had a use for literacy skills. In the case of women, for example,
do we take the scarce mentions of women using literacy skills (Esther,
Jezebel) as evidence of a much reduced female literacy, even among
high-ranking women? Or do we simply explain this as a lack of interest
in the feminine world in the literature in general? Furthermore, it must
be said that the sources are too poor to give a very nuanced picture
of any aspect of ancient Israelite literacy. We are in the dark, for
instance, as to the many shadings of levels of literacy there must have
been in the society. Apart from the case of craftsmen, we have usually
been faced with an either/or choice between no literacy on one side,
420 IAN M. YOUNG
and a high degree of skill in both reading and writing on the other.
Quite regularly in traditional societies, reading is a much more common
skill than writing. Also, it is often important to distinguish the ability
to read different sorts of texts (e.g. formal versus cursive scripts). We
know of later societies where written scripture is prominent where a
relatively high proportion of people have acquired the ability to "read"
the scriptures. What this often means, however, is not the ability to
pick up any text, and understand it at sight. Rather, it relies heavily on
oral memorization of the texts, with the written text functioning more
as a mnemonic aid.21Again, the phenomenon of widespread ability to
read the scriptureswould be more applicable in those periods of Israelite
history when the written word of God was treated with special reverence.
One clear problem with the picture presented here is that it has
usually been forced to take Israelite literacy as if it were a block, a
continuous and unchanging aspect of Israelite life. In fact, one would
surely expect the nature and role of literacy to change over time and
in different geographical and social circumstances. Was the situation
in the northern kingdom, Israel, the same as in the southern kingdom,
Judah, in, say, the 8th century B.C.? Can we be sure that the evidence
of Lachish Letter 3 can be generalized beyond a specific time (c. 600
B.C.), a specific place (Judah), and a specific skill (reading)?These are
some of the tasks facing future research. Greater clarity will be achieved
with the increase of evidence. However, for the present, the hypothesis
that scribes, priests and the upper class formed the literate segment of
ancient Israelite society seems to be the best reading of the evidence.
Israel was therefore a literate society in that the use of writing was
widespread, and was for many a day-to-day part of life. Nevertheless,
the majority of the population had access to the literate world only
through intermediaries.
Appendix:An Applicationof the Model:the Tombof the

Royal Steward(KAI 191)
The Siloam Tomb or Royal Steward inscription from Jerusalem of
c. 700 B.C. reads "This is [the tomb of...]-yahu, who was over the
21 Cf. Thomas
(n. 18), p. 92. S. Levin has made a strong case that this was the
normal means of "reading" any ancient Hebrew text: "The 'qeri' as the Primary Text
of the Bible", (Hebrew) in Hagit 'IvritBe 'Ameriqah(3 vols; Tel Aviv, 1974), 1, pp. 61-
86. Professor Levin was kind enough to supply a copy of the English original.
House.22 There is no silver or gold here but only [his bones] and the
bones of his maidservant with him. Cursed be the man who opens
this" (author'stranslation).Our understandingof the question of Israelite
literacy affects our understandingof this inscription.While most inscribed
curses could be understood more as magical protections rather than
warnings meant to be read,23 the information "there is no silver or
gold here" makes most sense as an attempt to dissuade potential robbers
from making the effort of desecrating the tomb. A similar idea is
expressed in the funerary inscription of the priest Si'-gabbar, from
Nerab, near Aleppo, in approximately the same period (KAI226, lines
6-8): "They (= the family) did not put with me any vessel of silver or
bronze. With my clothes (alone) they put me in order that in the future
my grave would not be dragged away" (author's translation).24
One could take these references as meaning that the average tomb
robber (presumably of low social standing) was expected to be able to
read and understand these (admittedly quite simple) inscriptions. Ac-
cording to our model, however, this would not be a reasonable expec-
tation. Rather, we suggest another way such an inscription would work
in a society without mass literacy. Jerusalem (like Nerab)25was home
for a significant number of priests, i.e., members of the literate class.
Jerusalem, also, was the seat of government, and therefore also had a
higher than normal number of literates from the scribal and noble
classes. Therefore, we should expect a relatively high proportion of lit-
erates (for antiquity) to be in this place. In a society less bombarded
than ours with written material, it is reasonable to suggest that in
22
For a recent discussion of this title see S.C. Layton, "The Steward in Ancient
Israel: A Study of Hebrew ('dser)'al-habbayitin its Near Eastern Setting", JBL 109
(1990), pp. 633-49.
23 For the use of written curses in
predominantly illiterate societies see, for exam-
ple, Harris (n. 12), p. 29 with n. 7. The so-called Ahiram graffito from Byblos (KAI2),
which may be translated as a tomb curse, was buried by the fill of the tomb shaft.
Whether this means that it was intended to be purely magical is uncertain, given the
problem of the dating of the fill of the shaft in relation to the art historical dating of
the Ahiram sarcophagus and the paleographic dating of the two Ahiram inscriptions.
See on this: E. Porada, "Notes on the Sarcophagus of Ahiram", JANES 5 (1973),
pp. 354-65; R. Wallenfels, "Redating the Byblian Inscriptions", JANES 15 (1983),
pp. 79-118.
24
Conveniently, on the Nerab texts: J.C.L. Gibson, Textbookof SyrianSemiticInscrip-
tions II: AramaicInscriptionsincludingInscriptionsin the Dialect of Zenjirli(Oxford, 1975),
pp. 93-8.
25 We
cautiously extend our working model beyond Israel and Judah alone into the
lands of their neighbours.
422 IAN M. YOUNG
antiquity a publicly displayed written text was more interesting than

we should consider it. Writing, also, being connected with the highest
ranks of society, had a greater social prestige than we accord it,26and
hence society in general, whether literate or not, would be interested
in knowing what the mysterious message meant, doubly so if they hap-
pened to be potential robbers investigating a possible target. There is
evidence that it was normal practice in antiquity for people to read
out loud,27and hence interested but illiterate bystanders would be able
to obtain the information presented in the text.28 Therefore, even in
a mostly illiterate society, such an inscription could be a useful ploy
in protecting a tomb against desecration.29
Postscript:This article was completed before the appearance of the

excellent study by Susan Niditch, Oral Worldand WrittenWordAncient
IsraeliteLiterature(Louisville, 1996). Although Niditch does not pursue
the question of the extent of literacy, she presents many insights com-
plementary to the argument given in the present study.
26
See, for example, Harris (n. 12), pp. 90, 212.
27 See recently PJ. Achtemeier, "Omne VerbumSonat: The New Testament and
the Oral Environment of Late Western Antiquity",JBL 109 (1990), pp. 15-17. Although
normal practice, however, it does not seem to have been exclusive practice: F.D.
Gilliard, "More Silent Reading in Antiquity Non OmneVerbum Sonabat",JBL 112 (1993),
pp. 689-94.
28 For examples of such "group readings" of publicly displayed documents in the
Elizabethan age, see K. Thomas, "The Meaning of Literacy in Early Modern England",
in G. Baumann, The WrittenWordLiteracyin Transition(Oxford, 1986), pp. 106-7.
29 It is
interesting to speculate on the defacement of this inscription by a hammer
(N. Avigad, "The Epitaph of a Royal Steward from Siloam Village", IEJ 3 [1953],
p. 137), so that the first (distinctive) part of the tomb owner's name has been removed,
while (most of) its divine element -yahu has been preserved. It has always been tempt-
ing to connect the tomb with King Hezekiah's official Shebna (short for Shebanyahu,
it can be argued-J.T. Willis, "Historical Issues in Isaiah 22, 15-25", Biblica 74 [1993],
p. 62) who is chastised by the prophet Isaiah for building a tomb for himself "on high"
(Isa. xxii 15-25). In favour of the connection are the identity of office ("over the house")
and the mention of the tomb. In any case, it can be argued that the defacement of
the name (even perhaps attempting to preserve the divine element out of respect) was
a deliberate act by a group who considered the tomb with its inscription offensively
ostentatious. Whoever directed the destruction was literate enough to recognize which
part of the inscription to destroy. In view of the argument in this paper, this means
there is a strong likelihood that those authorizing the vandalism were connected with
the highest ranks ofJudean society, which included Isaiah himself.

Israelite Literacy Interpreting The Evid PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Israelite Literacy Interpreting The Evid PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Israelite Literacy: Interpreting the Evidence: Part II

Author(s): Ian M. Young

You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

(a) "Reading"and "writing"

For Part I see VT48 (1998), pp. 239-253.

? Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 1998 XLVIII, 3

5 "A Literate Soldier: Lachish Letter

seen, it was normal for even literate people to be read to in antiquity.

7 P. 87. Pardee's other

Lemaire, translates: "Moreover, whenever any letter (seper)comes to

administrative ties to Jerusalem where residents would have had the

13 For the ascription of Num. v to the "P-document", which is usually assumed to

15J. Goody, Literacyin TraditionalSocieties(Cambridge, 1968), p. 16: "The priest was

Excursus: The Uses of Literacy

(6) Final Considerations

Appendix:An Applicationof the Model:the Tombof the

antiquity a publicly displayed written text was more interesting than

Postscript:This article was completed before the appearance of the

You might also like