Reimagining Hagar: Blackness and Bible (Biblical Refigurations) [Illustrated] 9780198745327, 019874532X

Citation preview

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

Biblical Refigurations

Reimagining Hagar

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

BIBLICAL REFIGURATIONS

General Editors: James Crossley and Francesca Stavrakopoulou This innovative series offers new perspectives on the textual, cultural, and interpretative contexts of particular biblical characters, inviting readers to take a fresh look at the methodologies of Biblical Studies. Individual volumes employ different critical methods including social-scientific criticism, critical theory, historical criticism, reception history, postcolonialism, and gender studies, while subjects include both prominent and lesser known figures from the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

REIMAGINING HAGAR Blackness and Bible NYASHA JUNIOR

1

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

3

Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX DP, United Kingdom Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries © Nyasha Junior  The moral rights of the author have been asserted First Edition published in  Impression:  All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press  Madison Avenue, New York, NY , United States of America British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available Library of Congress Control Number:  ISBN –––– Printed and bound by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR YY Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials contained in any third party website referenced in this work.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

To Jeremy David Schipper who has never asked me to dim my light

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

Acknowledgments

I must thank my students at Howard University School of Divinity for stimulating my thinking on the appropriation of Hagar. During a classroom exercise I showed them European paintings of Sarah, Abraham, and Hagar, and they blurted out, “Why is Hagar a White woman? We all know that she’s Black.” I was surprised because they had not voiced any objection to the skin color or features of other biblical characters such as Adam, Eve, Moses, or Joseph, who were portrayed as Europeans. I began to wonder how they could have arrived at such a definite view of Hagar. I am grateful for their inquisitiveness, which led me to this line of research. As well, I am grateful to my former Howard University colleague Dr. Cain Hope Felder, an esteemed New Testament scholar who has now retired. He welcomed me warmly to the faculty at Howard University School of Divinity. I and many other biblical scholars owe him a debt for his pioneering scholarship. While I was an undergraduate at Georgetown University, I took a very challenging “Blacks in the Ancient Mediterranean” course with the late Dr. Frank Snowden, a classicist at Howard University. He was a scholar and gentleman, and I recall being impressed that he did not rely on translations by others but translated ancient texts himself. Also, I remember being proud to tell him that I had been admited to the MPA program at Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. Although at the time I had no thought of pursuing doctoral work or becoming a biblical scholar, Snowden’s high standards and scholarship influenced my development and led me to my current career and this work. Also while a student Georgetown, I remember hearing whispers of enslaved Africans who were sold by Georgetown University to fund its endowment. At the time, no details were available regarding their fate. Now, there is movement to acknowledge the descendents of the 272 persons who were sold as well as others who were forced to labor at Georgetown. (See slaveryarchive.georgetown.edu and gu272.net.) Like other American institutions, Georgetown was built on a legacy

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

viii Acknowledgments of human bondage on stolen land. Like all Georgetown Hoyas, I have benefitted from this legacy, and I too owe a debt. My research on enslaved persons for this book has made me even more aware of the importance of telling the truth of our heritage and of making amends. I am thankful for the support and encouragement of my Temple University Department of Religion colleagues. I am grateful for helpful comments from the University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia Seminar on Christian Origins. Also, thanks to my virtual friends on social media who have cheered and encouraged me. A collective shout-out goes to Patricia Matthew, Ellen Muehlberger, Zandria Felice Robinson, Stephen Russell, Mark Kelly Tyler, and Fred Ware. Thanks and hugs go to my long-suffering friends James Logan and Bridgett Green. I am forever grateful for the firm foundation of my mother Abbie Gale Junior, my extended family, and my church family at Greater Bethlehem AME Church. They were the first to teach me about Hagar. All biblical translations in this book come from the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) or the King James Version (KJV).

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

Contents

List of Figures

xi

Introduction



. Mother Hagar . Egyptian Hagar

 

. Aunt Hagar . Black Hagar

 

Epilogue



Bibliography Index

 

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

List of Figures

. Giovanni Battista Tiepolo, Hagar and the Angel, c. . Udine, Italy. Palazzo Patriarcale. Photograph by Wolfgang Sauber.



. Jean-Baptiste-Camille Corot, Hagar in the Wilderness, . Metropolitan Museum of Art.



. Edward Sheffield Bartholomew, Hagar and Ishmael, . The Art Institute of Chicago. Photograph by Wuselig. . Edmonia Lewis, Hagar, . Smithsonian American Art Museum. Used by permission.

 

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

Introduction

As a warm-up, stop reading this book for a moment and visualize Moses from the Bible. For many of us of a certain age, we think of Charlton Heston from Cecil B. DeMille’s  classic The Ten Commandments. What if I ask you to visualize Pharaoh from the Moses story? Some of you may think of an animated character and hear the voice of Sir Patrick Stewart from the DreamWorks  film Prince of Egypt. Biblical characters are present within our lives and our culture, and they live in our imagination. Now visualize Hagar of the Bible. Were you thinking of her wearing a head covering and sandals? Were you thinking of a dark-skinned woman? While working on this project, when I mentioned that I was working on Black Hagar, I found that people had one of two reactions. Either they said, “I’ve never heard of that” or “Of course, Hagar is Black.” Among some African American Christians, Hagar is indisputably a Black woman. By “Black,” I mean an understanding of Hagar as related to peoples of the African Diaspora who would be identified as Black within contemporary racial classification schemes in a US context. The understanding of Hagar as a Black woman may strike some as especially curious due to the default Western identification of most biblical characters as White or at least as non-Black. Was it due to an old Negro spiritual? Maybe some long-forgotten early Christian commentary? Whether or not you are familiar with this particular interpretation, the idea of a Black Hagar presents some intriguing questions. Reimagining Hagar seeks to answer two questions: () How did Hagar become Black? and () What purpose did or does that serve? Hagar has become an important figure in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, but in many ways, Hagar is a minor character who appears in only a few scriptural texts. We do not know her age, height, weight, skin color, or hair curl pattern. In Genesis  and , Hagar is an Egyptian, an enslaved woman, a wife, and a mother. She is brought into, runs away

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

from, and is forced out of Abram/Abraham’s household.¹ In Galatians , she is allegorized in contrast to Sarah. In the Qur’an she does not appear by name. Nevertheless, Hagar is a complex character. In the space of only two chapters in Genesis, she is a surrogate to Sarah, a wife of Abraham, a mother to Ishmael, an enslaved woman, an Egyptian woman, a pregnant woman who is told to return to an abusive home, and a banished woman who experiences a theophany in the wilderness. This book offers a reception history that examines interpretations of Hagar with a focus on treatments of Hagar as a Black woman particularly among African Americans. Reception history within biblical studies considers the use, impact, and influence of biblical texts and looks at a necessarily small number of points within the long history of the transmission of biblical texts.² In particular, this book considers how interpreters engage markers of difference, including gender, ethnicity, status, and their intersections in their portrayals of Hagar. Reimagining Hagar illustrates that interpretations of biblical Hagar as Black emphasize elements of Hagar’s story in order to connect her with or disassociate her from particular groups. In addition, it reveals that references to Black Hagar are not always allusions to biblical Hagar. One might think that the story of an enslaved Egyptian woman such as Hagar would also resonate with African Americans, but biblical Hagar is not commonly engaged in African American biblical interpretation prior to the twentieth century. Biblical characters such as Mary, Martha, Daniel, and even Balaam’s talking ass found their place within this tradition, but not Hagar.³ Furthermore, other biblical characters would seem to offer easier connections. For instance, Miriam, a Hebrew enslaved woman born in Egypt, might provide a more obvious link to African American women’s experiences. Yet, she is not generally interpreted as Black. Due to the variety of elements of her story, Hagar is an excellent prism for interpreters who have concerns regarding inclusion and exclusion. Although other biblical texts include conflict, rivalry, arguments, and warfare, Genesis  and  includes tension between multiple characters and highlights questions of ethnicity, age, fertility, inheritance, obedience, and more. Because Hagar’s story includes so many different issues and relationships, she has captured the imagination of countless writers and artists, including those who identify her as Black.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

Introduction



The story of Hagar as Black is not a single, linear narrative. This book covers a limited selection of interpretations and is not intended to be a representative sample or comprehensive collection of interpretations of Hagar throughout the history of biblical interpretation. Also, I have not attempted to construct a tradition history of biblical Hagar, which would investigate the transmission of oral traditions and written texts that contribute to the final canonical form of the text.⁴ Furthermore, since Hagar is a literary character, we cannot recreate a hypothetical, historical Hagar in order to speculate regarding her status as an enslaved women or the possible physical features of a Late Bronze Age Egyptian woman.⁵ Finally, this book does not offer a reading of the Hagar narratives from a particular contextual perspective. Instead, I am concerned with determining how and why Black Hagar emerged and developed. I am not attempting to establish the precise origins of the idea of Hagar as Black as much as I want to try to untangle some of the knots in this thread of interpretation. As a reception history that engages African American biblical interpretation, this book builds on the work of African American classicists and biblical scholars.⁶ Hebrew Bible scholar Randall Bailey outlines four major tasks of African American biblical scholarship, including: () arguing for the African presence in biblical texts; () identifying and responding to White supremacist interpretations; () cultural-historical interpretation that attends to the history of biblical interpretation within Black communities; and () ideological criticism that uses the African American context as a reading strategy.⁷ This book fits within his third category in that it offers a history of interpretation, but it expands beyond interpretation among Black communities to consider how various interpreters have identified Hagar as Black. Since our quest for Black Hagar is a cross-disciplinary effort that covers a lot of ground, this Introduction supplies key information needed as background for our quest to understand how Hagar becomes Black and what purpose it serves. It explains key terminology related to race, ethnicity, and color. It provides a brief discussion of Blackness and biblical characters and describes key elements of the African American vernacular tradition. Finally, it offers an overview of this volume.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

Race, ethnicity, and color Since race is an integral part of this project, it is important to define key terms and provide background material that will inform our discussion of how and why Hagar becomes Black. “Race” refers to efforts to classify and divide humanity by physical and biological categories that stem from one’s genetic ancestry.⁸ Despite the lack of biological basis for racial categories, race continues to serve as a persistent although changing social construct.⁹ Notions of race often rely on phenotypes, which are observable physical traits such as eye color and hair color as well as perceived behavioral traits such as intelligence. Attempts to identify ancient peoples using modern notions of biological race are anachronistic since race as a strict biological category was not known in the ancient world.¹⁰ That is, later efforts to group people into biologically-based racial categories are not part of the ancient world’s understandings for categorizing different groups of people. Ethnicity refers to a dynamic and flexible group identity that involves shared genealogy, values, beliefs, behaviors, experiences, traits, and traditions.¹¹ Religion, language, history, customs, clothing, and physical features are among the real and imagined social and biological markers used in constructing boundaries that reflect notions of “us” and “them.” In the ancient world, ethnicity, as an element of individual and collective identity, was a recognized category for constructing boundaries of in-group and out-group members that distinguished insiders and outsiders. Part of the construction of an insider group may require an oppositional view that supports efforts to distinguish “us” from “them.” These real and imagined ethnic differences were not rigid but fluid and negotiated notions that changed over time. Ancient constructions of ethnicity differed among various peoples.¹² Neither race nor ethnicity is “natural” or neutral, and there is nothing “natural” or neutral regarding the use of these distinctions in determining and distributing power and position. Ancient peoples noted geographic and linguistic distinctiveness among different ethnicities.¹³ For instance, the Egyptian hymn “The Great Hymn to the Aten” (fourteenth century ) acknowledges differences among peoples under the creator Aten. It reads:

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

Introduction



Their tongues differ in speech Their characters likewise Their skins are distinct For you distinguished the peoples.¹⁴

In Histories, the fifth-century  historian Herodotus distinguishes Greeks from “barbarians,” those who spoke other languages. He identifies Greeks as “being of the same blood and tongue, having in common temples of the gods and sacrifices and shared customs.”¹⁵ Thus, he regards the Greeks as a people with shared ancestry, language, religious practices, and social behaviors. Within biblical texts, ethnicity is a recognized category of difference in both positive and negative ways.¹⁶ In the Hebrew Bible, ethnic difference is especially evident as the Israelites encounter and “other” various peoples.¹⁷ The Israelites consider themselves to be distinctive among the peoples of the earth in their covenant relationship with their god (Deut. :). The ritual observation of the Passover involves both the “alien” and the “native” (Exod. :, ). Although both the Gileadites and the Ephriamites are Israelites, they have an inter-tribal ethnic conflict and distinguish one tribe from another by their ability or inability to pronounce the word “Shibboleth” (Hebrew šibbōlet and sibbōlet in Judg. :–). Hebrew Bible texts identify non-Israelite groups, including the incestuous Moabites and Ammonites (Gen. :–); the “uncircumcised” Philistines (Judg. :); and the monstrous Egyptians (Ezek. :). The Hebrew Bible includes concerns regarding and prohibitions against intermarriage with other peoples (Gen. :; Deut. :; Ezra :) as well as instances of intermarriage (Ruth :; Ezra :). In the New Testament, Jews and Greeks are contrasted as different groups (Gal. :), as are barbarians and Scythians (Col. :). Numerous groups are identified by their geographic locations, including Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and others (Acts :–).¹⁸ “Black” was not a racial category in and of itself in the ancient world, but ancient peoples recognized differences in physical features, including skin color and hair texture.¹⁹ Such differences were viewed both positively and negatively as well as in neutral descriptions. For instance, the Egyptian Book of Gates (sixteenth to eleventh century ) is a funerary text that discusses the inhabitants of the underworld along with geographic and skin color distinctions. It reads, “Four

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

groups, each group containing four men. The first are Reth, the second are Aamu, the third are Nehesu, and the fourth are Themehu. They are Egyptians, the Aamu are dwellers in the deserts to the east and north-east of Egypt, the Nehesu are the black races and Negroes, and the Themehu are the fair-skinned Libyans.”²⁰ Herodotus identifies the Colchians as Egyptians because they are “dark-skinned and wooly-haired” but admits “though that indeed counts for nothing, since other peoples are, too.”²¹ Herodotus acknowledges hair texture and skin color in his description but connects the Colchians, Egyptians, and Ethiopians primarily due to their practice of circumcision. Pseudo-Aristotle’s Physiognomics (third century ) connects physical features with character or personality. It argues, “Too black a hue marks the coward, as witness Egyptians and Ethiopians.”²² Differences among people were also attributed to their environments. For example, in his discussion of the Nile River, Herodotus explains that the people living on the Nile are “of a black colour by reason of the burning heat.”²³ The environmental theory of color difference is also mentioned by Pliny the Elder (first century ): Æthiopians are scorched by their vicinity to the sun’s heat, and they are born, like persons who have been burned, with the beard and hair frizzled, while, in the opposite and frozen parts of the earth, there are nations with white skins and long light hair. The latter are savage from the inclemency of the climate, while the former are dull from its variableness.²⁴

While ancient peoples acknowledge ethnic difference, including skin color differences, color terminology within ancient literature served several different functions. As in our contemporary period, color symbolism was prevalent in the ancient world. The color white was associated with light and day, while the color black was associated with darkness and night. Although such mentions of color were not related to skin color, the association of white as positive and black as negative later became linked to skin color. For instance, Plutarch’s Brutus (second century ) mentions that an Ethiopian is killed as Cassius and Brutus go into battle because the soldiers regard him as an ominous sign.²⁵ In addition to its descriptive use regarding skin color, “blackness” also functioned symbolically and rhetorically within ancient discourse. Furthermore, both ancients and moderns are inconsistent in their use of “Black” in referring to ancient peoples. In her extensive study of

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

Introduction



Blackness and ethnic difference, New Testament scholar Gay Bryon identifies three rhetorical categories regarding Egyptians, Ethiopians, and Blacks in non-Christian literature, including: geopolitical identification; moral-spiritual characterization; and descriptive differentiation.²⁶ Inaccurate and inconsistent translations regarding terms for Egypt, Egyptians, Ethiopia, and Ethiopians have complicated efforts to discuss ethnicity in academia, especially across disciplines. Furthermore, the widespread use of “black” to group together various ethnicities and the mapping of modern racial categories onto ancient peoples have contributed to acrimonious scholarly debates regarding Blackness in antiquity.²⁷ Ancient peoples made color distinctions in both neutral, positive, and negative ways, but those distinctions do not align with contemporary racialized categories. Biblical texts have little physical description of characters, but such texts include both realistic and non-realistic physical descriptions of characters that include coloring. One of the most well-known instances is in Song of Songs. The female speaker declares, “I am black and beautiful” (Song :). Here, the speaker compares her coloring to the “tents of Kedar.”²⁸ Another famous instance is the rhetorical question “Can Ethiopians (NRSV; Hebrew ‘Cushites,’ kûšî ) change their skin or leopards their spots? Then also you can do good who are accustomed to do evil” ( Jer. :). In this text, God addresses Jerusalem and indicates that she will not change just as skin color or animal skin print would not change.²⁹ Also, Esau is the first-born twin brother of Jacob. At birth, Esau is “red” and hairy (Gen. :).³⁰ When David is selected to be king, he is described as “ruddy” with “beautiful eyes” and “handsome” ( Sam. :). In addition to these physical descriptions, biblical texts include poetic descriptions that mention color. For example, in Song of Songs, the lover is described poetically as having hair “black as a raven” (Song :) and eyes “like doves beside springs of water” (Song :). Yet, the poem’s sensual description of the lover does not provide clear details about his appearance. Likewise, the book of Revelation describes the Son of Man with this depiction: “His head and his hair were white as white wool, white as snow; his eyes were like a flame of fire, his feet were like burnished bronze, refined as in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of many waters” (Rev. :–). This awe-inspiring description sounds fierce, but it does not give the reader a sense for his human-like appearance.³¹

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

Blackness and biblical characters Despite the lack of physical description in the text, some biblical characters have become identified as Black or linked with Blackness. One of the most prominent examples is the biblical character Cain. In Genesis , after Cain kills his brother Abel, God sets a mark on Cain, and Cain is cursed as a fugitive and a wanderer. The text does not offer any details regarding the “mark of Cain” and does not explain if the mark appears physically on Cain. Since at least the sixth century , some have interpreted this mark to refer to darkened skin. Historian David M. Goldenberg argues that this interpretation, which appears in an Armenian “Adam-book,” may stem from the Peshitta, the Syriac translation of the Bible. The Syriac root kmr means “to be black” and also “to be sad.” These two meanings may have led to a view of Cain’s mark as darkness.³² Also, Ephrem the Syrian offers an interpretation of Cain and Abel as symbols of darkness and light respectively, which may have influenced the view of Cain’s mark.³³ In Jewish midrash, Genesis Rabbah interprets Cain’s reaction to God’s preference of Abel’s offering as Cain’s face becoming blackened like a firebrand.³⁴ In later periods, some pro-slavery advocates used this text to argue that the mark designated dark skin, which they associated with Africans. Thus, they regarded enslaved Africans as cursed. The Pearl of Great Price, one of the canonical works in the Church of the Latter-Day Saints, more directly links Cain with blackness. Moses :– reads: And it came to pass that Enoch talked with the Lord; and he said unto the Lord: Surely Zion shall dwell in safety forever. But the Lord said unto Enoch: Zion have I blessed, but the residue of the people have I cursed. And it came to pass that the Lord showed unto Enoch all the inhabitants of the earth; and he beheld, and lo, Zion, in process of time, was taken up into heaven. And the Lord said unto Enoch: Behold mine abode forever. And Enoch also beheld the residue of the people which were the sons of Adam; and they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it was the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not place among them.

In addition, in the Book of Mormon of the Church of the Latter-Day Saints, the Lamanites, whom some Mormons identify with Native Americans, were cursed with black skin ( Nephi :–). Under Brigham Young, the “curse of Cain” was linked to prohibitions

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

Introduction



against Black men serving as priests, but contemporary leadership of the Church of Latter-Day Saints has disavowed their previous position.³⁵ The “mark of Cain” was linked with the so-called “curse of Ham,” an interpretation of Genesis :– that argues for the divine sanction of slavery.³⁶ After the flood, Noah plants a vineyard and later drinks wine. While Noah is naked in his tent, Ham, one of Noah’s sons, sees his father and tells his two brothers, Shem and Japheth. While walking backward, they cover their father without seeing him. When Noah awakens, inexplicably he knows what Ham has done to him. The biblical text does not give details regarding Ham’s specific transgression. Noah does not curse Ham, but rather, he curses Canaan, the son of Ham, by saying “Cursed be Canaan; lowest of slaves shall he be to his brothers” (Gen. :). Then, Noah blesses his other sons while reiterating his curse of Canaan. He says, “Blessed by the Lord my God be Shem; and let Canaan be his slave” (Gen. :). Also, he prays, “May God make space for Japheth, and let him live in the tents of Shem; and let Canaan be his slave” (Gen. :). Noah makes Canaan subordinate to his other sons.³⁷ In texts that follow this incident, Noah’s sons become the progenitors of humanity after the flood, and in this family tree, the descendants of Ham are “Cush, Egypt, Put, and Canaan” (Gen. :).³⁸ The text does not link Ham or Canaan with darkened skin but with African people. In connection with the “mark of Cain,” pro-slavery advocates employed this text to argue that the African descendants of Ham were destined to be enslaved. Thus, they understood the enslavement of African peoples to be biblically justifiable. Some biblical characters have become linked with Blackness through the work of classicists and biblical scholars who have sought to offer a corrective to the largely Anglo and Eurocentric disciplines of classics and biblical studies.³⁹ As I discuss in Chapter , Charles Copher, Cain Hope Felder, and other African American biblical scholars have worked to reclaim the African presence in biblical texts. These and other scholars identified anti-Blackness and racism in academia as contributing to the lack of attention to Africa as well as the de-Africanization of biblical peoples and lands. In addition, they draw attention to how Eurocentric scholarship has contributed to the marginalization of Black Africans through the movement away from

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

linguistic and geographic designations to notions of culture and race.⁴⁰ Thus, Egypt, Egyptians, King Tutankhamen, Cleopatra, and other Egyptians are popularly regarded as “not Black.”⁴¹ African American biblical scholars were not interpreting selected biblical characters as “Black” as much as they were attempting to correct Eurocentric perspectives that erased the African presence within biblical texts. For instance, it was not their argument that Jesus was Black but that Jesus was not a White European male with blue eyes and blond hair.⁴² Their aim was to counter the prevailing view of White as normative. Yet, linking characters with Africa has sometimes resulted in associating these characters with Blackness. Within their scholarship, these interpreters pointed out the African geographic locations of some characters. The Queen of Sheba ( Kings :–;  Chron. :–) visits Solomon from the kingdom of Sabah, which is located in present day South Arabia.⁴³ Due in part to later traditions of her in the Qur’an and in Ethiopian traditions, she is often regarded as African and/or Black. Other characters treated as such include the unnamed Ethiopian Eunuch who worked for Queen Candace (Acts :); the Cushite woman, the controversial choice of wife by Moses (Num. :); the Midianite Zipporah, who is Moses’s wife (Exod. :–; :–); Nimrod (Gen. :–;  Chron. :); and Tirhakah, king of Cush ( Kings :; Isa. :). Again, these characters are not identified as “Black” within the text, and scholars did not seek to identify them as Black in contrast to White. The racial category of “Black” was not available to the ancient writers. In fact, the notion of “Africa” as a continent did not exist for ancient peoples and changed over time. The term may be related to the “Afri” peoples of northern Africa. Romans designated an area of Africa west of Egypt as Africa Proconsularis following the defeat of Carthage, and later understood “Africa” to refer to some lands west of Egypt. Eventually, the continent was known as “Africa.”⁴⁴ Nevertheless, eventually acknowledging this Africanness became associated with racialized Blackness. In general, biblical Hagar was not typically identified as a Black woman within early modern biblical scholarship in part because modern racial taxonomies had not yet become popularized. Still, even with later contemporary biblical scholarship, many scholars do not connect Hagar’s origins in Egypt to notions of Blackness. As discussed in Chapter , Egyptians are often not regarded as “Black,” and Egypt is

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

Introduction



often separated from “Black” Africa. Following Napoleon’s  expedition to Egypt, greater interest in Egypt and archaeology led to the development of studies of what was called the “Orient,” which created a divide between the “East” and the “West.” This notion of the Orient separated Egypt and northern Africa from the rest of the African continent that became “sub-Saharan Africa.” Europeans valued and prized Greco-Roman societies and developed interest in these “Oriental” societies, including Egyptian and Arabian cultures. The modern studies of archaeology, philology, and Egyptology developed out of these interests.⁴⁵ Notions of “Black Africa” or the contemporary notion of a “sub-Saharan” Africa stem from efforts to define Arabs and Northern Africans as non-Europeans but also as unlike “Black” Africans.⁴⁶ In this way, scholars in classics and biblical studies frequently separated Egypt and Northern Africa from the remainder of Africa. Such work has also been used to buttress notions of racial hierarchy and to support of White supremacist positions.⁴⁷

African American vernacular tradition African American biblical interpretation includes those outside of the academy. Traditions about Hagar are not found solely within standard biblical commentaries and academic journals. In order to discuss the emergence of Black Hagar within African American biblical interpretation, we must acknowledge the importance of the African American vernacular tradition and look for Hagar within it. This vernacular tradition refers to songs, stories, sermons, and other forms of cultural production that were created and transmitted orally within African American communities and that were not designed for circulation outside of those communities.⁴⁸ This tradition engages biblical texts, but it did not quote biblical texts as much as it used biblical characters, imagery, and themes that were retold and incorporated into oral tradition. African Americans created imaginative and subversive interpretations that linked biblical narratives to their experiences. The Exodus story of escape from Egyptian enslavement has played a significant role within African American biblical interpretation and connects with our quest to understand the emergence of Black Hagar.⁴⁹

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

The Negro spiritual “O Mary Don’t You Weep” is part of the extensive African American vernacular tradition. It includes references to the Exodus story and combines biblical texts and characters to provide comfort to those who are mourning. It exclaims, “Pharaoh’s army drowned in the Red Sea / O Mary don’t you weep / Tell Martha not to moan.”⁵⁰ Pharaoh’s army refers to the Egyptians who were drowned during the miraculous Exodus. Mary and Martha refer to the sisters of Lazarus who mourn his death prior to Jesus’s resurrection of their brother. While the Exodus story and the gospel accounts of Lazarus are not an obvious pairing, they are joined here to celebrate the fact that God can bring about the miraculous, including liberation from enslavement and liberation from the grave. One of the most famous spirituals is “Go Down, Moses” with lyrics that retell the biblical story.⁵¹ When Israel was in Egypt’s land, Let my people go; Oppressed so hard they could not stand, Let my people go. Thus saith the Lord, bold Moses said, Let my people go; If not I’ll smite your first born dead, Let my people go. The Lord told Moses what to do, Let my people go; To lead the children of Israel through, Let my people go. Chorus Go down, Moses, ’Way down in Egypt’s land. Tell ole Pharaoh, Let my people go.

This is a retelling of the biblical Exodus story in which the enslaved Hebrews are liberated from Egypt by Moses through the miraculous power of their God. On one level, to sing of the Exodus from Egypt was to celebrate the liberation of the Hebrews from Pharaoh, but on a figurative level, it was a charge against slaveholders who enslaved African peoples. This becomes more obvious in the nickname given to Harriet Tubman (born Araminta Ross) who was called “Moses”

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

Introduction



for liberating enslaved persons and leading them to freedom in the North.⁵² David Walker provides another example of the importance of the Exodus story. Walker was a free African American abolitionist who published Walker’s Appeal in .⁵³ In this document, he demands an end to enslavement and counters charges of Black inferiority. Also, he compares the Egyptian oppression of the Hebrews to the White Christian oppression of enslaved Africans. He contends that chattel slavery of the Americas was more brutal than ancient slavery in other regions. Walker discusses biblical texts within his work to emphasize how Egyptians were less cruel and more humane than American slavers. He notes that despite the enslavement of the Hebrews, Pharaoh’s daughter adopts a Hebrew child and names him Moses. Also, he points out that Joseph, a Hebrew who is enslaved by Egyptians, eventually marries into Pharaoh’s family. Walker points out that Egyptians regarded the Hebrews as human, while some in the US claimed that enslaved Africans were not human. He asks, “Have they not, after having reduced us to the deplorable condition of slaves under their feet, held us up as descending originally from the tribes of Monkeys or Orang-Outangs?”⁵⁴ Overview This book investigates the question of how, when, and why some interpreters choose to identify biblical Hagar as a Black woman. Chapter  examines the depiction of Hagar in the Hebrew Bible and in later Jewish, Christian, and Islamic texts. These scriptural traditions provide the foundations for later reinterpretations of Hagar. Since one might expect interpreters to connect Hagar to US enslavement, Chapter  explores the interpretation of Hagar in nineteenth-century pro- and anti-slavery literature in the United States. Chapter  provides a major clue to understanding Hagar’s Blackness through the development of an Aunt Hagar tradition within American culture. Chapter  puts the pieces together and solves the mystery of Hagar’s Blackness by untangling the growth of a biblical Black Hagar tradition and its connection with the Aunt Hagar tradition. The Epilogue offers my reflections on being a Black woman biblical scholar and writing on Blackness and the Bible.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

Notes . God changes Abram’s name to Abraham in Gen : and changes Sarai’s name to Sarah in Gen :. For the sake of clarity, unless I am referring specifically to events within Gen , I will refer to these characters as Abraham and Sarah. . For an overview and critique of reception history within biblical studies, see Timothy Beal, “Reception History and Beyond: Toward the Cultural History of Scriptures,” Biblical Interpretation  (): –, and William John Lyons and Emma England, eds., Reception History and Biblical Studies: Theory and Practice (New York: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, ). . Katherine Clay Bassard, Transforming Scriptures: African American Women Writers and the Bible (Athens: University of Georgia Press, ). . For a helpful description of tradition-historical criticism, see Joel S. Baden, “Tradition-Historical Criticism,” in Oxford Encyclopedia of Biblical Interpretation, ed. Stephen L. McKenzie (Oxford: Oxford University Press, ). http://www.oxfordreference.com.libproxy.temple.edu/view/ ./acref:obso/../acref--e-. . Forensic anthropologists have attempted facial reconstructions based on skeletal remains. See Caroline Wilkerson, “Facial Reconstruction: Anatomical Art or Artistic Anatomy,” Journal of Anatomy , no.  (): –. . For example, see Michael Joseph Brown, Blackening of the Bible: The Aims of African American Biblical Scholarship, ed. Anthony B. Pinn and Victor Anderson (Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, ); Vincent L. Wimbush, The Bible and African Americans: A Brief History (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, ); Tracey Lorraine Walters, African American Literature and the Classicist Tradition: Black Women Writers from Wheatley to Morrison (New York: Palgrave MacMillan, ); and William Sanders Scarborough and Michele V. Ronnick, The Works of William Sanders Scarborough: Black Classicist and Race Leader (New York: Oxford University Press, ). Also, see the resources available at the website Twelve Black Classicists by Michele Valerie Ronnick: http://www. langlab.wayne.edu/mvr/black_classicists/. On African American appropriation of Nimrod, see Anthony B. Pinn and Allen Dwight Callahan, African American Religious Life and the Story of Nimrod (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, ). . Randall C. Bailey, “Academic Biblical Interpretation among African Americans in the United States,” in African Americans and the Bible: Sacred Texts and Social Textures, ed. Vincent L. Wimbush (New York: Continuum, ), –.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

Introduction



. On racial classification, see Michael Omi and Howard Winant, Racial Formation in the United States, rd ed. (New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group, ); Theodore Allen, The Invention of the White Race, nd ed., vol. : Racial Oppression and Social Control (New York: Verso, ); and Theodore Allen, The Invention of the White Race, nd ed., vol. : The Origin of Racial Oppression in Anglo-America (New York: Verso, ). For an interactive graphic on changing racial categories in the US census, see Pew Research Center http://www.pewsocialtrends. org/interactives/multiracial-timeline/. . Robert W. Sussman, The Myth of Race: The Troubling Persistence of an Unscientific Idea (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, ). . Scholars differ as to whether race is a pre-modern category. On racism in antiquity, see Benjamin H. Isaac, The Invention of Racism in Classical Antiquity (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, ). On race in the medieval period, see Geraldine Heng, “The Invention of Race in the European Middle Ages I: Race Studies, Modernity, and the Middle Ages,” Literature Compass , no.  (): –, and Geraldine Heng, “The Invention of Race in the European Middle Ages II: Locations of Medieval Race,” Literature Compass , no.  (): –. On race and biblical studies, see Rodney S. Sadler, Jr., Can a Cushite Change His Skin?: An Examination of Race, Ethnicity, and Othering in the Hebrew Bible (New York: T&T Clark International, ). For a bibliography on race and ethnicity in antiquity, see the Classics at the Intersections blog: https:// rfkclassics.blogspot.com/p/bibliography-for-race-and-ethnicity-in.html. . It is beyond the scope of this work to address the voluminous body of literature on ancient notions of ethnicity. On ethnicity and the Bible, see Katherine M. Hockey and David G. Horrell, eds., Ethnicity, Race, and Religion: Identities and Ideologies in Early Jewish and Christian Texts, and in Modern Biblical Interpretation (London: T&T Clark, ); Mark G. Brett, ed., Ethnicity and the Bible, Biblical Interpretation Series, vol.  (New York: Brill, ), ; and Ann E. Killebrew, Biblical Peoples and Ethnicity: An Archaeological Study of Egyptians, Canaanites, Philistines, and Early Israel (– B.C.E.), ed. Andrew G. Vaughn (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, ). . On race, ethnicity, and genetics, see Race, Ethnicity, and Genetics Working Group, “The Use of Racial, Ethnic, and Ancestral Categories in Human Genetics Research,” American Journal of Human Genetics , no.  (): –. . Ton Derks and Nico Roymans, Ethnic Constructs in Antiquity: The Role of Power and Tradition, Amsterdam Archaeological Studies  (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, ) and Jeremy McInerney, A Companion

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi



.

. .

.

. .

. . . . . . . .

Reimagining Hagar to Ethnicity in the Ancient Mediterranean (Chichester: Wiley Blackwell, ). Miriam Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature: A Book of Readings,  ed., Vol. : The New Kingdom (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, ), –. This Egyptian hymn is often compared to Psalm . Herodotus, Histories, :. See Kenton L. Sparks, Ethnicity and Identity in Ancient Israel: Prolegomena to the Study of Ethnic Sentiments and Their Expression in the Hebrew Bible (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, ) and Brett, Ethnicity and the Bible. For archaeological views on the distinctiveness of the Israelites as compared to the Egyptians, Canaanites, Philistines, and others, see Killebrew, Biblical Peoples and Ethnicity. See various essays in Ehud Ben Zvi and Diana Vikander Edelman, eds., Imagining the Other and Constructing Israelite Identity in the Early Second Temple Period, Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies  (New York: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, ). Luke T. Johnson, “The New Testament’s Anti-Jewish Slander and the Conventions of Ancient Polemic,” Journal of Biblical Literature , no.  (): –. For a brief discussion of ethnicity and questions of race with a helpful bibliography, see Jeremy McInerney, “Ethnicity: An Introduction,” in A Companion to Ethnicity in the Ancient Mediterranean (Chichester: Wiley Blackwell, ), –. Egyptian Book of Gates, chapter , The Gate of Teka-Hra, the fifth division of the Tuat. Herodotus, Histories .. Aristotle, Physiognomics, chapter . Herodotus, Histories . Pliny the Elder, The Natural History .. Plutarch, Brutus .. Gay L. Byron, Symbolic Blackness and Ethnic Difference in Early Christian Literature (New York: Routledge, ). For a sample of this debate, see Martin Bernal, Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, ); Jacques Berlinerblau, Heresy in the University: The Black Athena Controversy and the Responsibilities of American Intellectuals (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, ); and Martin Bernal and David Chioni Moore, Black Athena Writes Back: Martin Bernal Responds to His Critics (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, ).

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

Introduction



. The tents would have been made of animal skins for Bedouin tribes. She is an agricultural worker in the vineyard and has been in the direct sunlight (:). On Song of Songs, see J. Cheryl Exum, Song of Songs: A Commentary (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, ). . Sadler, Can a Cushite Change His Skin? . The Hebrew name Esau (ʿēśāw) forms a wordplay with the Hebrew term “hairy” (śēʿār). Also, the descendants of Esau are from Edom which is another wordplay as it means “red” (êdôm) (Gen. :). . Some music lovers may be familiar with this text through the song “ Deaths” on the “Black Messiah” album by D’Angelo and the Vanguard. The song includes audio of “The Origin of Jesus Christ: Myth or Reality,” which features a debate between Khalid Abdul Muhammad and Anthony Hilder. Muhammad offers his view of the Africanness of Jesus in contrast to the Eurocentric view of Jesus portrayed as a White European. . On misunderstandings of the use of this text, see Rebecca Alpert, “Translating Rabbinic Texts on the Curse of Ham: What we Learn from Charles Copher and His Critics,” in Re-Presenting Texts: Jewish and Black Biblical Interpretation, ed. W. David Nelson and Rivka Ulmer (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, ), –. . David M. Goldenberg, The Curse of Ham: Race and Slavery in Early Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, ), –. . Genesis Rabbah :. . “Race and the Priesthood,” https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-thepriesthood?lang=eng. . Sylvester A. Johnson, The Myth of Ham in Nineteenth-Century American Christianity: Race, Heathens, and the People of God (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, ); David Brion Davis, Inhuman Bondage: The Rise and Fall of Slavery in the New World (Oxford: Oxford University Press, ); and David M. Whitford, The Curse of Ham in the Early Modern Era: The Bible and the Justifications for Slavery (Farnham, UK: Ashgate ). . Stacy Nicole Davis, This Strange Story: Jewish and Christian Interpretation of the Curse of Canaan from Antiquity to  (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, ). . Theories regarding the existence of biological races supported modern classifications of different human beings into racial groups and contributed to justifications of slavery, imperialism, and racial discrimination. See Allen, The Invention of the White Race. . On African American biblical interpretation, see Randall C. Bailey, Yet with a Steady Beat: Contemporary U.S. Afrocentric Biblical Interpretation,

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi



. .

. . .

. .

.

.

Reimagining Hagar Society of Biblical Literature Semeia Studies  (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, ); Wimbush, The Bible and African Americans: A Brief History; Randall C. Bailey and Jacquelyn Grant, eds., The Recovery of Black Presence: An Interdisciplinary Exploration: Essays in Honor of Dr. Charles B. Copher (Nashville: Abingdon Press, ); and Brown, Blackening of the Bible. Robert A. Bennett Jr., “Africa and the Biblical Period,” Harvard Theological Review  (): –. See Sharon Begley, Farai Chideya, and Larry Wilson, “Out of Egypt, Greece,” Newsweek , no.  (September , ): –. On the King Tut exhibit at the Franklin Institute Science Museum in Philadelphia: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=. On racialized discourse and racializing Jesus, see Shawn Kelley, Racializing Jesus: Race, Ideology, and the Formation of Modern Biblical Scholarship (London: Routledge, ). Annette Reed, “The Queen of Sheba in History and Legend,” last modified April , , https://bit.ly/GTfYsN For a brief discussion on Africa and biblical studies, see Rodney S. Sadler, Jr., “The Place and Role of Africa and African Imagery in the Bible,” in True to Our Native Land: An African American New Testament Commentary, ed. Brian K. Blount et al. (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, ), –. For a classic treatment on the development of “Oriental” Studies and Orientalism, see Edward W. Said, Orientalism (New York: Vintage Books, ). In the US, various ethnic groups seeking to assimilate often distance themselves from Blackness and situate themselves as White or in proximity to Whiteness. See Noel Ignatiev, How the Irish Became White (New York: Routledge, ); Nell Irvin Painter, The History of White People (New York: W. W. Norton, ); David R. Roediger, Working Toward Whiteness: How America’s Immigrants Became White: The Strange Journey from Ellis Island to the Suburbs (New York: Basic Books, ); and Ian Haney-López, White by Law: The Legal Construction of Race, rev. ed. (New York: New York University Press, ). Sarah Bond, “Why we Need to Start Seeing the Classical World in Color,” Hyperallergenic, last modified June , : https://hyperallergic.com/ /why-we-need-to-start-seeing-the-classical-world-in-color/; Bond received death threats for her work on color in the classical world: https:// www.insidehighered.com/news////classicist-finds-herself-targetonline-threats-after-article-ancient-statues. Lawrence W. Levine, Black Culture and Black Consciousness: AfroAmerican Folk Thought from Slavery to Freedom, th anniversary ed.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 29/4/2019, SPi

Introduction

.

. . . .

.



(Oxford: Oxford University Press, ). For a thorough annotated bibliography, see “African American Vernacular Tradition,” Oxford Bibliographies, ./OBO/-. On the importance of the Exodus narrative in African American biblical interpretation, see Herbert Robinson Marbury, Pillars of Cloud and Fire: The Politics of Exodus in African American Biblical Interpretation (New York: New York University Press, ). For a classic rendition, listen to the Swan Silvertones: https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=lMvFKpqnsWU. Hugo Frey, A Collection of  Selected Famous Negro Spirituals, Frances G. Spencer Collection of American Popular Sheet Music; . http:// digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/ref/collection/fa-spnc/id/. Catherine Clinton, Harriet Tubman: The Road to Freedom (Boston: Little, Brown, ). David Walker, Walker’s Appeal, in Four Articles; Together with a Preamble, to the Coloured Citizens of the World, but in Particular, and very Expressly, to those of the United States of America, Written in Boston, State of Massachusetts, September , , rd ed. (Boston: David Walker, ). http://docsouth.unc.edu/nc/walker/walker.html. Walker, Walker’s Appeal, .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

1 Mother Hagar

Hagar is in some respects a well-known character, since she is recognized as the mother of Ishmael within Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Yet, Hagar appears only in three Hebrew Bible texts (Gen. :–; :–; :) and once in the New Testament (Gal. ). While she is in the Hadith, the Qur’an does not mention her by name. This chapter provides a survey of texts on Hagar in the Hebrew Bible, the New Testament, and selected Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical and non-biblical texts. These texts do not offer any physical description of Hagar, but they form the foundation for interpretations of Hagar in later periods. In addition, this chapter highlights how early Jewish, Christian, and Muslim interpretations engage markers of difference, including gender, ethnicity, and status, especially in contrasting Hagar with other characters. These early treatments use Hagar’s distinctiveness to accentuate and rationalize religious and ethnic difference and to construct relationships and genealogies that identify Hagar as the mother of Ishmael and progenitor of a people. This connection to Hagar as a mother and as part of Abraham’s lineage leads us to our first clue regarding the interpretation of Hagar as a Black woman. The Hebrew Bible :– In some ways, Hagar is a minor character within the larger Abraham saga.¹ In Genesis , Hagar’s potential reproductive capacity, ethnicity, and enslaved status are key markers of difference within the text.

GENESIS

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Mother Hagar



Hagar is identified as an enslaved Egyptian woman who belongs to Sarai. Although the Lord has promised Abram that he will be blessed with descendants (Gen. :; :; :), his wife Sarai is unable to conceive (Gen. :; :). While she blames her condition on the Lord (:), she intends to use Hagar as a solution to her childlessness.² Sarai tells Abram to have sex with Hagar so that Sarai might have children by Hagar, and afterward, “Abram listened to the voice of Sarai” (:). The text does not indicate that Abram had sex with Hagar at that time. After ten years of living in Canaan, Sarai gives Hagar to Abram as a wife.³ Abram has sex with Hagar, and she conceives. The text does not provide Hagar’s age or reproductive history, but her presumed fertility provides a contrast to Sarai’s infertility.⁴ Sarai attempts to use Hagar to provide an heir to Abram. Hagar is identified as Egyptian when she is first introduced into the narrative (:). This identification is repeated two verses later when Sarah gives Hagar to Abram (:). As an Egyptian, her origins are distinct from that of Sarai and Abram who have traveled to Canaan from Ur of the Chaldeans (Gen. :).⁵ The text does not explain how she joined Abram’s household or came under Sarai’s control as an enslaved woman.⁶ Since Abram and Sarai travel to Egypt in Genesis , some later interpreters suggest that Pharaoh gave Hagar to Sarai as a parting gift.⁷ Apart from the mention of Egypt as a geographic location, the text does not offer any specific indicators of Hagar’s ethnic difference such as language, clothing, physical features, or other distinguishing characteristics. Hagar’s status within the household changes over time. Initially, Hagar is identified as a slave woman (šipḥâ) who belongs to Sarai (:).⁸ Although enslaved persons are typically under the control of the male head of household, some women in the Hebrew Bible hold slaves. For example, Laban gives Bilhah and Zilpah to his daughters Leah and Rachel when they marry Jacob (Gen. : and :). Although Hagar is an enslaved woman, Sarai gives Hagar to Abram “as a wife” (ʾiššâ).⁹ The term “wife” is the same term used to describe Sarai’s relationship to Abram (:; :). Yet, given Sarai’s continued power over Hagar, this new position does not indicate that Hagar has been liberated from her enslavement or elevated to equal co-wife status with Sarai.¹⁰ Hagar is only called a “wife” when the text describes her sexual relationship with Abram in :, but otherwise

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

she is never referred to explicitly as the wife of Abram. She is an enslaved woman who serves as a surrogate by providing Abram with a son. Despite the description of Hagar as a “wife,” the text emphasizes Hagar’s enslaved status as a woman who remains subordinate to Sarai, her “mistress” (:, –). Sarai refers to Hagar as “my slave-woman” (:) and in Abram’s response, he refers to Hagar as “your [Sarai’s] slave-woman” (:). Abram confirms Sarai’s authority over Hagar and leaves Sarai to cope with the matter of Hagar’s contempt. Similarly, Bilhah and Zilpah remain “slave women” after becoming “wives” (Gen. :–; :–). Although household dynamics shift when Hagar conceives, Sarai retains control of Hagar, despite Hagar’s position as wife. Even after she becomes a wife (ʾiššâ) of Abraham, the text emphasizes Hagar’s enslaved status and her subordinate position to Sarai. According to Sarai, after Hagar conceives, Hagar “looked with contempt on her mistress” (:). Such “contempt” appears to be related to Hagar’s conception based on the narrator’s mention of that conception and based on Sarai’s complaint to Abram regarding Hagar’s behavior (:).¹¹ Also, the text mentions Sarai’s inability to conceive immediately following the notice of Hagar’s conception. Yet, the text does not offer any direct speech or interaction between Hagar and Sarai to indicate more clearly the reasons for what Sarai claims to be contempt. Sarai complains to Abram regarding Hagar’s behavior, and Abram leaves the matter in Sarai’s hands. Sarai’s control of Hagar includes abuse since Sarai “dealt harshly with” (NRSV; Hebrew root: ‘nh) Hagar, but the text does not specify Sarai’s conduct. The same term is used of the Egyptians who oppress the Hebrews (Gen. :; Exod. :). Thus, Sarai’s treatment of Hagar could have included physical and/or psychological abuse. :– Following the report of Sarai’s abuse, Hagar runs away into the wilderness where she encounters a messenger of the Lord who does not oppose Hagar’s subordination. The text does not explain how far Hagar’s pregnancy has progressed, but despite her condition, the abuse is severe enough that Hagar responds by running away. The divine messenger finds Hagar and asks her where she has come from and where she is going. She answers that she has run away from her

GENESIS

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Mother Hagar



mistress Sarai. Again, the text stresses the hierarchical relationship between Hagar and Sarai. Also, the messenger refers to Hagar as “slave woman” (šipḥâ) of Sarai (:) even after she becomes a “wife” (ʾiššâ) in :. Both the messenger and Hagar refer to Sarai as Hagar’s “mistress” (:–). The messenger tells Hagar to return and submit to Sarai but does not provide any reassurance that Hagar will not suffer continued abuse. Furthermore, the Hebrew root (‘nh) used for the NRSV’s translation “submit” is the same for “oppress” or “afflict” in :.¹² Thus, a more literal translation suggests that the messenger instructs Hagar to allow herself to be afflicted. The messenger instructs Hagar to return and endure whatever Sarai may have in store. Nevertheless, the messenger promises to multiply Hagar’s offspring despite the fact that, unlike some other women in the Hebrew Bible, Hagar has not expressed a desire for children. As well, she is already pregnant. Thus, this visit is not a birth announcement like those of other previously infertile women in the Hebrew Bible.¹³ The divine messenger tells Hagar that her son will be named Ishmael. The name Ishmael, which means, “God hears,” forms a wordplay as the messenger reports that God has “heard” her affliction (:).¹⁴ Her son will be a “wild ass of a man” who will clash with his kin and with others. In another wordplay, Hagar names God “El-roi” (the one who sees) after “seeing” God and remaining alive (:).¹⁵ The well where she rested was called “Beer-la-hai-roi” (the well of the living one who sees me). Based on these references to God, it becomes clear that the appearance of the messenger is a theophany. Chapter  concludes with a description of family relationships as Hagar bears a son to Abram.¹⁶ The text specifies that Abram is eighty-six years old at the time but does not include Hagar’s age. Although the messenger instructs Hagar to call her son Ishmael (:), Abram is credited with naming the child Ishmael.¹⁷ :–: Hagar appears in the Hebrew Bible primarily in Genesis  and . Although Abram’s family saga continues in chapters –, Hagar is not mentioned in these chapters. Still, these chapters provide important background for understanding the family dynamics in chapter . In chapter , the Lord establishes a covenant with Abram and changes Sarai’s name to Sarah and Abram’s name to Abraham. In GENESIS

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

addition to the name change, circumcision for every man within Abraham’s household will serve as a sign of this covenant. Abraham is circumcised at age ninety-nine, and Ishmael is circumcised at age thirteen. The Lord promises that Sarah will bear a son who shall be named Isaac. While Ishmael will be blessed, the Lord promises to establish an everlasting covenant with Isaac and his offspring. At age ninety Sarah conceives due to God’s intervention, and she bears Isaac for Abraham when Abraham is one hundred years old (cf. Heb. :). Genesis :–: provides a link between Hagar’s appearances in Genesis  and Genesis . After we encounter Hagar in Genesis , the text does not explain how Sarai treated Hagar when she returned. It notes only that Hagar bore Ishmael. Although Hagar is the mother of Abraham’s first-born son, Abraham has now received the promise of an everlasting covenant and has secured a child with Sarah. Sarah used Hagar to provide a solution to Sarah’s childlessness, but now, Sarah has her own child. When the second account of Hagar begins, Abraham has two wives and two sons, but that changes soon. :– Genesis  offers a continuation of the Hagar story in Genesis .¹⁸ Family is at the center of the narrative in the second major section involving Hagar.¹⁹ Abraham throws a party for the weaning of Isaac. At the celebration, Sarah sees Ishmael “playing” or “laughing” (sḥq) with Isaac.²⁰ The Hebrew root here forms a wordplay on the name Isaac (which means “he laughs”).²¹ Sarah tells Abraham to cast out Hagar and Ishmael so that Ishmael will not inherit along with her son Isaac. The text does not identify the specific trigger for Sarah’s request of the expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael. Sarah sees Ishmael with Isaac and reacts to what she sees. The text does not identify Ishmael by name but distances him from Sarah as he is “the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham” (:). The text does not describe Hagar as wife of Abraham, although her ethnicity is mentioned. Sarah emphasizes Hagar’s class position when proposing Hagar’s expulsion. Also, she does not identify Hagar as Abraham’s wife or refer directly to Ishmael as Abraham’s son. Instead, Sarah refers to Hagar as a “slave woman” (’mh) and refers to Ishmael as “the son of this slave woman” (:). Furthermore, in contrast to GENESIS

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Mother Hagar



Genesis :, Sarah does not refer to Hagar as belonging to her. Rather, she identifies Hagar as “this slave woman” twice, and God tells Abraham to listen to (sm’) Sarah. God explains that Abraham’s offspring will be named for Abraham through Isaac, although Ishmael will become a nation also. While God promises to multiply Hagar’s offspring in :, in : God promises to make Ishmael a nation because he is Abraham’s offspring. Abraham gives bread and water to Hagar and sends her away with Ishmael, and Hagar wanders in the wilderness of Beersheba. When the water is depleted, she puts Ishmael under one of the bushes. Sitting a distance away, she cries aloud. God hears (sm’) the voice of Ishmael (unnamed here) and calls to Hagar. God tells Hagar not to fear and promises to make a great nation of her son. God opens her eyes, and she sees a well from which she gives water to her son. After this survival story, the text indicates that God was with Ishmael (still unnamed). He grows up and lives in the wilderness and becomes an expert with the bow. His mother obtains a wife for him from Egypt. The story of Hagar concludes with a list of the descendants of Ishmael. After being expelled, Hagar is no longer identified by her ethnicity or class. Instead, her position as mother to Ishmael becomes more prominent. Unlike previous instances, the messenger refers to Hagar by name when addressing her in her distress (:). Although Hagar and Ishmael are both outcast and without water, the male child remains central as God hears and responds to Ishmael’s voice but not the voice of Hagar crying. The primary concern expressed is for the survival of Ishmael as the progenitor of a “great nation” (:; cf. Gen. :). OTHER HEBREW BIBLE TEXTS

We hear no more of Hagar in the Hebrew Bible except the mention in the genealogy of Ishmael in Genesis :: “These are the descendants of Ishmael, Abraham’s son, whom Hagar the Egyptian, Sarah’s slavewoman (šipḥâ), bore to Abraham.” In the genealogy, Ishmael is identified as Abraham’s son. Yet, Hagar is not identified as Abraham’s wife in the genealogy. Instead, she is again described as Sarah’s slave woman and as an Egyptian. She is distanced from Abraham even when the text acknowledges Ishmael as a descendant of Abraham.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

Both Isaac and Ishmael, as well as their descendants, are listed in the genealogies in First Chronicles, but neither Hagar nor Sarah appear there. The Hagrites who reside near the trans-Jordanian tribes are mentioned in various Hebrew Bible texts, but they are not identified as descendants of Hagar (Ps. :;  Chron. :; :–; :; :).²² The Hagar narratives in Genesis provide the baseline texts of Hagar’s story from which later interpreters craft their reinterpretations of Hagar. Despite the juicy family drama, there is no physical description of Hagar in these texts. We are told of her status as an enslaved woman, her Egyptian ethnicity, and her position as a mother, but we have no description of her that would allow us to create an image of her appearance. The New Testament :– The New Testament mentions Hagar only in the book of Galatians.²³ Paul writes to the church at Galatia, which has questions about the proper route to conversion as some Gentiles are converting without becoming circumcised or following Jewish customs.²⁴ Paul counters opponents who offer “a different gospel” (Gal. :). He claims that some Judaic Christians argue the need to become Jews first, but he advises the community that this is not necessary.²⁵ By admonishing them to follow faith rather than the law, he links faith with belief in Jesus Christ and advocates for a faith that does not require circumcision or other observances of the law. As he continues his anticircumcision discussion in Galatians , he reinterprets promises in the Hebrew Bible to account for this new life in Christ.²⁶ In Galatians , Paul addresses issues of inheritance and adoption. He argues that heirs, before they come of age, are like slaves since they are still under the control of others.²⁷ Since the birth of Jesus Christ, his believers are adopted as children and become heirs. Galatians :– provides an interpretation of the Hagar/Sarah relationship and presumes that the audience has knowledge of Genesis . Paul does not address Genesis  or Hagar’s abuse and running away. In Galatians , Paul offers an allegorical interpretation of Hagar and GALATIANS

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Mother Hagar



Sarah that calls for the Galatians to identify themselves with Sarah and Isaac rather than Hagar and Ishmael.²⁸ Paul sets up his comparison by stating that Abraham has two sons by two women. Paul explains, “One, the child of the slave, was born according to the flesh; the other, the child of the free woman, was born through the promise” (:). He states that he is offering an allegory and treating the women as representative of two types of covenants. Hagar is associated with the law, as Mount Sinai is the place where the law was given to Moses following the Exodus out of Egypt.²⁹ She corresponds to “present Jerusalem” and to slavery (:).³⁰ The “present Jerusalem” refers to the physical city of Jerusalem, Judaism, and Judaic Christianity. In contrast, “the other woman” (Sarah is not named here) corresponds to “Jerusalem above,” the restored Jerusalem of an eschatological future (:), as Sarah “is free, and she is our mother” (:). The two women are offered as contrasts of the two covenants, one that requires observance of the law and one that does not.³¹ In Galatians, the two women and the details of their relationship with each other and with Abraham fade into the background as Paul focuses on them as representing present and heavenly Jerusalem. In this reinterpretation, Paul flattens the details of the Sarah/Hagar relationship by setting up strict binary comparisons such as slave/free and flesh/promise. He identifies the women as mothers and highlights status differences between Sarah, the free woman, and Hagar, the slave woman. Although he describes Hagar as the slave woman, he does not mention that she is Egyptian. He does not identify her as Black or provide any physical description of her in terms of skin color, eye color, or other physical characteristics. He is not interested in the women as multi-faceted characters but as symbols of opposing covenants. Paul strips out of the text any emotional ties of the family and kinship relationships between the women and between their children. For example, while Genesis : notes that Abraham has misgivings about expelling Hagar and Ishmael, Paul does not mention this. In addition, Paul does not mention Hagar’s role as a surrogate for Sarah. Furthermore, he does not acknowledge explicitly that the children are half-brothers. This separation creates two distinctive family trees from Abraham as patriarch without acknowledging the complex relationships between all of the parties involved. Paul accentuates the conflict

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

between the children by highlighting the alleged abuse of Isaac by Ishmael in Genesis :. He informs the Galatians that they are “children of the promise, like Isaac” (:). He then compounds the allegation by mentioning that the child of flesh “persecuted” the child born according to the spirit (:). Paul reiterates the necessity of driving out the slave and her child in order that the child of the free woman shall not share the inheritance. Here, Paul follows the concern expressed by Sarah regarding Isaac’s inheritance in Genesis :. Like a schoolteacher, he concludes by spelling out the correct answer to his audience. The Galatians should not listen to agitators, and circumcision and the law are not to be relied upon. He impresses upon the Galatians that they are children of the free woman and of the Sarah-Isaac-free covenant. A similar comparison is made in Romans :– although Hagar is not mentioned by name. The writer of Romans distinguishes children of the flesh and children of the promise and links the children of the promise with Sarah and Isaac. Also, Romans  discusses the grafting of the Gentiles into the family of God. Paul uses what he regards as the authority of scripture to support his claims regarding the gospel that he preaches, but he uses biblical texts selectively and may lead the reader to think that some non-biblical material is biblical. He assumes that his audience knows the story of Sarah and Hagar, since he does not provide a full description of Genesis  and  and seems to focus exclusively on Genesis . Although he introduces this segment with the phrase “for it is written that” (:), he is not quoting a biblical text here (cf. Gal. :, ; :). In addition, his designation of these children as flesh versus spirit may suggest that Isaac and Ishmael have these designations in Genesis although they do not. In Galatians :, he quotes Isaiah : which calls for the childless to rejoice. Paul compares Sarah to a city, “Jerusalem above,” because he quotes Isaiah :, which uses childless women as a metaphor for Zion. Yet, Genesis never compares Sarah with a city.³² Furthermore, in Galatians :, he paraphrases either Sarah’s directive to Abraham in Genesis : or God’s reassurance to Abraham in :–. Yet, instead of quoting directly the statement by Sarah or by God, Paul asks a rhetorical question “But what does the scripture say?” (:). Thus, the revised quotation sounds like a blanket scriptural statement.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Mother Hagar



The individual stories of Sarah and Hagar in Genesis are not at issue. Sarah’s inability to bear children, her abuse of Hagar, and Hagar’s expulsion are not discussed. Furthermore, by discussing Hagar and Sarah in metaphorical terms and highlighting only certain details of their Genesis narratives, he moves away from any notion of family connection between them and their children. Again, for Paul, Hagar is not a wife of Abraham or an Egyptian woman. Thus, she is not discussed in terms related to race or ethnicity and is not identified as a Black woman. Additional scriptural texts Hagar is reinterpreted in the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical books, in the Pseudepigrapha, and in the Dead Sea Scrolls. In general, these texts reflect the Hagar narratives in Genesis but offer limited detail about her. Like Genesis, the depictions of Hagar in these early texts do not include physical description or discuss race or ethnicity beyond the mention of Hagar as an Egyptian. The book of Baruch includes a reference to Hagar in a poem that entreats Israel to seek wisdom (:–:). Baruch :– reads, “She [personified wisdom] has not been heard of in Canaan, or seen in Teman; the descendants of Hagar, who seek for understanding on the earth, the merchants of Merran and Teman, the story-tellers and the seekers for understanding, have not learned the way to wisdom, or given thought to her paths.” Hagar is the mother of a people, and her descendants, like the merchants of Merran and Teman, have sought but not found wisdom. Hagar appears in the book of Jubilees, which recounts shorter versions of the Hagar stories. It does not mention her ethnicity or identify her as Black. Its version of the Hagar story includes the episode in which Sarah gives Hagar to Abraham (:–), but it does not mention Sarah’s abuse or Hagar’s running away or return. Jubilees  reinterprets Genesis  and offers a clearer explanation for Sarah’s request to Abraham to expel Sarah and Ishmael. Sarah sees Ishmael playing and dancing and Abraham laughing, and she becomes jealous, although in speaking with Abraham, she also charges that Isaac’s inheritance is her concern (:).

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

The Apocalypse of Daniel mentions the sons of Hagar, Ouachēs, Axiaphar, and Morphosar, in addition to Ishmael, who will fight against Babylonia (:–). There is one mention of Ishmael in QM ., the so-called “War Scroll” found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. In this text, the sons of light will be arrayed against the various nations. In ., they wage war against “the sons of Ishmael and Ketura” (cf. Gen. :; Jub. :). Keturah is Abraham’s third wife.³³ So, the text mentions two parts of Abraham’s lineage, including the children of Hagar and Abraham through Ishmael and the sons of Keturah and Abraham. The next section surveys how Hagar is reinterpreted within later Jewish, Christian, and Islamic texts with focused attention on their characterization of Hagar’s difference. These traditions do not identify Hagar as Black, but their exploitation of her difference contributes to the use of Hagar as a polarizing figure in order to accentuate and explain ethnic, religious, and other forms of difference. Hagar in ancient commentaries Ancient Jewish writers offer limited commentary on Hagar, but several writers highlight Hagar’s position as an enslaved woman and as subordinate to Sarah.³⁴ These interpretations are not polemical as much as apologetic, since they seek to explain and uphold Jewish culture and history to a Greek audience. Yet, they provide important background for later interpretations that become more one sided. For example, first-century  historian Josephus Flavius does not identify Hagar as Abraham’s wife in Antiquities of the Jews, an account of Jewish history and culture for a Greek audience.³⁵ Josephus’s account of Genesis  and  makes Hagar more responsible for Sarai’s mistreatment and softens the portrait of Sarai as Hagar’s abuser. According to Josephus, Hagar is Sarai’s Egyptian “handmaiden,” and Sarai and Abram are her mistress and master, respectively. Sarai’s decision to use Hagar as a surrogate is not her own idea but rather due to “God’s command.” After Hagar conceives and “abuses” Sarai, Josephus connects Hagar’s behavior with Sarah’s concerns in Genesis  by explaining Hagar’s behavior as due to her view that Abraham’s lineage would pass through her child. In ordering Hagar to return, the angel describes Hagar as ungrateful and arrogant. When she does

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Mother Hagar



return, Hagar is “forgiven,” which suggests that she is at fault for her maltreatment. After Isaac is born, in contrast to Genesis , Sarah loves Ishmael but has concerns that Ishmael could harm Isaac after the death of Abraham.³⁶ Josephus offers a portrait of Sarah as a loving and dutiful wife and stepmother in contrast to Hagar, who has a bad attitude. Josephus identifies her as Egyptian but not Black. Pseudo-Philo’s Biblical Antiquities (Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum) is a second–century  account of biblical history from creation through the death of Saul.³⁷ In Biblical Antiquities, the text provides an abbreviated version of Genesis . Hagar is described only as Abram’s servant (tunc Abram tulit Agar ancillam suam) who bore Ishmael to Abram since Sarai is unable to conceive.³⁸ Hagar is not described physically. Hagar’s status is at issue in several instances. First, although she is acknowledged as a slave, she is identified as a royal daughter of Egypt. Pseudo-Philo mentions that Hagar is Egyptian and claims that Hagar was Pharaoh’s daughter by connecting Genesis : with Genesis :, although the biblical text does not make that connection (BA :). Also, Pseudo-Philo creates a word play with the name Hagar and the Hebrew term for “reward” (agar) and claims that Pharaoh (identified as Abimelech in PseudoPhilo [cf. Gen. ]) offers her as a reward to Sarah when she and Abraham leave Egypt. So, Hagar is in a somewhat elevated position, and Pseudo-Philo stresses that she was indeed a wife and not a concubine (BA :). Also in Pseudo-Philo, Sarah’s barrenness is contrasted with Hagar’s fertility. Hagar’s conception (Gen. :) happened after her “first intimacy” with Abram (BA :), while Sarah took years to become pregnant. Still, according to Pseudo-Philo, Sarah’s barrenness and that of other matriarchs was intended so that Sarah would maintain her beauty and her intimate pleasure with her husband. Yet, details about Sarah’s appearance or particular aspects of her beauty are not given in Genesis or in Pseudo-Philo. Pseudo-Philo explains Hagar’s view toward Sarah as due to Hagar’s haughtiness at conceiving after only one night. Also, he suggests that Hagar’s conception was not Ishmael (:) since the angel tells Hagar that she will conceive in the future (:). He treats the first conception as resulting in miscarriage. The second conception announced by the angel results in the birth of Ishmael.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

Hagar in early allegorical readings Paul in Galatians  is not the only writer in antiquity to interpret Hagar allegorically. For some early interpreters, Hagar is not considered to be a mother of a people in a physical sense but in an allegorical sense. These interpreters do not stress historical or fictional kinship but focus on what they regard as the deeper meaning behind these texts. Hagar in these texts does not refer to a human but to an idea. In several different texts, first–century  Jewish philosopher Philo offers an allegorical reading of Genesis  and . Such allegory provides a deeper layer of meaning beyond the literal sense of a text. In Allegorical Interpretation III (Legum allegoriae III), Philo contrasts Hagar and Sarah by emphasizing Hagar’s subordinate status. Sarah is understood as “virtue,” while Agar (Hagar) her “handmaid” refers to “encyclical instruction,” which refers to secondary education that one undertakes prior to the study of philosophy.³⁹ Philo explains that Abraham listens to the wise counsel of Sarah and has a child with Hagar before he is able to have a child with Sarah. Claiming that the name “Agar” means “a dwelling near,” Philo interprets this text allegorically as meaning that one must dwell near encyclical studies as preparation prior to obtaining virtue.⁴⁰ While grateful for the preparatory studies, he claims that it is only after preliminary studies that one is able to draw near to virtue. In On the Cherubim (De Cherubin), Philo interprets the expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael in Genesis . In his allegory, Hagar, “elementary branches of instruction,” and Ishmael, their “sophistical” child, are to be banished forever as Abraham listens to the wisdom of virtue.⁴¹ In On Mating with the Preliminary Studies (De Congressu Quaerendae Eruditionis Gratia), Philo counsels the reader not to be concerned with Sarah’s abuse of Hagar, which is typical of “rivalry and quarrels among women,” because these are not women. Instead, Hagar and Sarah are “minds,” one that employs elementary instruction, while the other strives for virtue.⁴² By interpreting them as minds, Philo ignores markers of difference, including status and ethnicity. In an extensive discussion in Questions and Answers on Genesis III (Quaestiones et Solutiones in Genesin III), Philo acknowledges Hagar as Egyptian but claims that Hagar was a concubine and not a wife, since Abraham used Hagar in order to bear a child while he had a spiritual union with

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Mother Hagar



Sarah. Also, he emphasizes Hagar’s subordination to Sarah as a handmaid. When Hagar flees from Sarah (Gen. :), this is due not to fear but to modesty in the awesome presence of wisdom and virtue.⁴³ Hagar and Sarah are not flesh-and-blood women. Thus, Hagar is not described physically. Early Christian interpreters offer an array of interpretations of Paul’s Galatians  allegory of Hagar and Sarah.⁴⁴ These interpretations include the use of Hagar and Sarah to contrast Judaism and Christianity, often in support of anti-Judaism.⁴⁵ These interpreters argue for distinctions between the synagogue, represented by Hagar, and the church, represented by Sarah. For example, in Against Marcion (Adversus Marcionem), the second- and third-century Christian author Tertullian argues against what he perceives as Marcion’s heretical support of Gnosticism. Citing Galatians , Tertullian does not identify Sarah and Hagar by name, but he treats Sarah as the holy church and Hagar as the Jewish synagogue. He contrasts the “noble dignity” of Christianity, which is born of the free woman (Sarah), with the “legal bondage” of Judaism, which is born of the “bondwoman” (Hagar).⁴⁶ Cyprian, a third-century bishop of Carthage, provides counter arguments to hypothetical Jewish critiques of Christianity in Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews. Like Paul in Galatians , he cites Isaiah :–, which calls for the barren to rejoice. Cyprian notes that Sarah remained barren after Abraham has a son by the “bond-woman” (Hagar). Sarah later bears Isaac, the son of promise, whom Cyprian identifies as a type of Christ. He argues that the church will bear more children than the synagogue.⁴⁷ Since these early Christians interpret Hagar allegorically, they do not describe her physical characteristics or identify her as a Black woman. Hagar in Islamic traditions As noted earlier, Hagar (Hajar/Hajira in Arabic) is not mentioned by name in the Qur’an, and she is not treated as a major figure within early Islamic commentary.⁴⁸ Likewise, her prominence within and connection with the hajj are later developments. Still, she has an important role within Islamic traditions as the mother of Ishmael,

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

who is regarded as the father of Arab peoples and as an ancestor of the Prophet Muhammad.⁴⁹ The Qur’an shares similarities with some of the biblical texts related to Abraham and his family, including those related to Hagar.⁵⁰ Abraham (Ibrahim) is regarded as a prophet who advocated for monotheism.⁵¹ In the Qur’an, both Ishmael and Isaac are acknowledged as sons of Abraham. Ishmael is noted among the righteous, alongside other biblical figures such as Elisha, Jonah, and Lot (Al-An’am :; Al-Anbiya’ :), and as a prophet (Maryam :). Abraham and Ishmael are responsible for building the Ka’ba, the House of God (Al-Baqara :, ).⁵² Unlike Genesis , Hagar and Ishmael (Ismail) are not expelled but relocated. Abraham prays, “I have established some of my offspring in an uncultivated valley, close to your Sacred House, Lord, so that they may keep up the prayer” (Ibrahim :).⁵³ This oblique reference is traditionally interpreted as Abraham’s moving Hagar and Ishmael to Mecca.⁵⁴ Also, in the Qur’an as Jacob dies, he questions his sons regarding worship. They reply, “We shall worship your God and the God of your fathers, Abraham, Ishmael, and Isaac, one single God: we devote ourselves to Him” (Al-Baqara :). In the Qur’an there is no family discord or religious rivalry between Ishmael and Isaac. Although not mentioned by name in the Qur’an, various details regarding Hagar’s life are elaborated in the Hadith collections (Sahih al-Bukhari; Sahih Muslim).⁵⁵ The Hadith expands on material in the Qur’an, offering a fuller portrait of Hagar and her relationship with Abraham. Like biblical texts, the Hadith do not identify Hagar as Black. She is portrayed as a wife and mother who trusts in Allah. The Hadith include many similarities with the Hagar narratives in Genesis. According to the Hadith, Hagar is given to Sarah as a slave-girl or maidservant following incidents similar to the sister-wife stories in Genesis  and Genesis .⁵⁶ Also, it includes Sarah’s abuse of Hagar, but with more detail. For example, Hagar uses a girdle to hide her tracks when running away from Sarah.⁵⁷ In contrast to Genesis , the expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael receives much more attention in the Hadith. Abraham does not simply force Hagar and Ishmael out into the wilderness. Instead, Abraham accompanies Hagar (identified as the mother of Ishmael rather than by name) and a suckling Ishmael to Mecca but does not explain his

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Mother Hagar



reasons for leaving her. After she questions him repeatedly, he confirms that Allah has ordered him to do so, but unlike Genesis , the Hadith does not include Sarah’s insistence that he expel them. Also, while Abraham leaves them with few supplies, he prays to Allah that they will receive provisions and care.⁵⁸ Distressed at having no water, Hagar runs between two mountains, Safa and Marwa, looking for help. After running between these mountains seven times, on her last trip to Marwa, she hears a voice and sees an angel digging for water. She constructs a basin around it and creates a well at Zam-zam. The angel assures her that she will be cared for by Allah and that the house of Allah, the Ka’ba, will be built by Ishmael and his father. Hagar continues there until the Jurhum, a nomadic tribe, arrive at Zam-zam, and some of them settle there with her permission. Ishmael learns Arabic from the Jurhum and marries a woman from their people.⁵⁹ This marriage differs from Hagar’s procurement of a wife from Egypt for Ishmael in Genesis :.⁶⁰ Although Abraham has no further contact with Hagar after she is expelled in Genesis , both Isaac and Ishmael bury Abraham together (Gen. :). In the Hadith, Abraham has contact with Hagar and Ishmael. Abraham visits Ishmael after Ishmael’s marriage. Abraham and Ishmael build the Ka’ba together as a worship site (:–) at Mecca, which is considered to be the original place of monotheistic worship in Islam. There is no fraternal strife between Ishmael and Isaac here, although the Hadith acknowledges that they are children of Abraham with different mothers. Hagar and Blackness in early traditions Like earlier Jewish and Christian interpretations, Hagar is not designated as a Black woman in early Islamic material. Yet, her role as a progenitor serves as our first major link between Hagar and Blackness. Tracing ancestry from Muhammad to Abraham through Hagar becomes fraught due to Hagar’s status as an enslaved woman. In pre-Islamic and early Islamic Arabian societies, enslaved status was considered inferior to free status. In general, free men consorted with enslaved women, but enslaved men had less access to freeborn women. So, the sons of enslaved women were regarded as inferior to those of “freeborn” Arab mothers.⁶¹

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

Initially, the stigma of enslavement for children of enslaved women related to the status of the mother, but in later periods, enslavement becomes linked with color prejudice and anti-Blackness, especially with the development of large-scale trafficking of enslaved persons in Africa. As historian Bernard Lewis explains, “Before long, however, a distinctive color prejudice appeared; and the association of blackness with slavery and whiteness with freedom and nobility became common.”⁶² Eventually, the Arabic term for enslaved persons as “owned” (mamlūk) referred to non-Blacks, while “enslaved” (‘bd) was used for Blacks.⁶³ Over time, Hagar, enslavement, and Blackness become intertwined. Hagar’s position as mother of a people appears prior to the traditional dating of the Qur’an. The terms Hagarenes, Ishmaelites, and Saracens are used variously to refer to Arab peoples, but with those terms, no link is made to color or Blackness specifically. For instance, in the first century , Josephus claims that Arabs circumcise their sons at age thirteen because “Ishmael, the founder of their race, born to Abraham’s concubine, was circumcised at that age.”⁶⁴ A negative view of ancestry via Hagar emerges early on as some writers indicate that a relationship to Sarah is preferable to one with Hagar. For instance, the fourth- and fifth-century Christian writer Jerome claims that Saracens identified themselves as such in order to claim lineage through Sarah, although that is not a term that they used of themselves. In harmonizing Genesis  and , he writes, “Metaphorically, therefore, by Midianites, scripture means the Ishmaelites and Hagarenes, who are now called Saracens, evidently assuming falsely for themselves the name of Sarah because they wish to appear to be descended from a free woman and mistress of the household.”⁶⁵ While this is likely a false etymology, it demonstrates the negative association of Hagar and enslavement that we see reflected in later periods. Similarly, Sozomen, a fifth-century  Bishop of Gaza, writes that the “Saracens” (Arabs) had lost touch with their origins as sons of Ishmael but became reacquainted through their contact with Jews. He explains, “It appears that the Saracens were descended from Ishmael, the son of Abraham, and were, in consequence, originally denominated Ishmaelites. As their mother Hagar was a slave, they afterwards, to conceal the opprobrium of their origins, assumed the name Saracens, as if they were descended from Sara [sic] the wife of Abraham.”⁶⁶

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Mother Hagar



Despite the view of Muhammad as related to Abraham through Ishmael, some Persian Muslims claimed Isaac as their father figure in order to avoid the stigma of Hagar’s status as an enslaved woman. This claim functioned in part to connect Muhammad to prior generations and to position Persians as superior to Arabs. For example, the response of Persians to Islamic conquest and the growing dominance of Arab peoples in the eighth and ninth centuries is called the Shu’ubiyah controversy. The division between these groups is illustrated in a poem by classical Arabic poet Abu Nuwas (mid-eighth to early ninth century), who speaks of Persian land not occupied by Arabs: In a land where the “ ‘Ukl [tribe] has not tied down a rope Or khibā’ tent, nor have [the tribes of] ‘Akk or Hamdān done so, And in which neither [the tribe of] Jarm nor Bahrā’ has a homeland, But rather it forms homelands for the sons of freemen [banī’l-ah ḥrār], This is a land in which Kisrā built his balances of worship [manāsikahu], Thus there are no sons of the putrid-smelling woman [banī’l-lakhnā’] in it.”⁶⁷

Ibn Qutaybah spells out the use of these terms and identifies Isaac’s descendants as the “sons of the freemen” through Sarah and the sons of the putrid-smelling woman as descendants of Hagar.⁶⁸ Since enslavement was viewed negatively and associated with blackness, over time, Hagar becomes understood not just as an enslaved woman but, in some instances, as a Black enslaved woman. Conclusion Throughout the centuries, various writers have offered innovative and creative interpretations of Genesis , Genesis , and Galatians .⁶⁹ These interpretations include readings that emphasize forms of difference. While these interpretations are not by any means the only possibilities for reading Hagar, early treatments use Hagar’s distinctiveness to accentuate and rationalize religious and ethnic difference and to construct relationships and genealogies that identify Hagar as the mother of Ishmael and progenitor of a people. She is allegorized as encyclical instruction, acknowledged as a co-wife, and also reprimanded for her disobedience. Hagar’s ethnicity is not typically the primary focus of these early interpreters, and when her ethnicity is mentioned, it is not racialized. It is within Islamic tradition that we

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

have the first clue to understanding how Hagar became Black. Since enslaved status was inferior to free status, as enslavement become associated with Blackness, Hagar herself become regarded as a Black enslaved woman. The battle over slavery within United States is the next destination in our quest to understand how Hagar became Black. Notes . On traditions of Abraham, see Carol Bakhos, The Family of Abraham: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Interpretations (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, ) and Jon D. Levenson, Inheriting Abraham: The Legacy of the Patriarch in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, ). . Women identified as experiencing infertility in the Hebrew Bible include Sarai/Sarah, Rebekah (Gen. :); Rachel (Gen. :), Leah (Gen. :), Samson’s Mother (Judg. :); and Hannah ( Sam. :). In each case, their infertility later results in the birth of a child. On infertility in biblical texts, see Candida R. Moss and Joel S. Baden, Reconceiving Infertility: Biblical Perspectives on Procreation and Childlessness (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, ). . Within some literature from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, Hagar is a wife of Abraham. Sarah’s obedience in accepting Hagar as Abraham’s wife is used within justifications of plural marriage, but Hagar’s race or ethnicity is not mentioned. See Robert M. Bowman Jr., “Abraham, Hagar, and Joseph Smith’s Polygamy: The Mormon use of Abraham as Precedent for Plural Marriage,” Institute for Religious Research (December , ). http://mit.irr.org/abraham-hagar-and-joseph-smithspolygamy-mormon-use-of-abraham-precedent-plural-marriage. In Doctrines and Covenants, Sarah is praised for her obedience to the law by giving Hagar to Abraham (:; –). Doctrines and Covenants is part of the canon of the Latter-Day Saints that is understood as continuous revelation, although that claim is disputed by some within the denomination. Text available from Latter-Day Saints website: https://www.lds.org/scriptures/ dc-testament/dc/.?lang=eng#. Also see Andrew C. Smith, “Hagar in LDS Scripture and Thought,” Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture  (): –. On race and Mormon people, see Max Perry Mueller, Race and the Making of the Mormon People (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, ). . The NRSV translates the Hebrew šipḥâ as “slave-girl” (Gen. :, , , ) which might suggest that Hagar was a young woman, but the text does not indicate her age.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Mother Hagar



. Interpreters have attempted to find significance in the name “Hagar.” The Hebrew consonants that spell “Hagar” (hāgār) can be repointed to read “the stranger” (hā gēr). Genesis Rabbah connects “Hagar” with the Hebrew “reward” (:). Also, Hagar is sometimes linked with the Arabic root “to flee.” These efforts are best understood as wordplay or folk etymologies. . On female slaves in the Hebrew Bible, see Raymond Westbrook, “The Female Slave,” in Gender and Law in the Hebrew Bible and the Ancient Near East, ed. Victor Harold Matthews, Bernard M. Levinson and Tikva Frymer-Kensky (New York: T & T Clark, ), –, and Edward J. Bridge, “Female Slave vs Female Slave: ʼamah and šipḥah in the HB,” The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures  (). . See Genesis Apocryphon column  (QapGen); Genesis Rabbah :; Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer ch. ; and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan :. . Here, Sarah does not use šipḥâ as in Genesis  but ʾmh. Also, when God reassures Abraham about expelling Hagar and Ishmael, God uses ʾmh as well (Gen. :–). Scholars have debated the possible distinctions between šipḥâ and ʾmh. Some suggest a possible inferior status for šipḥâ and a closer conjugal relationship for ʾmh, but there is not enough available evidence to distinguish these terms in this case. Nevertheless, both terms emphasize Hagar’s subordinate position to Sarah. For a thorough survey of the uses of these two terms, see Bridge, “Female Slave vs Female Slave.” . Other enslaved women who are given as wives include Bilhah (Gen. :) and Zilpah (Gen. :). . In Tg. Ps-J, Hagar’s status changes. Sarai sets Hagar free (:–), and Abraham gives Hagar a divorce when he sends her away (:). . The Code of Hammurabi mentions a somewhat similar situation in which a female slave serving as a surrogate claims equality with her mistress (sec. ). On surrogacy and related reproductive issues in the ancient Near East, see Moss and Baden, Reconceiving Infertility; Naomi Steinberg, Kinship and Marriage in Genesis: A Household Economics Perspective (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, ); and Westbrook, “The Female Slave,” –. . The root is a Hithpael form in Genesis :. . According to Genesis Rabbah, Hagar conceives in : but miscarries due to the evil eye. Thus, she conceives Ishmael with the second mention of her conception in : (Gen. Rab. :). . Similarly, God hears and responds to the groaning of the Israelites under the oppression of the Egyptians (Exod. :). . On Hagar’s importance theologically, see Monika Egger, “Hagar, Woher Kommst Du? Und Wohin Gehst Du?” (Gen ,*): Darstellung und Funktion der Figur Hagar im Sara(i)-Abra(Ha)m-Zyklus (Gen ,–,), Herders Biblische Studien  (Freiburg: Herder, ), . Nina Heinsohn, Zwischen Verheissung und Verborgenheit: Studien zur Theologie

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



.

. .

. . .

Reimagining Hagar und Anthropologie der Hagar-Erzählungen in Genesis  und , BiblischTheologische Studien  (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, ), . For technical discussions of Genesis, see standard commentaries such as E. A. Speiser, Genesis (AB ; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, ) and Nahum M. Sarna, The JPS Torah Commentary-Genesis: The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, ). In other Hebrew Bible texts, women name their children (Eve, Gen. :; Leah, Gen. :, , , ; :, , , , ; Rachel, Gen. :, , ; women neighbors, Ruth :). Scholars have questioned the relationship between the two accounts of Hagar in Genesis. Traditional source-critical analysis attributes these texts to two different sources. Genesis  is primarily a Yahwistic text with Priestly insertions, while Genesis :– is attributed mainly to the Elohist with some insertions by the Yahwist and the Priestly Writer. Still, the combination of these stories could be the result of two traditions incorporated into the Abraham saga. On source-critical issues, see Sarah Shectman, Women in the Pentateuch: A Feminist and Source-Critical Analysis (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, ) and Joel S. Baden, The Promise to the Patriarchs (Oxford: Oxford University Press, ), . For a view of Gen  and  as non-parallel accounts, see T. Desmond Alexander, “The Hagar Traditions in Genesis Xvi and Xxi,” in Studies in the Pentateuch, ed. J. A. Emerton (Leiden: Brill, ), –. On the prominence of Hagar and Ishmael, see Scott Nikaido, “Hagar and Ishmael as Literary Figures: An Intertextual Study,” Vetus Testamentum , no.  (): –. The Hebrew Masoretic Text does not include the phrase “with her son Isaac,” which does appear in the Greek Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate. Cf. laughter at Gen. : and Gen. :. This root (sḥq) includes a sexual connotation since the same term is used of Isaac and Rebekah when Abimelech sees Isaac “fondling” Rebekah in Gen. :. For various interpretations of “playing,” see Yaffa Englard, “Ishmael Playing?: Exegetical Understandings and Artistic Representations of the Verb Meṣaḥēq in Genesis .,” Biblical Reception  (): –. Genesis Rabbah includes several different interpretations of Ishmael’s “playing,” including sexual immorality with women, idolatry, bloodsport, and making a reference to his inheritance as first-born son (:) In Jubilees, Sarah sees Ishmael laughing and dancing while Abraham rejoices and becomes jealous (:).

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Mother Hagar



. On the Hagarites, see Martin Goodman, Geurt Hendrik van Kooten, and J. van Ruiten, eds., Abraham, the Nations, and the Hagarites: Jewish, Christian, and Islamic Perspectives on Kinship with Abraham, Themes in Biblical Narrative  (Boston: Brill, ), . In the days of Saul, the Reubenites defeated the Hagrites ( Chron. :). Also, the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh defeated in battle the Hagrites, Jetur, Naphish, and Nodab ( Chron. :–). The Hagrites are listed among the enemies of Israel (Ps. :). Also, Jaziz the Hagrite is listed as keeper of the flocks within David’s royal administration ( Chron. :), and Mibhar, son of Hagri, is listed as one of David’s warriors ( Chron. :). . For more detailed information on Galatians, consult standard commentaries. See J. Louis Martyn, Galatians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, The Anchor Bible, vol. A (New York: Doubleday, ) and James D. G. Dunn, The Epistle to the Galatians (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, ). . Matthew Thiessen, Paul and the Gentile Problem (New York: Oxford University Press, ). . On ethnicity and race, see Denise Kimber Buell, Why this New Race: Ethnic Reasoning in Early Christianity (New York: Columbia University Press, ) and Love L. Sechrest, A Former Jew: Paul and the Dialectics of Race, Library of New Testament Studies  (London: T&T Clark, ). . On the Galatian crisis, see Ian J. Elmer, Paul, Jerusalem, and the Judaisers: The Galatian Crisis in its Broadest Historical Context, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament . Reihe, vol.  (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, ). . On the metaphor of slavery in Galatians, see Sam Tsang, From Slaves to Sons: A New Rhetoric Analysis on Paul’s Slave Metaphors in His Letter to the Galatians, Studies in Biblical Literature  (New York: Peter Lang, ). On African American perspectives, see Brad Ronnell Braxton, No Longer Slaves: Galatians and African American Experience (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, ). . On the allegory and its supersessionist uses as referring to Judaism as the old covenant and Christianity as the new, see Albert L. A. Hogeterp, “Hagar and Paul’s Covenant Thought,” in Abraham, the Nations, and the Hagarites, –, and Brendan Byrne, “Jerusalem’s Above and Below: A Critique of J. L. Martyn’s Interpretation of the Hagar-Sarah Allegory in Gal .–.,” New Testament Studies , no.  (): –. . Graham I. Davies, “Hagar, El-Heǧra and the Location of Mount Sinai: With an Additional Note on Reqem,” Vetus Testamentum , no.  (): –.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

. Specifically on Hagar in Galatians, see Troy A. Miller, “Surrogate, Slave, and Deviant? ‘Hagar’ in Jewish Interpretive Traditions and Paul’s Use of the Figure in Galatians :–,” in Early Christian Literature and Intertextuality, ed. Craig A. Evans and H. Daniel Zacharias, Library of New Testament Studies, Vols. – (London: T&T Clark, ), –, and Angela Standhartinger, “ ‘Zur Freiheit..Befreit’? Hagar im Galaterbrief,” Evang Theol  (): –. . In Merchant of Venice (act , scene ), Shylock asks, “What says that fool of Hagar’s offspring, ha?” His question to Jessica regarding Launcelot identifies Gentiles as related to Hagar and Ishmael rather than to Sarah and Isaac. . On the use of Isaiah in Galatians, see Mark Gignilliat, “Isaiah’s Offspring: Paul’s Isaiah : Quotation in Galatians :,” Bulletin for Biblical Research , no.  (): –. . Some interpreters treat Hagar and Keturah as the same person with two different names. Keturah becomes Abraham’s wife (‘isha) in Genesis : after Sarah dies, although she is identified indirectly as one of Abraham’s concubines (pilegesh) in Genesis : and in  Chronicles :–. Keturah and Abraham have six sons, and at least eight grandchildren (Gen :–), while  Chronicles :– list six sons and at least seven grandchildren. In both instances, she is noted as the mother of the peoples of the Arabian peninsula. Thus, she is ethnically distinct from Abraham’s family. Some rabbinic literature creates this linkage by connecting Isaac’s settlement near Beer-lahai-roi (Gen. :) with Hagar’s encounter at Beer-lahai-roi (Gen. :). According to this tradition, Isaac traveled there to retrieve Hagar, who is understood to be the same person as Keturah. The name Keturah is linked with the Hebrew verb which means “to offer incense” (qtr) (Gen. Rab. :). There is no textual evidence from the Hebrew Bible to support reading Hagar and Keturah as the same character (cf. Reuel [Exod. :] and Jethro [Exod. :]). Still, with this rabbinic interpretation, we see Hagar/Keturah as an ethnically distinctive figure. . Irene Pabst, “The Interpretation of the Sarah-Hagar Stories in Rabbinic and Patristic Literature: Sarah and Hagar as Female Representations of Identity and Difference,” Lectio Difficilior  () http://www.lectio. unibe.ch/_/pabst.htm. . Josephus, Jewish Antiquities, .. . Josephus, Jewish Antiquities, .. . Although attributed to the Jewish writer Philo, scholars agree that this work was not composed by Philo and refer to the author as Pseudo-Philo. . Pseudo-Philo, Biblical Antiquities, .. . Philo, Allegorical Interpretation, ..

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Mother Hagar . . . . . .

. . .

.

.



Philo, Allegorical Interpretation, .. Philo, On the Cherubim, –. Philo, On Mating with the Preliminary Studies, . Philo, Questions and Answers on Genesis, .. Johan Leemans, “After Philo and Paul: Hagar in the Writings of the Church Fathers,” in Abraham, the Nations, and the Hagarites, –. Elizabeth A. Clark, “Interpretive Fate Amid the Church Fathers,” in Hagar, Sarah, and Their Children: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Perspectives, ed. Phyllis Trible and Letty M. Russell (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, ), –. Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem .. Cyprian, Three Books of Testimonies against the Jews .. On Hagar traditions and Muslim women’s scholarship, see Hibba Abugideiri, “Hagar: A Historical Model for ‘Gender Jihad’,” in Daughters of Abraham: Feminist Thought in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, ed. Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad and John L. Esposito (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, ), –. On Islam and the Qur’an, see Andrew Rippin, The Qur’an and Its Interpretive Tradition (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, ) and John L. Esposito, Islam: The Straight Path, th ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, ). On the relationship of the Qur’an to biblical texts, see John Kaltner and Younus Mirza, The Bible and the Qur’an: Biblical Figures in the Islamic Tradition (London: Bloomsbury, ); John Kaltner, Ishmael Instructs Isaac: An Introduction to the Qurʼan for Bible Readers (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, ), ; Sidney Harrison Griffith, The Bible in Arabic: The Scriptures of the “People of the Book” in the Language of Islam (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, ); Gabriel Said Reynolds, The Qur’an and the Bible: Text and Commentary (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, ); John C. Reeves, ed., Bible and Qurʼān: Essays in Scriptural Intertextuality, Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series, vol. , ed. Christopher R. Matthews (Boston: Brill, ). On feminist engagement with the Qur’an, see Aysha A. Hidayatullah, Feminist Edges of the Qur’an (New York: Oxford University Press, ). In Islamic tradition, the family of the Prophet Muhammad served as guardians of the Ka’ba which was a religious shrine for multiple gods. His family clan traced its lineage to Abraham. There may have been a pre-Islamic idea of ancestry from Abraham through Ishmael, or it may have developed through the adaptation of biblical material within later Islamic traditions. See the helpful survey on Hagar in Islam by Riffat Hassan. Riffat Hassan, “Islamic Hagar and Her Family,” in Hagar, Sarah, and Their Children, –.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

. On Abraham in the Qur’an and in biblical texts, see Kaltner, Ishmael Instructs Isaac, –. . There are two major traditions regarding the Ka’ba. One holds that Adam and Eve built the original Ka’ba, which was destroyed during the flood in the time of Noah. The second regards the original Ka’ba as the one built by Ibrahim and Ishmael as discussed in the Qur’an. . English translations are taken from M. A. S. Abdel Haleem, The Qurʼan (New York: Oxford University Press, ), . . Although Abraham nearly sacrifices his son Isaac in Genesis , a similar story is recounted in the Qur’an without specifying the name of the child. Yet, according to Islamic tradition, it is Ishmael who is almost sacrificed. Also unlike the biblical story, Abraham shares with his son that he has had a dream involving the sacrifice of his son, and his son expresses his willingness to be sacrificed (Al-Suffat :–). According to tradition, the near sacrifice took place on Mount Mina. This sacrifice is commemorated at the Eid Al-Adha, “the feast of sacrifice,” which marks the end of the hajj or pilgrimage. One of the rituals of the hajj is “Stoning the Devil,” in which pilgrims stone pillars. The pillars represent the devil who is believed to have tempted Ibrahim not to sacrifice his son. . Within Islamic tradition, the Qur’an is understood as the revelation received from Allah through the angel Gabriel to the Prophet Muhammad. The Arabic text of the Qur’an is the only acknowledged form of the Qur’an as translations are treated as interpretive. The Sunna refers to the practice of Islam based on traditions regarding the actions, examples, and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad during his lifetime as narrated by those close to him. The Hadith refers to the written vehicle for the Sunna. It provides commentary on the Qur’an and includes traditions regarding the Prophet Muhammad, including oral and later written accounts of his practices. Sunni and Shi’a Muslims have different hadith collections. While it is somewhat secondary to the Qur’an, Islam does not have the sola scriptura notion of Protestant Christianity with its Christian Bible. Thus, the Qur’an is understood as scripture in concert with additional practices and texts. . Muḥammad ibn Ismāʻīl Bukhārī and Muhammad Muhsin Khan, The Translation of the Meanings of Ṣahih Al-Bukhari: Arabic-English = [Ṣaḥīḥ Al-Bukhārī], th ed. (Lahore, Pakistan: Kazi Publications, ), The Anbiya (Prophets), book , chapter , number . . Ibid., The Anbiya (Prophets), book , chapter , number  (cf. Gen. :). . Ibid. Cf. Qur’an, Ibrahim :. . Ibid., The Anbiya (Prophets), book , chapter , numbers –.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Mother Hagar



. Hagar is remembered by Muslims during the hajj or pilgrimage, which is one of the five pillars of Islam. Like Hagar, pilgrims run or walk quickly seven times between two hills, Safa and Marwa, which are adjacent to the Ka’ba. This search (sa’y) is a ritual enactment of Hagar’s frantic search for water for Ishmael (cf. Qur’an, Al-Baqara :). Also, pilgrims drink water from the well at Zam-zam. Sophia Rose Arjana, Pilgrimage in Islam: Traditional and Modern Practices (London: Oneworld Publications, ). . Muhammad’s “Farewell Sermon” acknowledges color and ethnic differences but seeks to overcome such divisions. It does not appear within the Qur’an but is cited among later writers. Muhammad exclaims, “O people! Indeed, your Lord is one and your father is one. Indeed, there is no superiority of an Arab over a non-Arab, nor of a non-Arab over an Arab, nor of a white over a black, nor a black over a white, except by taqwa [piety]. Have I conveyed the message?” Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, . . Bernard Lewis, Race and Slavery in the Middle East: An Historical Enquiry (New York: Oxford University Press, ), . Blackness here is not the modern racial identification but a complex mix related to color, geography, and ethnicity. . Lewis, Race and Slavery in the Middle East, . . Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, I, XII, . . Jerome, In Exech, CCSL , . . Sozomen, The Ecclesiastical History of Sozomen: Comprising a History of the Church from A.D.  to A.D. ; Translated from the Greek, with a Memoir of the Author; Also, the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgious, as Epistomised by Photius, trans. Edward Wolford (London: Henry G. Bohn, ), . . Sarah Bowen Savant, “Isaac as the Persians’ Ishmael: Pride and the PreIslamic Past in Ninth and Tenth-Century Islam,” Comparative Islamic Studies , no.  (), . doi:./CIS.vi.. . Savant suggests that an earlier poem may point to an earlier origin of this link to Isaac through intra-Arab insult. The poet Jarir ben Atiyah, who was known for insulting opponents, mentioned his Persian heritage when insulting others. . On Hagar in later periods, see John Lee Thompson, Writing the Wrongs: Women of the Old Testament among Biblical Commentators from Philo through the Reformation (Oxford: Oxford University Press, ), –.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

2 Egyptian Hagar

It is . A scruffy archaeologist is on the hunt for the Ark of the Covenant, which is believed to still hold the Ten Commandments. He must recover it for the US Government in a race against the Nazis who seek to possess the Ark and its supernatural powers. This is the plot of Raiders of the Lost Ark, which starred a young Harrison Ford. This swashbuckling adventure film reflects the pervasive view of Egypt as a dusty treasure trove to be plundered by Westerners who cart its riches and mysteries back to Europe. Napoleon Bonaparte’s  invasion of Egypt was a major catalyst for renewed European interest in Egypt, which has had a long-lasting effect on Western literature, art, and culture. Yet, the resulting nineteenth-century craze for all things Egyptian did not recognize Egypt as part of “Black Africa.” At the time of Napoleon’s invasion and occupation of Egypt, Egypt was largely controlled by the Ottomans. The purpose of Napoleon’s campaign was to secure French trading interests and to threaten British trade dominance with India. Although the French campaign was unsuccessful, the French remained in Egypt until . Included in the French military invasion was a group of scientists and scholars who formed an academic expedition. This group, the French Commission on the Sciences and Arts of Egypt, documented the expedition and surveyed the history of ancient and nineteenthcentury Egypt, including its art, geography, flora, and fauna. The group published a newspaper, a journal, and eventually the multivolume encyclopedic work, Description of Egypt, which proved to be one of the long-lasting and popular results of the invasion.¹ Also, it was during the French occupation that French soldier Pierre-François Bouchard uncovered the Rosetta Stone.² This stela was a decree from

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Egyptian Hagar



Ptolemy V, a third- to second-century  Egyptian king. The decree included the same text in hieroglyphic, Demotic, and Greek. Its discovery led to the deciphering of Egyptian hieroglyphics by French philologist Jean-François Champollion and others. Accompanying the invasion was Vivant Devon, an archaeologist, whose two-volume Travels in Upper and Lower Egypt () helped to spark interest in Egyptian architecture, sculpture, and painting.³ This excitement reached its pinnacle with the recovery of King Tutankhamen’s tomb in , which generated a popular culture obsession with sphinxes, mummies, and pyramids that continues to this day. Following Napoleon’s occupation of Egypt, greater interest in Egypt and archaeology led to the development of the studies of the “Orient,” which created a divide between the “East” and the “West.” The Eurocentric concept of the Near, Middle, and Far East operates from the perspective of the European West. The specific notion of the Orient separated Egypt and northern Africa from the rest of the African continent. Europeans valued and prized Greco-Roman societies and developed interest in these “Oriental” societies, including Egyptian and Arabian cultures. With Darwin’s new theories circulating, scholars were concerned with origins, including the beginning of life and evolution as well as the beginning of history, language, and religion.⁴ The modern studies of archaeology, philology, and Egyptology developed out of these interests.⁵ This concern with origins and development raised questions regarding the origins of humanity and racial categorization. Notions of “Black Africa” or the contemporary notion of a “sub-Saharan” Africa stem from efforts to define Arabs and Northern Africans as non-Europeans but also as unlike “Black” Africans.⁶ This view allowed nineteenth-century writers to identify Hagar as Egyptian while not necessarily treating her as racially Black.⁷ As an Egyptian, she could be treated as Oriental rather than African. This chapter provides background information on issues related to enslavement in the United States. It details how selected pro- and anti-slavery writers use the Hagar narratives to argue their respective positions on US enslavement. It shows how anti-slavery advocates focused on her Egyptianness and her alleged high-status position within the household rather than her race or African origins. Also, it explains how pro-slavery advocates emphasized similarities between

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

ancient and nineteenth-century chattel slavery. They used Hagar’s enslavement and mistreatment as justification for enslavement, abuse of the enslaved, and the return of fugitive enslaved persons, while rarely identifying her as Black. Although this literature does not typically involve a Black Hagar, this lack serves as another clue that points us to the unique perspectives on Hagar that emerge from American communities. Debates over enslavement in the USA Since the colonial period, ministers, politicians, and writers in the United States have used biblical texts as part of their arguments for and against enslavement.⁸ These arguments became especially heated in the early nineteenth century.⁹ Between  and , the US was embroiled in debates regarding slavery and its political, economic, and moral implications. Although the importation of slaves to the US had been prohibited since , the US domestic slave trade continued.¹⁰ By , the issue of slavery within the US threated the balance of power in the Union. The Missouri Compromise of  admitted Missouri to the Union as a slave state, while admitting Maine as a free state. Also, it prohibited slavery in the Louisiana Territory except for criminal punishment but provided for the return of fugitive slaves.¹¹ In , Denmark Vesey’s conspiracy to lead a revolt in South Carolina had failed but nevertheless gripped the nation.¹² Nat Turner’s Southampton Insurrection in Virginia in  had intensified concerns regarding possible uprisings.¹³ These developments stoked the fears of White slaveholders and led to further suppression of enslaved persons, including restrictions on travel and congregating. By the s, the abolitionist movement had launched. This movement called for the complete abolition of slavery.¹⁴ This more extremist position set it at odds with the more moderate gradualism of the larger anti-slavery movement.¹⁵ With the rise of abolitionism, there was a surge in public discourse regarding US enslavement.¹⁶ Since both pro- and anti-slavery advocates used biblical texts within their arguments in support of and in opposition to slavery, one might assume that this polemical literature would provide parallels between Hagar as an enslaved woman and the experiences of American enslaved persons.¹⁷ Yet, the

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Egyptian Hagar



Hagar narratives are not frequently cited by either pro- or anti-slavery advocates. In general, neither side identifies Hagar as a “Negro” or “Black” woman. As discussed in the Introduction, this lack of racialization was due in part to the fact that modern biologically determined racial taxonomies had not yet fully developed. Also, at this time, the status of Egypt was contested as many imagined Egypt as part of the Orient, which divided “East” and “West” and did not include Egypt as part of the African continent. Still, the close connection of Hagar with enslavement provides an important element of the reception history of Hagar as a Black woman. Despite the often-presumed connections between biblical Hagar and the enslavement of Africans in the Americas, there was no “natural” parallel even within the polemic literature on enslavement in the US. Hagar: pro-slavery The texts that invoke the story of Hagar are not the typical examples used within nineteenth-century pro-slavery rhetoric. There was no consistent, singular argument made in favor of slaveholding. Indeed, pro-slavery writers drew on a large arsenal of biblical texts to cite in support of enslavement.¹⁸ They made a variety of arguments based on appeals to the authority of the Bible, arguments from silence, analogous reasoning, and proof-texting. They argued from silence by claiming that slaveholding is not prohibited since these texts discuss the regulation of the slave trade and treatment of slaves. For example, some linked enslavement as described in Leviticus with slaveholding in the US. The book of Leviticus includes legal codes that govern social relations between the Israelites and others. Leviticus :– requires that the Israelites acquire slaves from non-Israelites or resident aliens who are among the Israelites. Also, it indicates that slaves who were born within Israel could be kept as property and treated as inheritable property. The text does not include any prohibition against holding slaves except the admonition that fellow Israelites were not to be treated as slaves. For pro-slavery advocates, this text and others like it supported slavery since they did not speak directly against slavery. Those pro-slavery advocates who mention Hagar tend to focus primarily on Genesis  rather than Genesis , in which Abraham

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

expels Hagar and Ishmael. They highlight Sarah’s ownership of Hagar and her abuse of Hagar as sanction for enslavement and for harsh treatment of enslaved persons.¹⁹ Furthermore, they point to the messenger’s instructions to Hagar to return and submit to Sarah as justification for enslavement as well as the return of fugitive slaves. The Letter to Philemon, also called the “Pauline Mandate” by pro-slavery advocates, was more frequently cited in debates regarding the Fugitive Slave Laws of  and . According to the Letter to Philemon, Paul and Onesimus had developed a close relationship while Paul was imprisoned. In sending Onesimus back to Philemon, Paul requests that Onesimus be welcomed back into the community just as Paul himself would be welcomed. Paul asks that they treat Onesimus “no longer as a slave but more than a slave, a beloved brother.” Pro-slavery writers interpret this letter as referring to Onesimus as a fugitive slave and to Philemon as his aggrieved slave master. Thus, they contend that this letter supported slavery. Hagar appears in some pro-slavery arguments within the context of Abraham’s slaveholding. Hagar is identified as Egyptian or as African in some cases but almost never as “Negro.” Instead, they tend to focus on her status as an enslaved woman who is the property of Sarah.²⁰ One of the earliest debates regarding slavery in North America involved significant engagement with biblical texts. In , Samuel Sewell published The Selling of Joseph: A Memorial.²¹ Sewell was a prominent New England lawyer and judge who participated in the Salem Witchcraft trials. John Saffin, a prominent slave trader and magistrate, had enslaved a man named Adam, who petitioned for his freedom. Sewell published a pamphlet in support of Adam. His pamphlet cites numerous biblical texts and refutes four main arguments related to enslavement: the so-called “Curse of Ham;” the Christianizing of Africans; African capture of other Africans; and Abraham’s slaveholding. Sewell quotes Exodus :: “And seeing God hath said, He that stealeth a man and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.”²² He argues, “This law being of everlasting equity, wherein man stealing is ranked among the most atrocious of capital crimes: what louder cry can there be made of the celebrated warning Caveat Emptor!”²³ For Sewell, since “man stealing” is punishable by death in the Hebrew Bible, enslaving should be regarded as an equally serious crime. His work provides the basis for

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Egyptian Hagar



many of the key arguments opposing slavery that were used for the next  years. Saffin refutes Sewall’s arguments and justifies his continued possession of Adam in his own pamphlet A Brief, Candid Answer to a Late Printed Sheet, Entitled, The Selling of Joseph ().²⁴ In his response, Sewall admits that the Israelites should not have sold their brother Joseph. Although he does not mention Hagar specifically, he contends that it was not wrong for Abraham and others to have slaves. For example, in responding to Sewall’s “caveat emptor,” following Leviticus :–, Saffin argues, “It was unlawful for the Israelites to sell their brethren upon any account or pretence whatsoever in life. But it was not unlawful for the seed of Abraham to have bond men and bond women either born in their house or bought with their money.”²⁵ He goes on to cite multiple texts supporting his claim, including Genesis :; :; Exodus :; Leviticus :–; and John :.²⁶ He includes Genesis :, which is Sarah’s request that Abraham expel Hagar and Ishmael. Although Saffin cites a Hagar text to support his non-Israelite argument, he does not racialize Hagar as Black. Both Saffin and Sewell’s biblical arguments become used frequently within debates on slavery.²⁷ For instance, in , slaveholder, lawyer, and South Carolina legislator Charles Cotesworth Pinckney mentions Hagar in his defense of slavery. Pinckney served in the Continental Army and was a delegate to the Constitutional Convention of . He writes that there are no Old Testament or New Testament texts that prohibit slavery. He argues that Abraham had  slaves (without citing Gen. :) and that Hagar, “from whom millions sprang, was an African slave, brought out of Egypt by Abraham, the father of the faithful and the beloved servant of the Most High.”²⁸ Unlike other writers, Pinckney does connect Egypt with Africa and regards Hagar as an early ancestor figure. In order to explain how Hagar came into Abraham’s household, Pinckney uses Genesis : in which Abraham acquires property and slaves from Pharaoh. In contrast to Pinckney, pro-slavery writers more often stress Hagar’s treatment by Abraham and Sarah. In Jonathan Small’s  An Inquiry into the Nature and Character of Ancient and Modern Slavery, he identifies five elements of enslavement, of which the first and most important is that “the liberty of the slave is

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

in the hands of his master” (italics original).²⁹ Small seeks to offer judicious and careful arguments regarding slavery and does not wish to broadly identify all slaveholders and all forms of slavery as sinful. He compares Hagar with Bilhah and Zilpah, the slave women of Rachel and Leah who, like Hagar, are used as surrogates (Gen. :, ; :, ). Noting Sarah’s possession of, exercise of authority over, and abuse of Hagar, he does not regard Hagar as a servant. Instead, he sees her as a slave woman with no liberties of her own and with Sarah as her mistress. In comparing Hagar with the non-Egyptian Bilhah and Zilpah, Small does not focus on Hagar’s ethnicity but on her household status. In , Thornton Stringfellow published A Brief Examination of the Scripture Testimony on the Institution of Slavery, in which he discusses Hagar’s status as a slave.³⁰ Stringfellow lived in Virginia and supported secession. He was a Baptist minister who was in favor of the Southern Baptist Convention’s split from the Northern Baptist Church. Stringfellow’s comments were initially published in the Religious Herald and were later compiled and published together. In this pro-slavery treatise, Stringfellow claims that Abraham and the patriarchs practiced slavery and that Jesus and the New Testament do not prohibit slavery. Without explicitly stating it, Stringfellow interprets the divine messenger’s instructions to Hagar in Genesis : as a divine sanction of slavery. Sarcastically, Stringfellow notes, “Quite a wonder she honored Sarah so much as to call her mistress; but she knew nothing of abolition, and God by his angel did not become her teacher.”³¹ Stringfellow does not make much of Hagar’s Egyptian origins in his argument. Her ethnicity is not at issue here as her submission to Sarah is primary. Within a discussion of Abraham as a slaveholder, Stringfellow argues that Sarah suggested to Abraham that “a female slave of the Egyptian stock” serve as “a secondary wife.”³² Following Genesis :–, Stringfellow believes Sarah’s complaint and alleges that Hagar was “puffed” “with pride” and “insolent.”³³ Stringfellow uses Genesis  to counter arguments by anti-slavery writers who used biblical texts to support emancipation. Within the context of fugitive slave legislation that required the return of enslaved persons to their slaveholders, Stringfellow portrays the divine messenger as supportive of the slaveholders’ position. Sarcastically,

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Egyptian Hagar



Stringfellow notes that when Hagar runs away, the angel does not offer a sermon that admonishes us to follow the Golden Rule (Luke :), which was a popular anti-slavery text. He argues that instead of giving Hagar directions back to Egypt, the angel calls her “Hagar, Sarah’s maid” (Gen. :). For Stringfellow, this address is a divine acknowledgement of Hagar’s position as enslaved. Also, since Hagar acknowledges that she has fled from her “mistress” (Gen. :), Stringfellow notes that Hagar knew nothing of abolition and was not enlightened on the subject by the angel. Then, Stringfellow asks a series of rhetorical questions regarding the lesson to be learned regarding God’s position on slavery based on Sarah’s abuse of Hagar. He concludes by quoting the angel’s response to Hagar that she should return and submit to Sarah (Gen. :). Like Stringfellow, Presbyterian minister George Junkin supported slavery, but he goes further in claiming that Sarah’s abuse of Hagar justified the harsh treatment of enslaved persons in the US. Junkin was the first president of Lafayette College in Easton, Pennsylvania, and he served as the second president of Miami University in Oxford, Ohio. In The Integrity of Our National Union, vs. Abolitionism (), he makes a series of pro-slavery claims in his remarks at the Synod of Cincinnati, a formal body within the Presbyterian Church. At one point, he offers the thesis: “A very considerable degree of severity, in the treatment of servants, was indulged in during the Old Testament times.”³⁴ Junkin surmises that Hagar may have been a “good and faithful servant” to Sarah, especially since Sarah chose her.³⁵ He acknowledges that Hagar was pregnant when she was “abused and maltreated” to such an extent that she chose to run away. Junkin concludes that Sarah’s abuse was physical and harsh by noting other texts in which the word “afflicted” appears (Exod. :; Isa. :; Job :). Junkin contends that Hagar’s case was that of a “runaway slave” similar to Shimei’s servants who also run away to Achish in Gath ( Kings :). He explains that Achish notified Shimei, who went to Gath and brought them back. He regards Achish more positively in his upholding of justice and law than “modern abolitionists.”³⁶ Junkin identifies the messenger who finds Hagar alone as God. Sarcastically, Junkin asks if God behaves like an abolitionist by giving her wings and releasing her or by hiring a “Vanzandt” to take her to Egypt or to Canada.³⁷ Here Junkin refers

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

to John Van Zandt, a former slaveholder turned abolitionist who was accused of harboring and concealing runaway slaves. Junkin quotes the messenger’s instructions to Hagar to return and submit to Sarah. Smugly, he explains, “Such is Jehovah’s command to a poor, abused and afflicted runaway African slave.”³⁸ Here Junkin acknowledges that Hagar is African. His use of “runaway” connects her to public discourse on fugitive slaves in the US. Junkin continues by quoting Exodus :– (KJV): “And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.” Junkin compares “under his hand” in Exodus with “under her hands” (referring to Hagar under Sarah’s control) in Genesis :. For Junkin, this expression means “severe correction” and “extremely violent whipping,” although the biblical text does not specify the form of abuse that causes Hagar to run away.³⁹ He claims that the slave belongs to the master and that the master’s financial interest should be enough to warrant the safety of “his own purchased slave.”⁴⁰ To Junkin, Hagar is merely a runaway slave who deserves to be punished. Junkin is selective in his engagement with biblical texts on Hagar. He identifies Egypt as her home and regards her as African, but he does not identify her by race. He affirms Sarah’s right to abuse Hagar, and by analogy, he claims that US slaveholders have the right to abuse their enslaved Africans. He does not discuss Hagar’s status within the household except to acknowledge that Sarah selected her. He focuses on Genesis  and the return of Hagar to Sarah without mentioning Genesis  and the expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael. In addition, Junkin does not acknowledge Hagar as a wife of Abraham or as the mother of Abraham’s child. A pro-slavery catechism ran in the Wiskonsan (Wisconsin) Freeman and was reprinted in the abolitionist newspaper The National Era (Washington, DC) on July , . The catechism identifies Hagar’s punishment as whipping, which is justified since God sends her back to her abuser. The catechism does not mention Genesis , in which Hagar is expelled and does not return. Nor does it mention Hagar’s status as a wife of Abraham or Hagar’s pregnancy. It uses the treatment of Hagar to justify the whipping of enslaved persons.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Egyptian Hagar



The catechism includes thirty-eight questions regarding slavery with short responses in a forceful and unapologetic defense of slavery. Some of the questions refer to Hagar’s story in Genesis : Question: “How do you know that Abraham’s servants were slaves?” Answer: Because he whipped Hagar. Question: “How do you know that?” Answer: Because she ran away. Question: “How do you know that it is right to flog slaves?” Answer: Because God sent Hagar back.⁴¹ Often, questions in the catechism allude to several texts that proslavery advocates use frequently, including the “Mark of Cain” and the “Curse of Ham.” The questions link biblical slavery with US chattel slavery. Although the catechism does not identify Hagar as “Negro,” in a rare move, it identifies persons in various time periods as “Negroes,” including biblical Cain and enslaved Romans. The writer regards “Negro” as a category that is applicable to some biblical characters but does not apply it to Hagar. Instead, the connection to Hagar focuses on the abuse of Hagar and claims regarding the appropriateness of flogging enslaved persons. The use of Hagar to justify abuse is also a key element in an anonymous essay in the September  issue of De Bow’s Review. The author surveys a selection of Old and New Testament texts and highlights Abraham’s treatment of his “servants” as comparable to, and in some instances more severe than, the treatment of enslaved persons in the US. Citing Abraham’s circumcision of the enslaved men in his household in Genesis (:–, ) and other instances of control, the author argues that Abraham’s “servants” were property over which he had both legal and moral authority to exercise his power. The writer claims that Abraham “exercised rights which no southern planter would dare to exercise, and which a southern negro would not submit to.”⁴² The author argues that Sarai complained about Hagar to her husband because “she only wanted her husband’s consent to punish Hagar as she pleased.”⁴³ The author emphasizes that the angel of the Lord

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

does not free Hagar but tells her to return and submit to her mistress. The author draws a parallel between Hagar’s efforts to flee and the flight to Canada by some US enslaved persons. Claiming that the master/slave relationship continues for “all future ages,” the author notes that God has requirements of Abraham in his use of his slaves but does not instruct him that it is “immoral” to enslave others.⁴⁴ For this author, Hagar serves as an example of God’s approval of holding and disciplining enslaved persons. In general, the pro-slavery literature of this period does not focus on Hagar. When writers do mention Hagar texts, they aim to justify her abuse or support her return after running away. They tend to not identify her as a Black woman. Hagar: anti-slavery Like pro-slavery advocates, anti-slavery writers were selective in their treatment of Hagar. They tend to identify Hagar as a servant rather than as a slave. Also, they do not racialize her as “Negro” but, using Orientalist notions, tend to highlight her Egyptian ethnicity as exotic and foreign but not as a negative. As early as the eighteenth century, anti-slavery advocates use Hagar to argue against the enslavement of African peoples. For instance, preacher and theologian Jonathan Edwards (the son of Jonathan Edwards of the First Great Awakening) refers to Hagar within an anti-slavery sermon preached in Connecticut at the annual meeting of a group of anti-slavery advocates in . For Edwards, the treatment of Hagar provides an example of how Christians can reject the example of Abraham the patriarch as slaveholder. Edwards states his opposition to the slave trade and refutes some of the typical arguments made in favor of slavery, including the “Curse of Ham” and the possession of slaves by Abraham. Edwards mentions Hagar in arguing that Abraham’s “servants” were not necessarily slaves. He contends that even if Abraham enslaved others it does not justify slavery, just as Abraham’s having sex with Hagar does not justify the behavior of one who would “indulge in criminal intercourse with his domestic.”⁴⁵ Edwards notes that Christians voiced objections to some of the behavior of the patriarchs including Abraham’s sexual relationship with Hagar and Sarah’s consent to it as well as the polygamy and

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Egyptian Hagar



concubinage of David and Solomon. Thus, he claims that it is acceptable to question how Christians could be slaveholders. Referring to Exodus :, which includes a clear prohibition against kidnapping, Edwards claims that robbing someone of liberty was a form of man stealing and a more grievous offense than fornication or concubinage since death is prescribed for it in Exodus : but not for other offenses. Hagar’s Egyptian origins are not considered here. In the  Remarks on Weem’s Defense of Slavery, the unnamed author focuses on Hagar’s status without addressing her ethnicity. The author claims that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were not slaveholders.⁴⁶ The author refers to Hagar as a “bondwoman” and surmises that although Hagar may have at one time been enslaved, the length of her service is not known.⁴⁷ The author speculates that she may not have remained enslaved after the birth of Ishmael, since being the mother of Abraham’s son was sufficient reason for her to remain in the family even if she were no longer enslaved. The author allows that even if Hagar remained enslaved, she and her son were freed by Abraham and by God. Thus, unlike pro-slavery writers who tended to focus on Genesis , the author reinterprets Abraham’s expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael in Genesis  as a manumission. The author focuses on Hagar’s status but does not discuss Sarah’s abuse of Hagar or Sarah’s request that Abraham expel Hagar and Ishmael. Charles Elliot’s The Bible and Slavery () discusses slavery within biblical texts as well as Roman slavery. Born in Ireland, Elliot immigrated to the US in . He served as a Methodist Episcopal minister and was president of Iowa Wesleyan University. Elliot was in conversation with those who consider patriarchal slavery to be similar to nineteenth-century slaveholding. Elliott links Hagar with Bilhah and Zilpah. He acknowledges that they may have been slaves but could not continue as slaves once they became wives of their respective patriarchs (Gen. :; :, ). Also, he claims that they became religious converts, although there is no biblical evidence to support this claim. He argues that Hagar, Bilhah, and Zilpah were originally slaves but became “freed-women” (italics original).⁴⁸ Furthermore, he contends that their children Ishmael, Gad, Dan, Asher, and Napthali were not slaves. Since he argues that the condition of the child follows the condition of the mother (partus sequitur ventrem), for Elliot, it follows that their mothers were not slaves.⁴⁹ In countering the

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

argument that Hagar was sent back to Sarah after fleeing to the wilderness, Elliot contends that she was returned “as a wife though a subordinate one” (italics original). Elliot argues that Hagar’s “departure” from Abraham’s household in Genesis  was in fact a divorce.⁵⁰ He focuses primarily on Hagar’s household status rather than her ethnicity or race. In , minister and activist George B. Cheever offered a disputation of slavery using biblical texts. In his work, he claims that Hagar is not an enslaved woman. A graduate of Andover seminary, Cheever was a reformer who campaigned for and spoke in favor of both temperance and abolition.⁵¹ He notes that Hagar is identified with the Hebrew word that he transliterates as “shippah” in Genesis  and with the Hebrew word that he transliterates as “amah” in Genesis . He argues based on the use of these terms in other texts that Hagar is not a “bondwoman” but a “handmaid” or “maid servant” who became part of Abraham’s household when he was in Egypt.⁵² Cheever lists the uses of these terms and notes that they can also describe free women, including Hannah, Abigail, and Ruth. Cheever also considers the use of the Greek term paidischē (“bondwoman”) in the Septuagint to describe Hagar in Genesis  and  and in the New Testament in Galatians . Cheever notes the contrast of “bondwoman” and “free woman” (Gal. :) for Hagar and Sarah and claims that the text does not clearly indicate the status of the person. In a more detailed discussion of Galatians, Cheever argues that within Paul’s allegory, Hagar is a servant and not a slave. Paul’s effort is not to contrast freedom and slavery, “which is the unrighteous bondage of chattelism,” but to contrast the law and the gospel.⁵³ Cheever contends that the descriptions of Hagar as a “bondwoman” may refer to Hagar’s status before becoming a part of Abraham’s family. He argues that after Hagar becomes a wife, she was no longer a slave. Also, he explains that Hagar’s condition would not have extended to her offspring, unlike the later practice of partus sequitur ventrem. For Cheever, Hagar’s status is at issue rather than her ethnicity or race, and he claims that Hagar’s status is not comparable to that of enslaved persons in the US. In , the American Tract Society published a tract by Isaac Allen titled “Is Slavery Sanctioned by the Bible?” Allen does not connect Hagar’s ethnicity to Africa or to a racialized identity. Instead,

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Egyptian Hagar



he considers her to be part of the exotic Orient. Allen addresses proslavery arguments that cite biblical texts. He claims that chattel slavery involves two elements: the fact that “the status of the mother decides that of the child” and the inability “to inherit or possess property.”⁵⁴ He uses Genesis  to argue against these elements by claiming that Hagar was a concubine and alludes to her Egyptian ethnicity by referring to the conflict with Hagar as similar to “the usual bickering of Eastern harems.”⁵⁵ Allen claims that Ishmael was regarded as a rightful heir and therefore was not a slave. Also, he argues Abraham does not regard Hagar and Ishmael as personal chattel because he sends them away without selling them. William Morris offered the anti-slavery lecture Ancient Slavery Disapproved of by God () in order to counter pro-slavery advocates who used biblical texts to support their cause. Unlike some pro-slavery advocates, Morris uses both Genesis  and . Like Isaac Allen, Morris distances Hagar from nineteenth-century links with enslaved persons by treating her as an exotic foreigner. Thus, Egypt is not linked with Blackness or with Africa. He identifies her as an “Egyptian damsel” and a “maid of honor” who was a gift from Pharaoh, perhaps from his own seraglio.⁵⁶ She is offered to Abraham as a “subordinate wife” due to Sarah’s infertility “in accordance with oriental ideals and customs.” Morris softens Sarah’s abuse of Hagar by treating it as verbal abuse. He claims that Sarah uses “the natural weapon of womanhood, the tongue” (italics original), arguing that the Hebrew verb that he transliterates as “annah” means “to answer, to return, to give back or retort.”⁵⁷ Although Morris uses the correct Hebrew verb, he overlooks the fact that the particular construction of this verb in Genesis : has an intensified force in this instance, suggesting oppression or violence.⁵⁸ He counters the notion that this text supports fugitive slave laws because Hagar was sent back to Sarah. Morris regards the angel’s words to Hagar as comforting and completely different than the treatment of any fugitive slave. Finally, Morris argues that although Hagar’s expulsion from Abraham’s household for “improper behavior” is a form of emancipation, pro-slavery advocates do not recommend expulsion as punishment for slaves.⁵⁹ For Morris, she is an Egyptian woman who is set free by her masters. Her Egyptian origins are unrelated to Blackness or to Africa. Instead, they help to reinforce his view of Hagar as an exotic, Oriental foreigner.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

In , Reuben Hatch published Bible Servitude Re-Examined; With Special Reference to Pro-Slavery Interpretations and Infidel Objections. Hatch was a Congregationalist minister and a graduate of Oberlin College who was active in developing educational institutions. His Bible Servitude provides a lengthy and detailed rebuttal to proslavery biblical arguments using both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament. In addition, he takes on certain anti-slavery arguments that he believes are faulty, including the notion that the “servitude” in the biblical patriarchal period was “chattel slavery” and that servant/ master regulations in the New Testament apply to slaves and slaveholders in the US. Hatch treats Hagar’s status and ethnicity as positives that argue for Hagar’s elevation within Abraham’s household. He does not identify Hagar as African or as Black. Hatch discusses Hagar in chapter eight, “Particular Examination of Various Passages of Scripture which Refer to Patriarchal Servitude.” He contends that Hagar is not a slave or a chattel slave within Abraham’s household but a “handmaid, or maid of honor.”⁶⁰ He compares Hagar with Eliezar of Damascus, who has a high-level position within Abraham’s household. Eliezar was Abraham’s heir until he had children (Gen. :). Furthermore, Hatch draws upon Jewish traditions such as Genesis Rabbah that connect Eliezar with the unnamed servant who finds Rebekah as a wife for Isaac (Gen. ). He contends that both Hagar and Eliezar of Damascus were in honored, not subservient, positions. Hatch acknowledges that Eliezar and Hagar are non-Israelites, but he treats them as high-status non-Israelites, arguing that they are “foreigners of the most honorable type.”⁶¹ He understands Egypt as an important political power and argues that the status associated with being Egyptian is comparable to the status associated with being Roman at the height of Rome’s power. Although Hatch chastises Sarah and Abraham for unfaithfulness in seeking a surrogate, he stresses that Sarah would never have chosen a “mere slave” (italics original).⁶² Instead, Sarah chose to elevate Hagar to a position as the wife of Abraham since she was the “lady highest in honor, and esteem and rank” and “of rich and noble Egyptian stock” in order to “secure honorable heirship in the family.”⁶³ He concludes that Hagar became the mother of the Ishmaelites, whom he regards as below only Isaac’s line in status.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Egyptian Hagar



Hatch treats Sarah’s abuse of Hagar (Gen. :) as a natural result of Sarah’s fear that Hagar would usurp her place. Hatch describes Hagar’s running away as a personal choice. He claims that Hagar left the household “exactly when it pleased her” in order “to take care of herself.”⁶⁴ He contends that since there was no effort to retrieve Hagar, she was a free woman and not a fugitive. The angel’s command that Hagar submit herself was only to have Hagar acknowledge that she was subject to Sarah. It was not an indication of an enslaved status. Hatch argues that Hagar left Abraham’s household as a free woman and notes that there was no “slave-hunt” to retrieve her.⁶⁵ Hatch rebuts the argument that Abraham and Sarah were slaveholders. Furthermore, he argues that Paul does not treat Hagar as a slave in Galatians . Paul refers to Hagar as a paidischē, which Hatch contends should not be translated as “bondwoman” but as “girl, or young maiden” (italics original).⁶⁶ He highlights other New Testament texts in which the term is used to suggest that slavery need not be implied (Matt. :; Mark :, ; Luke :; :; John :; Acts :, :). Also, he notes that the Septuagint uses paidischē when referring to Ruth (Ruth :). Hatch argues that slavery was unknown to Paul and that he would not have thought of Hagar as a slave. Hatch concludes that Paul uses language in the “ancient, free, Hebrew sense” and “not in the South Carolina sense.”⁶⁷

Conclusion Both pro- and anti-slavery advocates use biblical texts to support their respective positions. One might think that this type of public discourse would certainly emphasize Hagar’s Blackness because she is identified as Egyptian in biblical texts. Yet, this is generally not the case. While Hagar is not frequently cited among these texts, of those that do mention Hagar, few identify her as “African” or as “Negro.” Instead her Egyptian ethnicity is understood as her geographic origin or, in an Orientalist view, as “exotic.” Hagar is not racialized within these conversations in part because Egypt was not regarded as “Black” or “African” at this time. Furthermore, despite the consistent engagement of biblical texts on both sides, the view of Hagar as connected with enslaved Africans is rarely put forth. Instead, her status within

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

Abraham’s household and under Sarah’s control is more often at issue. Nevertheless, we see how biblical Hagar is part of the conversation regarding US enslavement, but antebellum America does not provide us with enough clues to solve the mystery of how Hagar became Black. In the next chapter, we will discover how a different Hagar comes to be associated with biblical Hagar and with Blackness. Notes . The full English title is Description of Egypt, or the Collection of Observations and Researches which were made in Egypt during the Expedition of the French Army. See website: http://descegy.bibalex.org/index.html. . The Rosetta Stone is held at the British Museum. Britain has refused to repatriate the Rosetta Stone to Egypt. . Vivant Denon, Travels in Upper and Lower Egypt: During the Campaigns of General Bonaparte in That Country; and Published Under His Immediate Patronage [Voyage dans la Basse et la Haute Égypte] (New York: Arno Press, ). . Randall Fuller, The Book that Changed America: How Darwin’s Theory of Evolution Ignited a Nation (New York: Viking, ). . On Orientalism, see Edward W. Said, Orientalism (New York: Vintage Books, ). . In the US, various ethnic groups seeking to assimilate often distance themselves from Blackness and situate themselves as White or in proximity to Whiteness. See David R. Roediger, Working Toward Whiteness: How America’s Immigrants Became White: The Strange Journey from Ellis Island to the Suburbs (New York: Basic Books, ); Ian Haney-López, White by Law: The Legal Construction of Race, rev. ed. (New York: New York University Press, ); Noel Ignatiev, How the Irish Became White (New York: Routledge, ); and Nell Irvin Painter, The History of White People (New York: W. W. Norton, ). . On views of race and color in earlier periods, see Sharon Block, Colonial Complexions: Race and Bodies in Eighteenth-Century America (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, ). While Hagar was not identified as a “dark concubine,” such notions of hypersexualized Black women were prevalent. See Lisa Ze Winters, The Mulatta Concubine: Terror, Intimacy, Freedom, and Desire in the Black Transatlantic (Athens: University of Georgia Press, ) and Robin Mitchell, Vénus Noire: Black Women and Colonial Fantasies in Nineteenth-Century France (Athens: University of Georgia Press, ). Also, while Hagar was used to produce a child, the intended child was not solely to produce enslaved offspring to labor for Abraham. Instead, the child was

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Egyptian Hagar

.

.

.

.



to belong to Sarah. On reproduction and enslavement, see Jennifer L. Morgan, Laboring Women: Reproduction and Gender in New World Slavery (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, ); Thavolia Glymph, Out of the House of Bondage: The Transformation of the Plantation Household (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ); Gregory D. Smithers, Slave Breeding: Sex, Violence, and Memory in African American History (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, ); and Ned Sublette and Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the SlaveBreeding Industry (Chicago: Lawrence Hill Books, ). On the Bible and American politics, see Stephen R. Prothero, The American Bible: How Our Words Unite, Divide, and Define a Nation (New York: HarperOne, ); Eran Shalev, American Zion: The Old Testament as a Political Text from the Revolution to the Civil War (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, ); Mark A. Noll, In the Beginning Was the Word: The Bible in American Public Life, – (Oxford: Oxford University Press, ); and Seth Perry, Bible Culture and Authority in the Early United States (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, ). For first-person narratives on enslavement, see Noel Rae, The Great Stain: Witnessing American Slavery (New York: Overlook Press), . Also see the Library of Congress collection, Born in Slavery: Slave Narratives from the Federal Writers’ Project, –, https://www.loc.gov/. On issues of enslavement and Christianity, see Larry R. Morrison, “The Religious Defense of American Slavery before ,” Journal of Religious Thought , no.  (): –; J. R. McKivigan and M. Snay, Religion and the Antebellum Debate Over Slavery (Athens: University of Georgia Press, ); David Torbett, Theology and Slavery: Charles Hodge and Horace Bushnell (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, ); and Katharine Gerbner, Christian Slavery: Conversion and Race in the Protestant Atlantic World (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, ). The Act Prohibiting the Importation of Slaves was enacted on March , . It took effect on January , . See National Archives Catalog: https://catalog.archives.gov/. On voyages of the enslaved, see The TransAtlantic Slave Trade Voyage Database: http://slavevoyages.org/. On enslavement over centuries, see Ira Berlin, Generations of Captivity: A History of African-American Slaves (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, ). There was no legislation to permit slavery in the US. The so-called “fugitive slave clause” of the US Constitution (Article IV, Section , Clause ) does not mention “slavery.” It states: “No person held to service or labor in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

service or labour may be due.” See US Government Publishing Office text: https://www.gpo.gov/. The Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery and involuntary servitude except as punishment for a crime and made this provision moot. Since the Constitution did not provide a means for executing the law regarding fugitives, the Fugitive Slave Law of  provided for the return of fugitives from service and made assisting fugitives a crime. See Annals of Congress: http://memory.loc.gov/ ammem/index.html. Section eight of the Missouri Compromise of  specified: “And be it further enacted, That in all the territory ceded by France to the United States, under the name of Louisiana, which lies north of thirty-six degrees, and thirty minutes north latitude, not included within the limits of the state contemplated by their act, slavery and involuntary servitude, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes, whereof the parties shall have been duly convicted, shall be, and is hereby, forever prohibited. Provided always that any person escaping into the same, from whom labor or service is lawfully claimed, in any state or territory of the United States, such fugitive may be lawfully reclaimed and conveyed to the person claiming his or labor or service as aforesaid.” See American Memory: http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/index.html. The Missouri Compromise was ruled unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court in Dred Scott v. Stanford (). The Fugitive Slave Law of  amended the Fugitive Slave Law of  and strengthened its provisions by providing for the capture of fugitives, criminalizing assistance to fugitives, and requiring the use of law enforcement. Such provisions made fugitives easier to capture and made the capture of free persons easier. On the  law, see R. J. M. Blackett, The Captive’s Quest for Freedom: Resistance to the  Fugitive Slave Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ). . Douglas R. Egerton, He Shall Go Out Free: The Lives of Denmark Vesey, rev. ed. (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, ), ; Douglas R. Egerton and Robert L.Paquette., eds., The Denmark Vesey Affair: A Documentary History (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, ). On biblical interpretation and the Denmark Vesey trial, see Jeremy Schipper, “ ‘On Such Texts Comment is Unnecessary’: Biblical Interpretation in the Trial of Denmark Vesey,” Journal of the American Academy of Religion , no.  (): –; and Jeremy Schipper, Denmark Vesey’s Bible (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, forthcoming). . Attorney Thomas Gray published a wildly popular account of the insurrection based on what he claimed were conversations with Turner during Turner’s imprisonment; Nat Turner and Thomas R. Gray, The Confessions of Nat Turner, the Leader of the Late Insurrection in Southampton, Va. as Fully

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Egyptian Hagar

. .

. .



and Voluntarily made to Thomas R. Gray, in the Prison Where He was Confined, and Acknowledged by Him to be such when Read before the Court of Southampton: With the Certificate, Under Seal of the Court Convened at Jerusalem, Nov. , , for His Trial. Also, an Authentic Account of the Whole Insurrection, with Lists of the Whites Who were Murdered, and of the Negroes Brought before the Court of Southampton, and there Sentenced, &c (Richmond: T. R. Gray, ). For scholarship on Turner and on Gray’s account, see Patrick H. Breen, The Land Shall be Deluged in Blood: A New History of the Nat Turner Revolt (New York: Oxford University Press, ); Kenneth S. Greenberg and Nat Turner, The Confessions of Nat Turner with Related Documents, nd ed. (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, ). Nilgun Anadolu-Okur, Dismantling Slavery: Frederick Douglass, William Lloyd Garrison, and Formation of the Abolitionist Discourse, – (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, ). This movement ended in  with the conclusion of the US civil war and the ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment to the US Constitution, which legally abolished slavery and involuntary servitude except as punishment for a crime. The Thirteenth Amendment states: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” It was passed by Congress on January ,  and was ratified by the states on December , . See the National Archives: https://www.archives.gov. Morrison, “Religious Defense.” Many other biblical texts were used to support enslavement. Genesis , the “curse of Ham,” is likened to Genesis , “the mark of Cain,” and is used to justify slavery. Hebrew Bible texts that were interpreted as supporting slavery and requiring submission to slaveholders include Joseph’s enslavement of the Egyptians (Gen. :–), the Ten Commandments (Exod.:– and Deut.y :–) as well as other legal material in biblical texts. Also, interpreters used New Testament texts such as the “Haustafeln” or household codes that prescribed how to regulate hierarchy and obedience within one’s household and relationships. Colossians :– required obedience to masters. Similarly, Ephesians :– required obedience with enthusiasm, while  Peter :– was used to require obedience regardless of abusive treatment. Despite the differences between ancient practices of enslavement and US chattel slavery, proslavery defenders used biblical texts in a variety of ways to justify the practice of slavery in the US. On abolitionism and biblical interpretation, see Hector Avalos, Slavery, Abolitionism, and the Ethics of Biblical Scholarship (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, ). For a database with

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



. .

. . . . . . . . . .

.

Reimagining Hagar biblical quotations from this era, see Lincoln Mullen, America’s Public Bible: Biblical Quotations in U.S. Newspapers, website, code, and datasets (): http://americaspublicbible.org/. A South Carolinian [Frederick Dalcho], Practical Considerations Founded on the Scriptures, Relative to the Slave Population of South Carolina (Charleston, SC: A. E. Miller, ). Note that one tactic employed by anti-slavery advocates was the use of the brutality of slavery to convince others that slavery was morally evil. “The Scourged Back,” a photograph that shows the scarred back of a formerly enslaved man named Gordon or “whipped Peter” was printed on cartes de visite in support of anti-slavery efforts. On “The Scourged Back” and questions regarding the narrative surrounding it, see David Silkenat, “‘A Typical Negro’: Gordon, Peter, Vincent Colyer, and the Story Behind Slavery’s Most Famous Photograph,” American Nineteenth Century History , no.  (): –. On the uses of photography and post-emancipation life, see Deborah Willis and Barbara Krauthamer, Envisioning Emancipation: Black Americans and the End of Slavery (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, ). On the economic value of enslaved persons in the US, see Daina Ramey Berry, The Price for Their Pound of Flesh: The Value of the Enslaved from Womb to Grave in the Building of a Nation (Boston: Beacon Press, ). Samuel Sewall, The Selling of Joseph: A Memorial (Boston: Bartholomew Green and John Allen, ). Ibid., . Ibid. See Abner C. Goodell, “John Saffin and His Slave Adam,” Publications of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts  (): –. Goodell reprinted Saffin’s work and other documents related to Adam’s case. Saffin, reprinted in George Henry Moore, Notes on the History of Slavery in Massachusetts (New York: D. Appleton, ), . Ibid. For more on Sewell and Saffin, see Lawrence W. Towner, “The SewallSaffin Dialogue on Slavery,” William and Mary Quarterly , no.  (): –. Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, “Slavery speech” (), The American Mosaic: The African American Experience. ABC-CLIO, . Jonathan Small, An Inquiry into the Nature and Character of Ancient and Modern Slavery. To which is Added a Brief Review of a Book Entitled, Testimony of God Against Slavery, by Rev. La Roy Sunderland (Maine: J. Small, M.D., ). Thornton Stringfellow, A Brief Examination of Scripture Testimony on the Institution of Slavery, in an Essay, First Published in the Religious Herald

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Egyptian Hagar

. . . .

. . .

. . . . . . . .

.



and Republished by Request: With Remarks on a Review of the Essay (Richmond: Office of the Religious Herald, ). Ibid., . Ibid., . Ibid. George Junkin, The Integrity of Our National Union, Vs. Abolitionism: An Argument from the Bible, in Proof of the Position that Believing Masters Ought to Be Honored and Obeyed by Their Own Servants, and Tolerated in, Not Excommunicated from, the Church of God: (Cincinnati, OH: R. P. Donogh, ), . Ibid. Ibid., . Van Zandt was party to Jones v. Van Zandt  U.S.  (). Van Zandt was accused of harboring and concealing fugitive slaves in violation of the Fugitive Slave Act. He lost and appealed to the Supreme Court. The Court decided that the Fugitive Slave Act was constitutional and that Van Zandt assisted fugitives in fleeing through the Underground Railroad in Ohio. Jones sued Van Zandt for monetary damages. Van Zandt lost the case. Junkin, Integrity of Our National Union, . Ibid., . Ibid. The National Era (Washington, DC), July , . Anonymous, “Slavery and the Bible,” De Bow’s Review , no.  (September ), . Ibid. Ibid., . Jonathan Edwards, The Injustice and Impolicy of the Slave Trade, and of the Slavery of the Africans: Illustrated in a Sermon Preached before the Connecticut Society for the Promotion of Freedom, and for the Relief of Persons Unlawfully Holden in Bondage, at their Annual Meeting in New Haven, September , , rd ed. (New Haven, CT: New Haven AntiSlavery Society, ). Enoch Lewis, ed., The African Observer: A Monthly Journal, Containing Essays and Documents Illustrative of the General Character, and Moral and Political Effects of Negro Slavery, – (Westport, CT: Negro Universities Press, ). The response is in conversation with Maryland Congressman John C. Weems, who offered a defense of slavery within a congressional debate, “Captured Africans.” This debate centered on a petition from Richard H. Wilde to cancel a Senate bill canceling his bond, which required that he transport a group of Africans outside of the US. He was attempting to prevent a group of African enslaved persons

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



. .

. . .

. . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

Reimagining Hagar from being transported to Cuba. Congressional Debates,  Cong. st sess., January , , pp. –. Lewis, African Observer, . Charles Elliot, The Bible and Slavery; in which the Abrahamic and Mosaic Discipline is Considered in Connection with the Most Ancient Forms of Slavery; and the Pauline Code on Slavery as Related to Roman Slavery and the Discipline of the Apostolic Churches (Cincinnati, OH: L. Swormstedt and A. Poe, ), . The notion that the condition of the child follows the condition of the mother (partus sequitur ventrem) was not an accepted practice in all slaveholding societies. Elliot, Bible and Slavery, . Philip English Mackey, “Reverend George Barrell Cheever: Yankee Reformer as Champion of the Gallows,” Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society  (): –. https://americanantiquarian.org/ proceedings/.pdf. George B. Cheever, The Guilt of Slavery and the Crime of Slaveholding Demonstrated from the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures (New York: s.n., ), . Ibid., . Isaac Allen, Is Slavery Sanctioned by the Bible? (Boston: American Tract Society, ), . Ibid. William Morris, Ancient Slavery Disapproved by God. The Substance of a Lecture (Philadelphia: Scriptural Knowledge Society, ). A seraglio refers to living quarters for wives and concubines during the Ottoman Empire. Ibid., . The Piel form of the verb is used here. Morris, Ancient Slavery, . Reuben Hatch, Bible Servitude Re-Examined; With Special Reference to Pro-Slavery Interpretations and Infidel Objections (Cincinnati, OH: Applegate, ), . Ibid. Ibid., . Ibid., –. Ibid., –. Ibid., . Ibid., . Ibid., .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

3 Aunt Hagar

Womanist theologian Delores Williams writes, “For more than a hundred years Hagar—the African slave of the Hebrew woman Sarah—has appeared in the deposits of African American culture. Sculptors, writers, poets, scholars, preachers, and just plain folks have passed along the biblical figure Hagar to generation after generation of black folks.”¹ As I shall argue in Chapter , Williams’s groundbreaking work Sisters in the Wilderness has been extremely influential within religious studies and biblical studies and has promoted the notion of an intimate relationship between biblical Hagar and Black women. Williams cites numerous instances of what she identifies as the “appropriation” of Hagar by African Americans. While her primary intent is to construct a womanist theology or god-talk that takes seriously Black women’s experiences, the notion of Hagar as a Black woman has a more complex development than the tradition asserted by Williams. This chapter traces the intertwining of Hagar figures by analyzing select depictions of Hagar as a Black woman from nineteenth- and twentieth-century visual arts, music, and literature in the United States. As this chapter shows, different Hagar figures, including an Aunt Hagar figure, become fused into one cultural icon because of the name “Hagar.” Hagar becomes a popular fictional character to such an extent that the term Hagar becomes a literary trope. Still, not all Hagar figures are based on their biblical namesake. We can examine representations of Hagar within art, literature, and music in order to understand how and when these interconnections happen. My aim is not to catalog every instance of Hagar within American art or to

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

discuss every treatment of Hagar as a Black woman. Instead, my aim is to disentangle some of these understandings of Black Hagar and to discover how these traditions emerge and then merge together. What’s in a name? While the name “Hagar” was one of many biblical names given to enslaved persons, it is not necessarily a direct reference or allusion to the biblical character Hagar.² Typically, ship captains or slaveholders gave names to enslaved persons, but it may be that some enslaved persons gave names to enslaved children. Some enslaved persons may have retained African names, and Africanisms remained among names for enslaved persons, especially in areas where there was less linguistic and cultural acculturation.³ Africanisms refer to retentions related to the transmission of African cultural heritage to the Americas. As related to naming, an enslaved person could have two names, including a “Christian” or “baptismal” name and an African or “country” name. For instance, one enslaved person is named John, also called “Footbea.”⁴ Frequently, enslaved persons were given common English names like Tom or Bess and French names such as Pierre. They could be named for months of the year (January) and seasons (Spring). As well, following some African naming practices, they could be named for days of the week (Cudjoe or “Monday”). They could receive biblical names such as Adam or Moses as well as names from classical literature such as Virgil or Ovid. Such naming was not meant to link the personality or features of the enslaved with the name given. Thus, the name “Hagar” for an enslaved woman does not ascribe any particular characteristic to the person so named.⁵ Evidence for the name “Hagar” in reference to an enslaved person appears in runaway notices and slave manifests. In , the Philadelphia Gazette lists a notice for a runaway that reads: Run away from John Jones, of the Manor of Mooreland, and county of Philadelphia, a likely Negroe [sic] wench, named Hagar, and has taken with her a Mulattoe [sic] child, turned of three years old. Whoever takes them up, and delivers them to their master, or puts them into the Workhouse in Philadelphia, shall have Ten Shillings reward, and reasonable charges, paid by John Jones. N.B. She formerly lived with William Branson, and is supposed to be in Philadelphia.⁶

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Aunt Hagar



Similarly, The City Gazette of Charleston, South Carolina includes runaway advertisements that mention women named Hagar. On June ,  The City Gazette reads: Run Off from the subscriber, on the th instant, a family of three negroes: a fellow named Abraham, with his wife Hagar, who has a wooden leg, and their male child Jacob, about  years old; they were purchased at the sheriff ’s sale, late the property of Mr. John Berwick It is supposed they will go back to their old range. Two guineas reward to any person that will deliver them to the Master of the Work House, or to the subscriber on James-Island. James Witter. As the above negroes went off for no provocation, if they will return in one week they will be forgiven. June .⁷

Likewise, the August ,  edition of The City Gazette includes an advertisement for a family of enslaved persons who have escaped. The family includes husband and wife Hector and Fanny and their children Mary, Hagar, and Lizette.⁸ The name Hagar is a biblical one, but the name alone does not constitute any desire, hope, or indication that the person so named would necessarily embody any of the characteristics of the biblical character Hagar. If Hagar was named by her slaveholder, certainly it was not done with the intent that she would become a runaway.⁹ Like the name “Hagar,” the term “Aunt Hagar” is used for some enslaved women. Distinguishing biblical Hagar from “Aunt Hagar” will play an important role in connecting Hagar with African American traditions independent of biblical Hagar. For instance, Hagar Brown was a formerly enslaved woman in Murrells Inlet in South Carolina. Brown is referred to as “Aunt Hagar” and “Mom Hagar” in an interview as part of the Slave Narrative Collection of the Federal Writers’ Project of the Works Progress Administration.¹⁰ The use of “Aunt Hagar” did not indicate any link with biblical Hagar or add any additional significance to the name, since the same kinship designation was used with other names as well. The use of “Aunt” with Hagar or any name for an older Black woman was a legacy of the family networks created by enslaved persons.¹¹ Such fictive kinship (also known as “chosen kin,” “voluntary kin,” or “pseudo kin”) created relationship ties that were not restricted to those who were blood relatives. Such ties were especially important for enslaved persons who had to create new relationships when blood relatives and families were split apart

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

and/or sold away. In addition, referring to someone as “mother,” “aunt,” or “uncle” as an honorific functioned as a respectful way to address an elder whether or not that person was related to you.¹² Although used to support demeaning stereotypes, Black popular culture icons “Aunt Jemima” and “Uncle Ben” are examples of this kind of naming.¹³ One of the most well-known Black Hagar figures in literature appears in Nobel prize-winning Toni Morrison’s novel Song of Solomon (). Morrison’s Hagar is the daughter of Reba and granddaughter of Pilate. This Hagar is an African American woman, but her character does not resemble the biblical Hagar in her actions. Morrison’s Hagar is not a biblical allusion, especially since several different characters in the novel have biblical names. Although unable to read, Macon Dead, a father and grandfather in the novel, chooses names from the Bible for all of his children except for the first-born male. This naming tradition continues with the second Macon Dead, who names his children Magdalene (nicknamed Lena) and First Corinthians (nicknamed Corinthians). Thus, in Morrison’s novel, the name Hagar is chosen not because of the biblical narratives about Hagar but simply due to the family naming tradition. Like Morrison’s novel, Octavia Butler’s  novel Kindred includes a character named Hagar. Hagar Waylon Blake is certainly named for biblical Hagar, but she is not a reinterpretation of biblical Hagar. Instead, she is an enslaved Black woman who is the ancestor of the protagonist Dana (named Edina) Franklin. Within the novel, Dana time-shifts from  Los Angeles to early nineteenth-century Maryland. Dana assists Rufus Waylon, a White slaveholder and father of Hagar, several times during her time shifts. She does so in order to ensure that he survives so that Hagar, his child and her ancestor, is born in  and dies in . Hagar’s mother, Alice Jackson (earlier, Greenwood), is forced to bear children for Rufus, her slaveholder. She has four children who all have biblical names, Miriam, Aaron, Joseph, and Hagar.¹⁴ At one point, Alice explains, “If Hagar had been a boy, I would have called her Ishmael. In the Bible, people might be slaves for a while, but they didn’t have to stay slaves.”¹⁵ As the first-person narrator, Dana nearly laughs. When Alice gives Rufus’s child the name Hagar, he does not recognize the reference, and Dana warns, “Someday Rufus is

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Aunt Hagar



going to get religion and read enough of the Bible to wonder about those children’s names.”¹⁶ Dana explains, “I kept it all in somehow and congratulated myself that the Bible wasn’t the only place where slaves broke free. Her names were only symbolic, but I had more than symbols to remind me that freedom was possible—probable—and for me, very near.”¹⁷ Hagar’s importance in the novel is to serve as a Black woman ancestor to Dana. Although biblical Hagar is her namesake, Hagar is not a reinterpreted biblical Hagar. This is not a reinterpretation of the biblical narrative but a use of a biblical name to construct a Black woman ancestor figure. Hagar is named after her biblical counterpart, but she plays the role of Aunt Hagar. The multiple Hagar figures contribute to the mingling and confusion of Hagar traditions due to the use of the name Hagar. Representations of Hagar In general, biblical texts offer little in the way of physical description, and the limited description of Hagar is no exception. Even when biblical texts provide some physical description of characters, they do not provide enough detail to visualize the face and body of the characters.¹⁸ Rather, biblical texts provide descriptions in order to place the character within the relevant social and political context.¹⁹ For instance, the biblical character Bathsheba is described as beautiful ( Sam. :), but the text does not describe her beauty. Instead, it offers pertinent information for understanding her standing within her community and within the narrative. For this narrative, it is important for the reader to know simply that David considers Bathsheba to be a beautiful woman to explain his interest in her. Similarly, both Rachel and her son Joseph are described as “beautiful” (Gen. :; :). Such limited description does not provide enough information for the reader to pick Rachel or Joseph out of a police lineup. As there are so few visual cues in biblical texts, the reader envisions characters in his or her imagination.²⁰ Nevertheless, the choice to construct a character in particular ways is not a neutral activity but an element of interpretation.²¹ The rendering of Rachel and Joseph as ivory-skinned Europeans by some painters is an interpretive choice.²² Despite the sparse description of characters within biblical texts, artists have constructed images of Hagar in a variety of imaginative

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

ways and often with European features, resulting in a White European Hagar. For instance, Hagar was a popular subject in seventeenthcentury Dutch painting and engraving, but she was not depicted as a brown-skinned woman.²³ Art historian Christine Petra Sellin estimates that about  seventeenth-century Dutch paintings of the Hagar narratives survive. These paintings tend to involve one of four types of scenes: Sarah’s presentation of Hagar to Abraham (Gen. :–); Hagar’s wilderness encounter with the angel (Gen. :–); the expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael by Abraham (Gen. :); and the rescue of Hagar and Ishmael in the wilderness (Gen. :). These depictions were largely sympathetic to Hagar and Ishmael and emphasized family as well as domestic and civic duty, particularly following the Eighty Year’s War or the War for Dutch Independence. In these paintings, both Sarah and Hagar are depicted as ivory-skinned women. In the paintings of Sarah’s presentation of Hagar to Abraham, the key difference is one of age. Sarah is depicted as an elderly woman who leads a nubile Hagar to the bedside of an aging Abraham. In some paintings, Hagar and/or Abraham appear nude or semi-nude. The draperies, bed linens, and clothing suggest Hagar’s fertility and may create some associations with prostitution. Still, there is no major difference in skin color or physical features. Hagar was also a familiar subject with European artists in later periods. Like Dutch artists, they emphasized various elements of Hagar’s story and did not depict Hagar as an African or dark-skinned woman.²⁴ In Italian painter Giovanni Battista Tiepolo’s Hagar and the Angel, a fresco at Palazzo Patriarcale at Udine (–), Hagar leans against a barrel, while Ishmael rests near her. An angel with wings appears on a cloud in what seems to be just the nick of time (Figure .). In French painter Jean-Baptiste-Camille Corot’s Hagar in the Wilderness (), Hagar appears as a distraught mother with her son lying nearby.²⁵ With one hand at her forehead and the other outstretched, she despairs at just the instant that the angel appears overhead (Figure .). American sculptor Edward Sheffield Bartholomew’s Hagar and Ishmael () is a marble bas-relief that depicts Hagar and Ishmael alone. A young Ishmael clings to Hagar’s waist while she gazes upward with her hands clasped together, an overturned jug at her feet (Figure .). These and other artists could have depicted Hagar as brown-skinned but chose not to do so. European

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Aunt Hagar



Figure .. Giovanni Battista Tiepolo, Hagar and the Angel, c. . Udine,

Italy. Palazzo Patriarcale. Photograph by Wolfgang Sauber.

Figure .. Jean-Baptiste-Camille Corot, Hagar in the Wilderness, . Metropolitan Museum of Art.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

Figure .. Edward Sheffield Bartholomew, Hagar and Ishmael, . The Art Institute of Chicago. Photograph by Wuselig.

artists in these periods were capable of creating portraits of African people with various textures of hair and different skin colors. European paintings from this era include African people in clothing befitting their social station without any hint of derision or ridicule.²⁶ For example, Jan Jansz Mostaert’s “Portrait of an African Man” is a portrait of a dark-skinned African man in sixteenth-century clothing.²⁷ Also, one of the Magi appears as dark-skinned in many Renaissance paintings, such as “The Adoration of the Magi” (c. –) by Peter Paul Reubens.²⁸ One of the first visual representations of biblical Hagar as a Black woman may have been produced by Mary Edmonia Lewis, a Black woman of African American and Ojibwa heritage.²⁹ Lewis’s neoclassical marble sculpture Hagar (also called Hagar in the Wilderness) () links biblical Hagar with anti-slavery sentiments, especially

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Aunt Hagar



Figure .. Edmonia Lewis, Hagar, . Smithsonian American Art Museum. Used by permission.

since the sculpture was dedicated to Rev. Leonard A. Grimes, a Black abolitionist (Figure .). This sculpture’s association with abolition and Lewis’s own ancestry contributed to some understandings of Lewis’s representation of Hagar as “Black.” Nonetheless, the sculpture depicts a woman of ambiguous ethnicity and does not clearly depict Hagar as a woman of African descent.³⁰ Lewis’s Hagar has wavy hair and narrow features. She has clasped her hands together as if in prayer, with bare feet and a bare right shoulder. She stands alone without Ishmael. The overturned jug at her feet represents the meager provisions that Abraham gives her in Genesis :–. While the title of the work and the overturned jug suggest a connection with the biblical source, it is unclear if Lewis intended to depict Hagar as a Black woman.³¹ Historian Kirsten Pai Buick argues that Lewis’s Hagar and some of her other work link Lewis’s sculpted figures with

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

enslavement without “a racialized identification with those of African descent” and “masks them as white ethnics.”³² By comparison, Lewis’s sculpture The Morning of Liberty: Forever Free () depicts a woman who looks very much like Lewis’s Hagar of . This sculpture includes a man and a woman. The male figure stands with his left hand raised with his wrist in a broken shackle. Unlike Lewis’s Hagar, the male figure has thicker features and tightly coiled short hair. The female figure is kneeling with hands clasped. She is clothed and has straight hair, but her left foot remains shackled. Lewis’s The Morning of Liberty offers two figures that appear to be newly freed from enslavement. Yet, Lewis’s Hagar does not have shackles or other implements to connect her with US slavery. Lewis does depict some sculpted figures as more clearly African but does not do so in her Hagar sculpture.³³ Twentieth-century artists offer reinterpretations of biblical Hagar in various forms, including more abstract representations. Although it is not common, a few artists do include what are usually thought of as more African features and darker skin in depictions of Hagar. For example, sculptor Charles Gomes has interpreted Hagar as a darkskinned woman.³⁴ Also, Alan Jones (also known as Theophilus), a pastor in Tennessee, offers “Hagar and Ishmael” with dark-skinned characters, but these figures are within a series of paintings depicting numerous biblical characters as dark-skinned. Thus, Theophilus is not singling out Hagar and Ishmael as ethnically distinct from other biblical characters. I am not suggesting that Hagar should appear in a particular form but calling attention to the overwhelming depiction of Hagar as a White European by visual artists. My point is that there is not a continuous, long-standing tradition of a darker-skinned Hagar within European and American visual art. Edmonia Lewis’s ambiguous Hagar may be one of the first instances of a visual representation of Hagar as linked with African American women’s experiences, although even this sculpture is open to interpretation. Music involving Hagar Biblical Hagar and Black Hagar also come together through music. Musical composers have drawn on biblical texts and themes for

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Aunt Hagar



centuries, but relatively few musicians have focused on Hagar. However, despite her limited dialogue within Genesis  and Genesis , composers and librettists have imagined Hagar as an expressive figure with a wide range of emotions.³⁵ Early musical forms reinterpret the Hagar narratives in Genesis as reflecting domestic concerns without emphasizing class or ethnic conflict. One of the earliest musical interpretations of Hagar within European classical music is Alessandro Scarlatti’s oratorio Agar et Ismaele Esiliati (Hagar and Ishmael Exiled), which premiered in .³⁶ The libretto was written by Giuseppe Domenico de Totis, and it focuses on the expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael in Genesis . Scarlatti’s oratorio examines issues of family, loyalty, and money. Hagar is not identified as Egyptian or as an enslaved woman.³⁷ “Sara” insists that Ishmael holds some ill will toward Isaac and demands that Abraham expel him and Hagar. After Sara threatens to leave, Abraham relents despite Hagar’s pleas and Ishmael’s willingness to give up any claims to an inheritance. Franz Schubert composed Hagars Klage (Hagar’s Lament) in  and based the song lyrics on a poem by Clemens August Schücking.³⁸ This song is entirely in Hagar’s voice after she has been expelled but before the angel appears. It focuses on Genesis  but acknowledges Hagar’s return in Genesis  and the promises made to her regarding her son. Like Scarlatti’s oratorio, no mention is made of class or ethnic difference. In this song, Hagar is a despairing mother who beseeches God as her son is dying. African American folksongs would seem to be a more likely source for finding representations of Hagar as a Black woman, but unlike biblical characters such as Daniel or Moses, she is not a familiar figure within early African American music. The name Hagar appears in the song “Sweet Turtle Dove, or Jerusalem Mornin,” but it is not an allusion to biblical Hagar. This traditional song was included in the  publication of Cabin and Plantation Songs, but the song is much older than its publication date. Hagar and other biblical names such as Philip and Moses are names that do not represent their biblical counterparts. The title “Sweet Turtle Dove” may refer to Psalm : (KJV), in which the psalmist asks the Lord to remember God’s people and not to deliver them over to destruction.³⁹ In the song, the speaker looks forward to hearing the sound of Gabriel’s trumpet as heralding a new Jerusalem. The first stanza reads:

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar Sweet turtle dove, she sing-a so sweet Muddy de water, so deep An’ we had a little meetin’ in de mornin’ A-for to hear Gabel’s trumpet sound.

It continues: Old sister Hagar, she took her seat An’ she want all de members to foller her An’ we had a little meetin’ in de mornin’ A-for to hear Gabel’s trumpet sound.⁴⁰

Each of the following solo stanzas includes the name of a different person who takes a seat, including sister Hannah, “brudder” Philip, and “brudder” Moses. The song does not refer to any biblical events involving those passengers who take their seat. While the song contains some biblical allusions, the names included (other than that of Gabriel) refer to passengers with names from the Bible rather than biblical characters. Similarly, the name Hagar here is not a biblical allusion but only a biblical name. She is a presumably Black Hagar that is not an interpretation of the biblical Hagar. Like the “sister Hagar” in the spiritual, an “Aunt Hagar” who is unrelated to her biblical namesake appears in blues songs, and this Aunt Hagar is a Black woman. The  song “Aunt Hagar’s Blues,” also known as “Aunt Hagar’s Children” and “Aunt Hagar’s Children’s Blues,” was composed by W. C. Handy with lyrics by J. Tim Brymn. The song “Aunt Hagar’s Children’s Blues” was reissued in  and retitled “Aunt Hagar’s Blues.” It has become a blues and jazz standard and has been recorded by Lena Horne, Jack Teagarden, King Oliver’s Dixie Syncopators, Louis Armstrong and His All Stars, and pianist Art Tatum. This song was also included in the  film St. Louis Blues, which was partly based on the life of W. C. Handy. Nothing in the song itself suggests links to biblical texts. Instead, the song illustrates that Aunt Hagar and her children are African Americans, who sing and dance and who are the originators of the blues. The song is set in a church, but Aunt Hagar is no biblical Hagar. Old Deacon Splivin’ has a leadership position in the church, and he opposes contemporary dancing and singing. Aunt Hagar rebukes him and rejects his preaching and teaching. She must dance when she hears the blues. Aunt Hagar’s “children” are a heavenly choir that sings and

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Aunt Hagar



harmonizes in their embrace of the blues. They refuse to accept a sacred versus secular divide and argue that if the blues is “debbil” (devil) music, it has been sent from God. The lyrics read: Old Deacon Splivin’, his flock was givin’ The way of livin’ right, Said he, “No wingin’ no ragtime singin’ tonight” Up jumped Aunt Hagar, And shouted out with all her might Oh, ’taint no use o’preachin’ Oh, ’taint no use o’ teachin’, Each modulation of syncopation Just tells my feet to dance, And I can’t refuse When I hear the melody they call the blues; Those ever lovin’ blues: Just hear Aunt Hagar’s children harmonizin’ To that old mournful tune, It’s like a choir from on high broke loose, If the debbil brought it The good Lawd sent it right down to me, Let the congregation join While I sing those lovin’ Aunt Hagar’s blues.⁴¹

The composer himself establishes that the song does not refer to a biblical Hagar. An interview with Handy confirms the disconnect between Hagar as the mother of African Americans and biblical Hagar. In an interview, Handy mentions “Aunt Hagar’s Children’s Blues” while discussing racial injustice. In response, the interviewer makes a connection with biblical Hagar and says, “Oh, yes, I remember Ishmael.” Yet, Handy does not pick up her reference to biblical Hagar. Rather, he thinks that the Hagar mentioned by the interviewer is Hagar, the progenitor of Black people. He explains, “I wouldn’t wish to say anything that would reflect on my race. This is written to express what every Negro will understand, but which white people of the North could not. You know we sometimes speak of our race as Aunt Hagar’s children.”⁴² For the interviewer, Hagar is the biblical mother of Ishmael, but for Handy, Hagar’s children are American Negroes. While the interviewer assumed that Handy was referring to the biblical character, Handy was not. The interviewer was

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

unfamiliar with the notion of an Aunt Hagar, which Handy explains to her. This interview illustrates how these two different Hagars become one.⁴³ To be sure, later composers have continued to retell the story of biblical Hagar. Yet, the name Hagar is not always a reference to biblical Hagar in African American music.⁴⁴ Hagar in literature Nineteenth-century writers in Britain and the US engaged the story of Hagar and Sarah with biblical commentary, poetry, and fiction.⁴⁵ Yet, they did not typically read these narratives as related to the enslavement of their era.⁴⁶ Characters named “Hagar” appear regularly in nineteenth- and twentieth-century American literature.⁴⁷ In the nineteenth century, some writers use the words “brown” or “black” in relation to Hagar’s coloring, but in instances when these writers identify her racially or ethnically, they identify her as an Arab. For example, Susan Warner, a Presbyterian White woman, offers biblical commentary in the form of an intergenerational conversation in Walks from Eden (). Warner identifies Hagar as an Egyptian slave who, after conceiving, “carried her pretty black head high.”⁴⁸ The “black head” refers to perhaps darker skin or dark hair, but it does not refer to racialized Blackness.⁴⁹ This is clear as Warner claims later that Hagar’s offspring are “the great Arabian nation, a people almost as wonderful as their cousins the Jews” and that “the children of Ishmael are said to form now the great mass of the Arabian people.” ⁵⁰ Here, Hagar is an “Other,” but she is not Black. Like Warner, White writer Harriet Beecher Stowe identifies Hagar as Arab in her portrait of Hagar called “Hagar the Slave” in Women in Sacred History ().⁵¹ Stowe does not link Hagar with American enslavement and claims that ancient enslavement as described in biblical texts was not as harsh as later forms of enslavement. Stowe contends, “The condition of a slave more nearly resembled that of the child of the house than that of a modern servant.”⁵² She contends that Hagar was a “confidential handmaid” who was treated with “peculiar tenderness.”⁵³ Stowe does not identify Hagar as Black but stereotypes her as a passionate Oriental woman, which reflects the nineteenth-century tendency to view Egypt as part of the “Orient” rather than as part of

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Aunt Hagar



Africa. Using Orientalist stereotypes, Stowe describes Hagar as a “poor, blinded, darkened, passionate slave-woman.”⁵⁴ She claims that Hagar is made an “inferior wife,” and when she becomes pregnant, “her ardent tropical blood boiled over in unseemly exultation.”⁵⁵ Stowe regards Hagar as a “hot-hearted, ungoverned slave girl.”⁵⁶ Also, she is a “wild girl of the desert.”⁵⁷ Stowe discusses differences between Ishmael and Isaac in racial terms but not using twentieth-century notions of race, as Ishmael is “Arab” in contrast to the race of “Isaac and Jacob.”⁵⁸ She regards God’s choice of Isaac and rejection of Ishmael as choosing the “gentler and quieter elements of blood and character, and the persistent rejection of that which is wild, fierce, and ungovernable.”⁵⁹ Thus, according to Stowe, “[T]he thoughtful, patient, meditative Isaac is chosen; the wild hot-blooded, impetuous Ishmael is rejected.”⁶⁰ For Stowe, the Hagar story does not relate to contemporary issues of race but to differences between racial groups. Stowe contends that Hagar’s position was not comparable to that of US enslaved persons by claiming that modern enslavement was unlike ancient slavery.⁶¹ In Footsteps of the Master (), Stowe continues to view Hagar through an Orientalist lens. She identifies Hagar as a “poor, passionate, desperate slave-girl” who was “struggling with the pride and passion of her unsubdued nature.”⁶² Also, Stowe understands the offspring of Hagar as a “race of men” who are “wild and turbulent.”⁶³ It is the “fiery, indomitable passions of the slave-woman” that result in Hagar’s expulsion in order to maintain the peace of Abraham’s household.⁶⁴ Published in two volumes in  and , The Woman’s Bible was a departure from standard biblical commentaries. It argued for masculine and feminine elements of the divine, emphasized women characters, and offered a critique of religious orthodoxy that upheld the inequality of men and women. Created by women’s rights activist Elizabeth Cady Stanton and a committee of women, this commentary offered reinterpretations of biblical texts that differed from mainstream treatments of biblical texts. The Woman’s Bible includes commentary on Sarah and Hagar in Genesis  and the death of Sarah in Genesis . The commentary does not discuss Hagar’s ethnicity, but it does criticize Sarah and Abraham’s treatment of Hagar. It includes anti-Jewish sentiments in berating Abraham for expelling Hagar

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

without provisions and notes that this expulsion was done with the approval of God. Furthermore, it argues that Sarah was “undignified, untruthful, and unkind to Hagar” but excuses her behavior as part of a different culturally conditioned “moral standard.”⁶⁵ The commentary emphasizes Sarah’s position within the household as wife and mother. Since Abraham’s wealth was gained by handing over Sarah to the Egyptians (Gen. ), he is called not “a self-made but wife-made man.”⁶⁶ One section quotes Galatians  as an allegory of two covenants but notes that the allegory has not been read in light of women’s issues. The commentary charges that Sarah “connived at her own degradation,” which refers to her idea to have a child by Hagar.⁶⁷ It treats Sarah’s actions regarding Hagar as “establishing her claim, not only for personal freedom, but for the integrity of the home.”⁶⁸ Yet, after having Isaac, Sarah “made her rightful demand for unrivalled supremacy in that home and in her husband’s affections” by asking him to expel Hagar.⁶⁹ Whereas Galatians highlights the religious division of the covenants, the commentary enjoins its audience to become like Sarah in fighting for her individual rights as a woman. It states: “The bondwoman must be cast out. All that makes for industrial bondage, for sex slavery and humiliation, for the dwarfing of individuality, and for the thralldom of the soul, must be cast out from our home, from society, and from our lives.”⁷⁰ The commentary is opposed to slavery, but its opposition is not to the enslavement of those of African descent but rather the so-called “sex slavery” of women’s subordination. Color, ethnicity, and race are not salient issues for the commentary. Poets also note Hagar’s coloring without racial designations. For instance, the  poem “Hagar” written by White author Anne Charlotte Lynch describes Hagar as “the dark-browed child of Egypt.”⁷¹ Lynch may refer to Hagar’s complexion but not to a distinctive race.⁷² Annie Chambers Ketchum, a White woman, has an  poem “A Treaty of Eld,” in which she describes Hagar as “dusky as the night that fell around her” with “brown and slender feet.”⁷³ Hagar is brown in coloring but not racially Black. African American poet Eloise Alberta Bibb’s poem “The Expulsion of Hagar” () mentions hair and skin color. She discusses Abraham’s advanced age with the phrases “a century’s frost upon his brow” and “with hoary locks o’er shoulders bent.”⁷⁴ In the poem, Hagar pleads with Abraham

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Aunt Hagar



regarding Ishmael’s fate. She explains, “His beaut’ous face,—note thou it well; / In yonder wilderness, the sun / Will scorch that broad and noble brow, / And dark the cheek it shines upon.”⁷⁵ The concern with “dark” skin here is not a racial reference. Rather, she fears that Ishmael will suffer from sun exposure after their expulsion. Still, like others, Bibb does not identify Hagar or Ishmael as connected to enslavement of African peoples. Within American novels, the name “Hagar” is used frequently, and similar to visual artists, many writers portray her primarily as a White woman. As detailed in Janet Gabler-Hover’s Dreaming Black Writing White: The Hagar Myth in American Cultural History, Hagar appears primarily as a White woman within nineteenth-century American novels.⁷⁶ For example, the novel by E.D.E.N. (Emma Dorothy Eliza Nevitte) Southworth, The Deserted Wife (also called Hagar; or The Deserted Wife) (), has a main character named Hagar who is a White American woman. In this novel, the name Hagar is acknowledged as a biblical allusion, but the character, while dark, is not connected to any form of racialized Blackness. In The Deserted Wife, Hagar is the nickname for Agatha, whose mother was also named Agatha. She is nicknamed Hagar due to her “wild, dark beauty.”⁷⁷ She also has a “dark, wild countenance.”⁷⁸ In comparing herself with another woman character, Hagar explains, “She is fair, full formed. I am small, thin and dark. She is soft, gentle, sensitive. I am wild, fierce, and proud.”⁷⁹ An allusion to biblical Hagar is acknowledged in the novel, but the link is made not to her ethnicity but to her exotic beauty. In arguing with her husband, Hagar notes the allusion, “Yes, Hagar, that is my name, my fit name—what strange prophetic inspiration was it that made them drop my proper name of Agatha and call me ‘Hagar?’ ”⁸⁰ In describing her careful efforts at her attire to please her husband, she is arrayed in rubies and topazes, the only jewels “that her Egypt complexion would bear.” Her carefully chosen outfit “harmonized beautifully with her dark complexion, while her jetty brows, black eyes, and eyelashes, and long, black, glittering ringlets, relieved the amber-hued complexion and dress from sameness.”⁸¹ Her husband calls her a “wild, dark little savage.”⁸² While on tour as a singer after being deserted by her husband, Hagar becomes known as “Hagar, the Egyptian,” to her considerable fans. She is also known as “The Spirit of Music,” “The Queen of Song,” “Hagar of the

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

Lightning,” “Hagar, the Gypsy,” and “Hagar, the Indian.”⁸³ She is dark of complexion but only in that she has dark hair and eyes. Her complexion is “Egyptian” but not brown or black. Hagar is still a White woman. Her darkness is not racialized but exoticized. As discussed in Chapter , in the nineteenth century Egypt was often imagined as part of the Orient, so Southworth is not necessarily describing her as African when referring to her darkness or describing her as Egyptian. Hagar appears as a Black woman character in American novels. She is “Aunt Hagar” in Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin, which was serialized in The National Era in  and  and published in  as a two-volume book entitled Uncle Tom’s Cabin; Or, Life among the Lowly. Scholars have debated the immediate effect of Stowe’s work on the US Civil War. There is an apocryphal story that upon meeting Stowe, President Abraham Lincoln is claimed to have said, “You’re the little lady who started the great war.” There is no historical evidence that this statement was ever made, and it is in hindsight that some attribute such great influence to Stowe’s work at the time of its publication.⁸⁴ Still, its impact on American literature and culture as well as the wider world is unprecedented. It has been translated into multiple languages and remains in print more than  years after its publication. It is within Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin that Aunt Hagar is portrayed as an enslaved African woman.⁸⁵ A sentimental novel with an anti-slavery message, it is replete with biblical quotations and allusions, including texts that nineteenthcentury writers used frequently in supporting slavery.⁸⁶ In the novel, Mr. Wilson lectures formerly enslaved fugitive George by arguing that his running away is unlawful and “unscriptural.”⁸⁷ He cites both the angel’s instructions to Hagar to submit to Sarah and Paul’s sending Onesimus to his master in Philemon. Yet, while Mr. Wilson refers to the biblical story of Hagar, Stowe’s Aunt Hagar character is not an interpretation of biblical Hagar. Aunt Hagar is mentioned initially in an advertisement for enslaved persons that includes Hagar among others. She is described as sixty years of age and as “a regular African in feature and figure.”⁸⁸ She has some visual impairment and rheumatism. She is called “Aunt Hagar” as an honorific, just as Tom is called “Uncle Tom.” She describes herself as a hard worker in order to be sold along with her son Albert, who is

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Aunt Hagar



fourteen. She is despondent when they are sold and separated. There are no allusions to Genesis here since biblical Hagar’s son is expelled with her and not sold away from her. Furthermore, in The Key to Uncle Tom’s Cabin (), Stowe mentions an enslaved woman named Aunt Hagar without reference to biblical texts.⁸⁹ In Uncle Tom’s Cabin, “Aunt Hagar” is simply a name for a Black woman character. As discussed by Gabler-Hover, within American novels in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, writers create Hagar characters who are mulattas or Black women. For example, in Hagar the Martyr (), Hagar is a White woman and her daughter, also named Hagar, is discovered to be the mixed-race child of the elder Hagar’s husband and a Black woman. Also, Charlotte Moon Clark makes clear the link between an enslaved woman character and the biblical Hagar in her novel The Modern Hagar: A Drama. Published in  under the pseudonym Charles M. Clay, the novel does not have a character named Hagar, but the White wife Kate regards Lucy as “Hagar” in her mind. Lucy is the mulatta enslaved woman in her household who has borne a child by Kate’s husband, Simon Hartley. Kate muses over the “Hagar in the Desert” painting in her home, which does not depict Hagar as a Black woman. Furthermore, Kate admits that “she knew she need not say ‘Cast out this bondwoman’” (cf. Gen. :).⁹⁰ Eventually, Hagar becomes a literary trope that involves abandonment, racial or ethnic ambiguity, and sexual expression. This trope may play on the biblical allusion, but it develops in American literature such that the Hagar character may not resemble biblical Hagar or necessarily link to Blackness. Furthermore, the Hagarian trope may not require the use of the name “Hagar.” Lynne Jefferson identifies a “Hagarian trope” even in fiction that does not have a character named Hagar. For instance, Jefferson regards Harriet Wilson’s Our Nig () and Frances Harper’s Iola Leroy () as involving Hagarian figures. They are “Hagarian” in the sense that Hagar shifts from “one literally cast into the wilderness of the Southern lifestyle to one figuratively cast into unimaginable circumstances within contemporary nineteenth-century society due to her social status and race.”⁹¹ Yet, these characters do not resemble biblical Hagar. We cannot know the intention of authors who use the name Hagar for characters, but while the name Hagar can be a biblical allusion or literary trope, in most instances it is merely a biblical name.⁹²

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

In the early twentieth century, African American writer and editor Pauline E. Hopkins used the pseudonym Sarah A. Allen for her novel Hagar’s Daughter: A Story of Southern Caste Prejudice, which was serialized in the Colored American Magazine in  and .⁹³ It is only after her marriage to a White man that the main character Hagar discovers that she is not White, as she had been raised to believe. Instead, she is biracial, and her mother was enslaved. When Hagar realizes this, she notes the biblical allusion. The narrator explains, “Only this morning she was his wife, the honoured mistress of his home; tonight what? His slave, his concubine. Horrible fatality that had named her Hagar.”⁹⁴ After being enslaved and sold, Hopkins’s Hagar jumps off of a bridge holding her daughter. Hagar, the character, notes the irony of her name by comparing her situation to that of the biblical Hagar. While both are presumed dead, Hagar and her daughter reemerge later in the story. Likewise, biblical Hagar is expelled from Abraham’s home and fears Ishmael’s death, but both survive. Yet, the parallels are not exact. Biblical Hagar belonged to Sarah. Furthermore, she was given to Abraham as a wife, not as a concubine. In the novel, Hagar has become the tragic mulatta.⁹⁵ Certainly, writers sometimes linked biblical narratives with the conditions of African Americans. For instance, Hagar and Ishmael is a short play written by Charlotte Teller Hirsch. Published in The Crisis, the magazine of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the play opens with the text of Genesis :–. It begins with Hagar in the desert. She considers revenge and remarks, “If we could breed a race to take vengeance upon Isaac’s seed, his son, who shall have wealth and comfort from his flocks!”⁹⁶ Ishmael assures her that he has no desire to return to Abraham’s household. He speaks of his own descendants and vows that “every one of them shall find this pool of tears—the exile’s bitter drink, by which he lives—Son of a Slave but Father to the Free.”⁹⁷ The explicit quotation of the biblical text before the text of the play makes obvious the parallel to the biblical text. In other instances, the name Hagar does not in and of itself constitute a biblical allusion.⁹⁸ In fact, Hagar may be a Black character without reference to biblical Hagar. For example, Harlem Renaissance poet and writer Langston Hughes’s novel Not without Laughter () includes a character named Hagar.⁹⁹ She is an African American

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Aunt Hagar



grandmother who cares for her daughter and grandson, but she bears no resemblance to a biblical Hagar.¹⁰⁰ Similarly, Harlem Renaissance writer Richard Bruce Nugent’s Gentleman Jigger () includes a Hagar character that is unrelated to biblical Hagar.¹⁰¹ Harlem Renaissance novelist Wallace Thurman wrote an unpublished essay collection titled Aunt Hagar’s Children in  without any discussion of biblical Hagar in the essays. The editors of his collected writings acknowledge that Thurman’s title may refer to biblical Hagar and to the blues song “Aunt Hagar’s Children’s Blues.”¹⁰² Another instance of the connection between biblical Hagar and Aunt Hagar comes from esteemed African American sociologist E. Franklin Frazier. In his classic work The Negro Family in the United States (), Frazier includes a chapter titled “Hagar and Her Children.”¹⁰³ The chapter discusses enslaved women who were forced to bear children for their slaveholders. Frazier highlights the precarious situation of the women in what were sometimes long-term attachments as well as the plight of their children who remained enslaved. He does not mention biblical Hagar, but his discussion of forced sexual activity and childbearing suggests that his title may function as both an allusion to biblical Hagar as well as a reference to enslaved women in the US. Maya Angelou creates a fusion of biblical Hagar and Aunt Hagar by identifying Hagar as a maternal ancestor. Published in , Maya Angelou’s poem “The Mothering Blackness” mentions “Hagar’s daughter.” It reads, “She came home blameless / black yet as Hagar’s daughter / tall as was Sheba’s daughter.”¹⁰⁴ Angelou’s use of both Hagar and Sheba in the same verse suggests that both are biblical allusions. Sheba is the queen who visits King Solomon ( Kings :–;  Chron. :–). Sheba is not identified as tall in the biblical text, but the use of poetic license here may suggest a woman who is stately with royal presence. The unnamed woman is as black as “Hagar’s daughter.” Like Sheba, the text does not refer to Hagar herself but to her daughter. Yet, biblical Hagar does not have a daughter, only a son, Ishmael. Still, by including biblical Hagar and her non-biblical Black offspring, Angelou combines two Hagar figures.¹⁰⁵ Arab American writer Mohja Kahf ’s collection of poems Hagar Poems offers creative interpretations of women from biblical and

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

Quranic texts and various Islamic traditions, including Hagar/Hajar, Sarah, Mary, Miriam, Zuleikha, and Khadija. In some poems, Hagar is imagined as an immigrant, as an American, and as a participant in an AIDS march. She is also identified as Black. For example, in “Hajar Triumphant,” Kahf writes, “Our Prophet traces his line / to a Black woman / whom we know / only by her function: / to migrate, to be abandoned.”¹⁰⁶ Here, Hagar is associated with abandonment and other circumstances affecting Black women. One of the major clues regarding the link between Black Hagar and biblical Hagar comes from Pulitzer prize-winning novelist Edward Paul Jones. Jones has an Aunt Hagar character unrelated to biblical Hagar. Jones’s Aunt Hagar serves as a mythical progenitor of Black people. Yet, in sharing his writing process, he provides another example of the joining of Aunt Hagar with biblical Hagar. Similar to what we see with W. C. Handy, this is another way that two different Hagars become merged. Jones’s collection of short stories All Aunt Hagar’s Children was published in . In the titular story “All Aunt Hagar’s Children,” a character named Miss Agatha mentions the murder of her son Ike in Washington, D.C., and the lack of investigation of his murder. Another character named Aunt Penn responds, “If they are doin something they keepin it secret. . . . One more colored boy outa their hair. It’s a shame before God, the way they do all Aunt Hagar’s children.”¹⁰⁷ Aunt Penny links Aunt Hagar’s children with other African Americans, but she does not mention biblical Hagar. In an interview with National Public Radio, Jones connects Hagar with biblical Hagar and with Black Hagar. He explains that his mother used “Aunt Hagar’s children” as a way of referring to Black people. He acknowledges that Hagar is a biblical name, but he contrasts it with his mother’s use of the phrase “Aunt Hagar’s children.” He recounts: In the Bible, it’s Abraham’s concubine, his slave. The phrase, “all Aunt Hagar’s children” is one my mother used for black people. . . . The other things she would say, people weren’t black at that time, they were “colored.” So it was either “colored” or “all Aunt Hagar’s children.” It was just a phrase she used . . . it’s along the lines of what Penny says in the title story. She says, “All the bad things they do to all Aunt Hagar’s children.” That’s sort of the same way my mother would’ve spoken those words.¹⁰⁸

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Aunt Hagar



His mother uses the phrase “all Aunt Hagar’s children” to refer to African Americans. She does not make any reference to biblical Hagar, but Jones joins her reference to the biblical reference. In this way, we see the mingling of two different Hagars. Aunt Hagar and biblical Hagar become fused as a Black Hagar. Conclusion The name Hagar does not always function as biblical allusion. It may simply be a name that comes from the Bible. Artists have reinterpreted biblical Hagar in many different mediums in different time periods. In some instances, she is reinterpreted as a Black woman. Often, Aunt Hagar represents a Black cultural icon unrelated to her biblical counterpart. Hagar serves as a metonym for African American women, and Hagar’s children became a metonym for African Americans. Hagar comes to represent an original mother for African Americans. Aunt Hagar becomes intertwined with notions of biblical Hagar, which results in a mixed heritage for notions of Hagar as a Black woman. These two Hagars are treated as one woman, but they have different origins. Of course, it is difficult to know precisely when an author is offering an allusion to a particular source, but the mere use of the name Hagar is not a sufficient marker to argue for an allusion to biblical Hagar. Confusion arises in part because scholars and others tend not to separate these figures but group together instances of the name Hagar. As discussed in the following chapter, the combination of these two Hagar figures creates the notion of biblical Hagar as a Black woman. Notes . Delores S. Williams, Sisters in the Wilderness: The Challenge of Womanist God-Talk (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, ), . . On allusion, see Benjamin D. Sommer, A Prophet Reads Scripture: Allusion in Isaiah – (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, ). . Joseph E. Holloway, Africanisms in American Culture (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, ). . Hennig Cohen, “Slave Names in Colonial South Carolina,” American Speech , no.  (), . doi:./.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

. Cheryll Ann Cody, “There was no ‘Absalom’ on the Ball Plantations: Slave-Naming Practices in the South Carolina Low Country, –,” The American Historical Review , no.  (): –. doi:./. Cody contends that on the Ball plantation, some biblical names were avoided, such as “Saul” or “Absalom,” as these characters exhibited what were considered to be negative characteristics or flaws. Yet, these names were given to other enslaved persons at other locations. For example, Absalom Jones was an enslaved man who was later manumitted. He and Richard Allen founded the Free African Society in . He helped to found the African Episcopal Church at St. Thomas in Philadelphia in . The church continues to operate in Philadelphia. See the church website: http://www.aecst.org/. . The Philadelphia Gazette, September , . http://www.accessiblearchives.com/. . Thomas Brown and Leah Sims, Fugitive Slave Advertisements in the City Gazette: Charleston, South Carolina, – (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, ), –. . Ibid., –. . Similarly, this is also the case with the name Samson. See Nyasha Junior and Jeremy Schipper, Black Samson: The Untold Story of an American Icon (New York: Oxford University Press, forthcoming). . The American Mosaic: The African American Experience, s.v. “South Carolina: Hagar Brown Narrative,” https://africanamerican.abc-clio. com. Interview in the Slave Narrative Collection of the Federal Writers’ Project of the Works Progress Administration. . See the classic work Herbert George Gutman, The Black Family in Slavery and Freedom, – (New York: Vintage Books, ), . . I grew up in the southern US, and in my experience in Black communities, children were never allowed to refer to adults by first name. Adults were addressed by title and last name or “Miss” or “Mister” and first name. Closer family friends were called “Aunt” or “Uncle” and first name, and adults with nicknames were called “Aunt” or “Uncle” and nickname. They were never addressed by first name or nickname alone by younger persons. My late uncle Robert was called “Pie,” and I addressed him as “Uncle Pie.” Younger non-family members in the neighborhood called him “Mr. Pie.” . Brian D. Behnken and Gregory D. Smithers, Racism in American Popular Media: From Aunt Jemima to the Frito Bandito (Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, ). . Octavia E. Butler, Kindred, Black Women Writers Series, vol.  (Boston: Beacon Press, ), . . Ibid.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Aunt Hagar



. Ibid. . Ibid., . . On interpreting visual texts, see Vernon K. Robbins, Walter S. Melion, and Roy R. Jeal, eds., The Art of Visual Exegesis: Rhetoric, Texts, Images, Emory Studies in Early Christianity  (Atlanta: SBL Press, ). On artists as biblical interpreters, see Martin O’Kane, Painting the Text: The Artist as Biblical Interpreter, The Bible in the Modern World  (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, ), . . On characterization, see Adele Berlin, Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative (Sheffield: Almond Press, ), –, and Jeremy Schipper, “Body: Hebrew Bible/Old Testament,” in Encyclopedia of the Bible and its Reception, vol.  (Berlin: De Gruyter, ), –. . For a fun read on phenomenology with accompanying illustrations, see Peter Mendelsund, What We See When We Read: A Phenomenology with Illustrations (New York: Vintage Books, ). . The limitations of biblical texts in providing visual cues are part of the reason why controversy erupts when biblical texts are adapted into films in our contemporary era. For example, the  film Exodus: Gods and Kings recounts the biblical Exodus story. The filmmakers cast the main characters as White. Thus, in support of this interpretive choice, English actor Christian Bale plays the lead role as Moses, and Australian Joel Edgerton serves as Ramses. Some accused the filmmaker of “whitewashing” the film by not including people of color in leading roles. In film, whitewashing involves casting White actors to play roles for characters who were originally identified as persons of color. While there are dark-skinned actors in the film, they play supporting and lower-status roles, including “Egyptian Civilian Lower Class,” “Ramses’ Royal Servant,” and “Assassin.” The film acknowledges the existence of dark-skinned people, but none are in positions of power. Exodus: Gods and Kings on Internet Movie Database: https://www.imdb.com/. . On physical description in biblical texts, see Berlin, Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative. At Wikimedia Commons, see Rachel in Giovanni Battista Tiepolo’s “Rachel Hides Her Father’s Idols” (–) and Joseph in Carlo Cignani, “Joseph and Potiphar’s Wife” (). https://commons.wikimedia.org. . For great detective work using biblical commentaries and art history, see Laura Greig Krauss, “Restoring Hagar: Rembrandt Van Rijn’s Painting Abraham Dismissing Hagar and Ishmael in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London,” Biblical Reception  (): –. . Tom Strider, “Hagar in the Wilderness: Visualizing Antebellum Politics and Changing Views of True Womanhood,” From Slave Mothers and

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



. .

. . .

. .

Reimagining Hagar Southern Belles to Radical Reformers and Lost Cause Ladies: Representing Women in the Civil War Era, , https://civilwarwomen.wp. tulane.edu/. On Orientalism in nineteenth-century art, see https://metmuseum.org/ toah/hd/euor/hd_euor.htm. David Bindman and Henry Louis Gates, The Image of the Black in Western Art, vol IV, part  (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, ); Peter Erickson and Clark Hulse, Early Modern Visual Culture: Representation, Race, and Empire in Renaissance England (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, ); Joaneath A. Spicer, Revealing the African Presence in Renaissance Europe (Baltimore: Walters Art Museum, ); and T. F. Earle and K. J. P. Lowe, Black Africans in Renaissance Europe, repr. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ). Also, see People of Color in European Art History on Tumblr: http://medievalpoc.tumblr.com/. The Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam. Portrait of an African Man, Jan Jansz Mostaert, c. –, http://medievalpoc.tumblr.com/. Museo del Prado. Hieronymous Bosch, c. , https://www. museodelprado.es/en. For a biography of Lewis, see Harry Henderson and Albert Henderson, The Indomitable Spirit of Edmonia Lewis: A Narrative Biography (Milford, CT: Esquiline Hill Press, ). Similar to Alice Walker, who searched to find Zora Neale Hurston’s final resting place, Marilyn Richardson has found Edmonia Lewis’s grave and spearheaded a campaign to fund a grave marker for her previously unmarked grave. Talia Lavin, “The Decades-Long Quest to Find and Honor Edmonia Lewis’s Grave,” Hyperallergic, March , . https://hyperallergic.com// edmonia-lewis-grave/. On issues of race and gender in sculpture, see Charmaine Nelson, The Color of Stone: Sculpting the Black Female Subject in Nineteenth-Century America (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, ), . Michelle Cliff suggests that Lewis’s choices regarding the sculpture’s features are related to Lewis’s decision to sculpt in a neo-classical style. Cliff identifies this piece as linked with the experiences of Black women. She cites the story of Hagar’s expulsion and argues that Lewis is associating Hagar with Black enslaved women. Michelle Cliff, “Object into Subject: Some Thoughts on the Work of Black Women Artists,” Heresies: A Feminist Publication on Art and Politics , no.  (): –. Also, see Regenia Perry, Free within Ourselves: African-American Artists in the Collection of the National Museum of American Art (Washington, DC: National Museum of American Art, Smithsonian Institution in

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 7/5/2019, SPi

Aunt Hagar

. .

. .

. . . .



association with Pomegranate Artbooks, San Francisco, ). On Lewis and nineteenth-century ideals of gender, see Kirsten Pai Buick, “The Ideal Works of Edmonia Lewis: Invoking and Inverting Autobiography,” American Art , no.  (): –. Kirsten Pai Buick, Child of the Fire: Mary Edmonia Lewis and the Problem of Art History’s Black and Indian Subject (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, ), . Pulitzer prize-winning poet Tyehimba Jess’s poem “Hagar in the Wilderness” refers to Edmonia Lewis’s Hagar sculpture in its first line: “Carved marble. Edmonia Lewis, .” It connects a creator God with Lewis, the sculptor, and with biblical Hagar. It identifies Lewis as the link between the divine creator and the sculpture of her own creation. It reads, “I’ve kissed the fingertips / of my dark and mortal God.” Although the poem mentions enslavement, it does not identify Hagar specifically as Black, but it treats her as a marginalized woman. See https://www.poets.org/. This sculpture stands in a sculpture garden that includes fourteen stations of the Cross as well as biblical and other inspirational figures. See website: http://www.bijbelsetuininhoofddorp.nl/. Helen Leneman, “Hagar: Music,” in Encyclopedia of the Bible and its Reception Online, ed. Dale C. Allison, Jr. et al (Berlin: De Gruyter, ); Helen Leneman, Musical Illuminations of Genesis Narratives, T & T Clark Library of Biblical Studies  (London: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, ), –. This composition has more than one title. The published  version identifies the same composition as “L’Ismaele: Soccorso dall’angelo (Ishmael: Rescue by the Angel)”. Liner notes available: https://alexanderstreet.com. It was published in  by Franz Schubert. Musically, Schubert revised Hagars Klage in “der Wüste Bersaba,” a ballad by Johann Rudolf Zumsteeg. The alternate title “Jerusalem Mornin’ ” may refer to the new Jerusalem in the apocalyptic vision of the heavenly city: “And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband” (Rev. : [KJV]). Although some biblical texts mention trumpets blowing prior to the resurrection of the dead ( Cor.:;  Thess. :; Rev. :), Gabriel is not specified as the horn player. The archangel Gabriel here is referred to as “Gabel.” This is a regional or dialectal pronunciation, like “brudder” for “brother.” Gabriel’s popular reputation as a trumpeter comes from his role in Milton’s Paradise Lost. Gabriel and his trumpet appear in African American spirituals (also known as Negro spirituals) such as “In Dat Great Gittin’-Up Mornin’” and “Blow Your

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



. . . .

.

.

.

Reimagining Hagar Trumpet, Gabriel.” Milton, Paradise Lost IV, , and XI, . See S. Vernon McCasland, “Gabriel’s Trumpet,” Journal of Bible and Religion , no.  (): –. Thomas P. Fenner, Cabin and Plantation Songs as Sung by the Hampton Students, rd ed. (New York: G. P. Putnam’s sons, ). For sheet music image and text: http://clio.lib.olemiss.edu/. William Sanders Scarborough and Michele V. Ronnick, The Works of William Sanders Scarborough: Black Classicist and Race Leader (New York: Oxford University Press, ), . Although the phrase “Aunt Hagar” or “Aunt Hagar’s children” probably pre-dates the song, the popularity of the song may have led to the widespread use of the phrase. Similarly, many people familiar with the term “Jim Crow” may not realize that it became a slang term or name for a Black person due to the song “Jump Jim Crow,” which was common in minstrel shows. The later use of “Jim Crow” to refer to laws supporting segregation has become so popular that many are not aware of the song itself. See Ferris State University’s Jim Crow Museum of Racist Memorabilia: https://ferris.edu/jimcrow/. A jazz album called “Hagar’s Song” by saxophonist Charles Lloyd and pianist Jason Moran was released in . The album includes a five-part suite of songs: “Journey Up River,” “Dreams of White Bluff,” “Alone,” “Bolivar Blues,” and “Hagar’s Lullaby.” According to the ECM liner notes, Lloyd composed the suite in dedication to his great-great-grandmother, who was sold into slavery in Tennessee. This may be another example of the use of Hagar as a biblical name without reference to biblical Hagar. See liner notes at Edition of Contemporary Music: https://www.ecmrecords.com. On nineteenth-century women’s biblical interpretation, see Christiana De Groot and Marion Ann Taylor, Recovering Nineteenth-Century Women Interpreters of the Bible, Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series, vol.  (Boston: Brill, ). For a collection of nineteenth-century women’s writing on Hagar, see “Part : Hagar––The Wanderer,” in Marion Ann Taylor and Heather E. Weir, Let Her Speak for Herself: Nineteenth-Century Women Writing on Women in Genesis (Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, ). Also, see Amanda W. Benckhuysen, “Reading Hagar’s Story from the Margins: Family Resemblances between Nineteenth-and Twentieth-Century Female Interpreters,” in Strangely Familiar: Protofeminist Interpretations of Patriarchal Biblical Texts, ed. Nancy Calvert-Koyzis and Heather E. Weir (Boston: Brill, ), –. For another view, see Taylor and Weir, Let Her Speak for Herself, .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Aunt Hagar



. For a discussion of characters named Hagar in poetry and prose, see Vanessa Lovelace, “Hagar in Fiction,” Oxford Biblical Studies Online, www.oxfordbiblicalstudies.com/article/opr/t/e. . Taylor and Weir, Let Her Speak for Herself , . . For another view, see ibid., . . Ibid., . . Excerpted in Ibid. . Ibid., . . Ibid. . Ibid., . . Harriet Beecher Stowe, Woman in Sacred History: A Series of Sketches Drawn from Scriptural, Historical, and Legendary Sources (New York: J. B. Ford, ), . . Ibid., . . Ibid., . . Ibid., . . Ibid. . Ibid. . Ibid., . . Harriet Beecher Stowe, Footsteps of the Master (New York: J. B. Ford, ), . . Ibid., . . Ibid. . Elizabeth Cady Stanton, The Woman’s Bible (New York: European Publishing, ; Reprinted with foreword by Maureen Fitzgerald Boston: Northeastern University Press, ), . Page references are to the  edition. . Ibid., . . Ibid., . . Ibid. . Ibid. . Ibid., . . Anne C. Lynch Botta, Poems, new enlarged ed. (New York: G.P. Putnam, ), . . Contra Gabler-Hover, who regards “dark-browed” as a metonym for African. Janet Gabler-Hover, Dreaming Black/Writing White: The Hagar Myth in American Cultural History (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, ), . . Annie Chambers Ketchum, Christmas Carillons, and Other Poems (New York: D. Appleton, ), . . Reprinted in Taylor and Weir, Let Her Speak for Herself , .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

. Ibid., . . Gabler-Hover, Dreaming Black/Writing White, . . E. D. E. N. Southworth, The Deserted Wife: A Novel (Chicago: M.A. Donoghue, ), . . Ibid., . . Ibid., . . Ibid. . Ibid., . . Ibid., . . Ibid., . . Daniel R. Vollaro, “Lincoln, Stowe, and the ‘Little Woman/Great War’ Story: The Making, and Breaking, of a Great American Anecdote,” Journal of the Abraham Lincoln Association , no.  (): –. . The “Uncle Tom” character is believed to be based in part on the  autobiography of Josiah Henson. Josiah Henson and Samuel Atkins Eliot, The Life of Josiah Henson, Formerly a Slave, Now an Inhabitant of Canada (Boston: Arthur D. Phelps, ). . For example, when Uncle Tom refuses to beat another enslaved person, Simon Legree exclaims, “Here, you rascal, you make believe to be so pious,—didn’t you never hear, out of yer Bible, ‘Servants obey yer master’?” Harriet Beecher Stowe and Elizabeth Ammons, Uncle Tom’s Cabin: Authoritative Text, Backgrounds, and Contexts, Criticism (New York: W. W. Norton, ), . Quoting  Peter :. . Ibid., . . Ibid., . . Harriet Beecher Stowe, The Key to Uncle Tom’s Cabin (New York: Arno Press, ), –. . Charlotte Moon Clark, The Modern Hagar: A Drama (New York: G. W. Harlan, ), . . Lynne T. Jefferson, “The Emergence of a Pioneer: The Manipulation of Hagar in Nineteenth-Century American Women’s Novels” (PhD diss., Indiana University of Pennsylvania, ), . . See also the Black woman character named Hagar in the novel Mamba’s Daughters. DuBose Heyward, Mamba’s Daughters (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, Doran, ). The novel was adapted into a Broadway play, and Ethel Waters played the Hagar character. Heyward is the author of both the novel and the play Porgy. . Pauline Hopkins, Hagar’s Daughter (London: The X Press, ). For more on Hopkins, see the Pauline Elizabeth Hopkins Society website: http://www.paulinehopkinssociety.org/. . Ibid., .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Aunt Hagar



. Mulatto is an antiquated term for a mixed-race person, usually of Black and White parentage. The “tragic mulatto” is a generally unhappy character who usually only finds peace and rest in death. Examples within literature and film include Lydia Maria Child’s short story “The Quadroons,” the novel Clotel by William Wells Brown, and the novel Imitation of Life by Fannie Hust. Imitation of Life was adapted for film in  with the main character played by Claudette Colbert and in  by Lana Turner. See Donald Bogle, Toms, Coons, Mulattoes, Mammies, and Bucks: An Interpretive History of Blacks in American Films (New York: Continuum, ). In other novels, Hagar figures are “fallen women” and become connected with the Jezebel stereotype. See Jefferson, The Emergence of a Pioneer. . Charlotte Teller Hirsch, “Hagar and Ishmael,” The Crisis , no.  (), . . Ibid. . Biblical Hagar is popularly presumed to be the basis for Margaret Atwood’s dystopian novel The Handmaid’s Tale due to the rape and forced surrogacy of the “handmaids.” Yet, Atwood’s front matter includes a quotation of Genesis  on Bilhah and Zilpah, the enslaved women of Rachel and Leah. The novel was adapted into a film version starring Faye Dunaway and Robert Duvall in  and a television version in  starring Elisabeth Moss. . Langston Hughes, Not without Laughter (New York: Knopf, ), . Also, see Vanessa Lovelace, “Hagar’s Racial Identity in NineteenthCentury Southern Women’s Novels in the U.S.A.,” in The Oxford Handbook of Feminist Approaches to the Hebrew Bible, ed. Suzanne Scholz (Oxford: Oxford University Press, forthcoming). . Contra Steven C. Tracy, who, in reading Hughes through the lens of the blues, finds ties to biblical Hagar as well as to “Aunt Hagar’s Children’s Blues” in Hughes’s character. Steven C. Tracy, “Langston Hughes and Aunt Hager’s Children’s Blues Performance,” in Montage of a Dream: The Art and Life of Langston Hughes, ed. John Edgar Tidwell and Cheryl R. Ragar (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, ), –. . Bruce Nugent and Thomas H. Wirth, Gentleman Jigger: A Novel (Philadelphia: Da Capo, ), . . Wallace Thurman, Amritjit Singh, and Daniel M. Scott, The Collected Writings of Wallace Thurman: A Harlem Renaissance Reader. (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, ), . . E. Franklin Frazier, The Negro Family in the United States (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, ), .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

. Poem available at Poetry Foundation: https://www.poetryfoundation. org/. . In contrast, poet Honorée Fanonne Jeffers illustrates the interpretation of biblical Hagar outside of an Aunt Hagar tradition. She interprets Genesis – as a series of thirteen poems in her poetry collection, Outlandish Blues. Honorée Fanonne Jeffers, Outlandish Blues (Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press, ). . Mohja Kahf, Hagar Poems (Fayetteville: University of Arkansas Press, ). . Jones, All Aunt Hagar’s Children, . . National Public Radio, “Edward P. Jones’s Tales of ‘All Aunt Hagar’s Children’ ” August , , https://www.npr.org/.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

4 Black Hagar

As discussed in Chapter , biblical Hagar has become entangled with Aunt Hagar and fused into a single Black Hagar figure due to the name “Hagar.” So, we have solved one part of the mystery of Black Hagar. Chapter  helps us by tracing how related strands of religious studies and biblical studies scholarship have contributed to the notion of biblical Hagar as a Black woman. As explained in the Introduction, some scholars within classics and biblical studies have argued for the recovery of Arabia and Africa within studies of the ancient Near East. In some instances, given its emphasis on the African presence in biblical lands and peoples, such research identified Hagar as African and, by extension, as a Black woman. In addition, some scholars and theologians offered contextual readings of Hagar that created analogies between her experiences and those of contemporary women. This type of reading strategy is exemplified in the work of Hebrew Bible scholar Renita Weems in Just a Sister Away: A Womanist Vision of Women’s Relationships in the Bible. Theologian Delores Williams’s Sisters in the Wilderness: The Challenge of Womanist God-Talk linked biblical Hagar and the many manifestations of Aunt Hagar with African American women’s experiences to identify what she regards as a tradition of African American appropriation of Hagar. With the influential work of Weems and Williams, the notion of a biblical Black Hagar figure gained momentum and popularity. As discussed in Chapter , an Islamic Black Hagar traces back to the linking of enslavement and Blackness.¹ Nevertheless, the notion of biblical Black Hagar is a relatively recent phenomenon.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

This chapter focuses on academic religious studies and biblical studies scholarship. It highlights how standard commentaries treat the Hagar narratives and details how biblical scholarship by African American biblical scholars contributed to an emphasis on Hagar as African and Egyptian. It discusses the contributions of the volume Stony the Road We Trod and other contextual readings of the Hagar narratives. It details the significance of Sisters in the Wilderness in contributing to the idea of a Black Hagar and the ongoing importance of this work, including refutation of Williams’s views. It demonstrates how scholarship has added to the view of biblical Hagar as a Black woman. Twentieth-century biblical commentary In standard biblical commentaries of the twentieth century, scholars acknowledged Hagar’s Egyptian origins but did not identify her racially as Black. Of course, such commentaries vary in their approach to Genesis and may stress philological, historical, literary, or theological concerns over issues of ethnicity or race. Still, they do not attempt to draw parallels between Hagar and US enslavement. Nor do they relate the Hagar narratives to African peoples or those of African descent. Even when discussing Hagar’s Egyptian origins, these commentaries do not connect her with Africa or any notion of Blackness. They may identify Hagar and Ishmael as ethnically distinctive depending on how they understand their physical features or personality traits, particularly in contrast to Sarah and Abraham, but they do not identify them as Black using contemporary notions of race. These scholars often rely on Orientalist notions by regarding Hagar and Ishmael as passionate and stubborn, following a romantic, stereotyped view of nomadic peoples. They associate Egypt with the socalled Orient rather than Africa. Such scholarship illustrates how later work that addresses issues of race and ethnicity is a unique departure from standard treatments of Hagar within biblical studies. Hermann Gunkel’s  The Legends of Genesis: The Biblical Saga and History connects Israelite literature with earlier oral traditions.² He distinguishes “history,” which is primarily written, from “legend,” which originates in oral tradition. Gunkel discusses races and tribes in this work, but he does not refer to modern racial classifications.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Black Hagar



Rather, he is describing peoples descended from particular ancestors. Gunkel does not identify Hagar as Black but argues that an earlier oral tradition portrayed Hagar as an Arab or Bedouin woman. Like Stowe, his discussion of Hagar includes a stereotyped view of the passionate foreigner. Although Gunkel claims that elements of Hagar’s story have changed over time, he argues that Hagar was a “Muzritish Arabian woman” from the “North Arabian tribe of the Muzrim” who became a woman from “Mizraim” or Egypt.³ Also, he characterizes Hagar as a “tempestuous Bedouin woman” whose portrayal is softened in later versions because the writers were “not familiar with the desert.”⁴ In Genesis , Hagar with the “defiant spirit” becomes transformed into the “patient and unfortunate woman,” since the Yahwistic (J) story of Genesis  is the “robust primitive version” while chapter  is the “lachrymose version” of the Elohist (E).⁵ Gunkel treats the “flight of Hagar” in Genesis  as an example of a mixed legend that includes “ethnographic, ethnological, ceremonial, and etymological elements since it describes Ishmael, the conditions of the life of Ishmael, the importance of ‘Lacha-roi’ and the names ‘Lacha-roi and Ishmael’.”⁶ Similarly, in his article “Two Accounts of Hagar,” which was published in , Gunkel argues that the two Hagar texts are legends that are variations of a single story. He describes Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar as “husband, wife, and maid,” which “are clearly Israelite archetypes.”⁷ Again, Gunkel claims that Hagar is the “genuine, defiant, untamable ancestress of the Bedouin” in the first account, but in the second account, those who preserved the story were unfamiliar with “the tribe of Hagar.”⁸ S. R. Driver’s  Genesis commentary does not focus on issues of race or ethnicity, but like Gunkel, he uses Orientalist stereotypes in his discussion of Hagar and Ishmael. While Driver does not mention race, he does mention the physiognomy of Egyptians. In commenting on Genesis :, he cites Richard Francis Burton, a well-known linguist and explorer in India, Arabia, and Africa. Driver writes, “Sir. R. F. Burton remarked upon the Egyptian physiognomy of some of the Bedawi clans of Sinai observable at the present day.”⁹ Now considered a pseudo-science, physiognomy involved the practice of attempting to determine a person’s moral character by facial features. This is not a racial designation, but by suggesting that there is an Egyptian physiognomy, Driver treats Egyptians as a distinctive group.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

In commenting on Ishmael as a “wild-ass of a man” (Gen. :), Driver connects Ishmael with Bedouin tribes, which he describes as “free and independent sons of the desert, owning no authority save that of their own chief, reckless of life, treacherous towards strangers, ever ready for war or pillage.”¹⁰ Driver suggests a relationship between Ishmaelite tribes and Egypt, since Hagar is Egyptian and since Ishmael’s wife was an Egyptian. In a footnote, Driver cautions that one should not link the biblical Ishmaelites with modern Bedouin, since he regards the Ishmaelites as consisting of twelve different tribes based on the genealogy in Genesis :–. Rather, the Ishmaelites and Bedouin tribes share “a general similarity in mode of life and character.”¹¹ Driver’s view of Egyptians and Ishmaelites reflects the notion of particular peoples as having certain features and characteristics. John Skinner’s  Genesis commentary in the International Critical Commentary series is in conversation with Gunkel, Driver, and other early commentaries on Genesis. Engaging in source-critical analysis, Skinner attributes chapter  to the Yahwist and Priestly source and chapter  to the Elohist. Like others, he argues that the Ishmaelites, as descendants of Hagar, are kin to Egyptians, and like Driver, he mentions Burton’s comments on Egyptian physiognomy.¹² In comparing Genesis  and , Skinner refers to Hagar in chapter  as a “high-spirited Bedawi woman who will not brook insult, and is at home in the desert.”¹³ In contrast, the Hagar of chapter  is “a household slave who speedily succumbs to the hardships of the wilderness.”¹⁴ For Skinner, Hagar in chapter  is a Bedouin woman, and her passionate personality is considered a trait of Bedouin women. In his  Genesis commentary, Gerhard von Rad interprets the description of Ishmael as a “wild ass of a man” (Gen. :) as related to his being a “Bedouin” and as “a worthy son to his rebellious and proud mother!”¹⁵ Also, he regards Ishmael as “the ancestor of the Bedouins, the camel-nomads.”¹⁶ For von Rad, Ishmael’s geographic location and his marriage to an Egyptian woman signal his physical and ethnic distance from Abraham. Von Rad does not discuss Hagar’s ethnicity at length but notes the distinctions in class within the narrative by pointing out Sarah’s contempt for Hagar in not identifying her by name but as “this slave woman” (:). Furthermore, the narrator’s description of Ishmael as “the son of Hagar the Egyptian” without the use of his name (:; cf. :) stresses Ishmael’s

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Black Hagar



“inferior rank.”¹⁷ Von Rad notes ethnic and class indicators in the Hagar narratives and understands Hagar and Ishmael as distinctive but not as racially different. In the  Anchor Bible commentary on Genesis, E. A. Speiser does not link any of the characters in Genesis  and  with contemporary US racial classifications or focus attention on ethnic difference. Speiser does not regard Hagar as a Black woman or address issues of ethnicity. Furthermore, unlike other commentaries that connect Ishmael with Bedouin tribes, Speiser stresses connections between these texts and ancient Near Eastern comparative material. For instance, Speiser links the description of Ishmael as a “wild colt of a man” (Gen. :) with the Akkadian term “savage of a man,” which is used to describe Enkidu and the first creation of the gods in the Epic of Gilgamesh.¹⁸ Speiser associates Sarah’s decision to use Hagar as a surrogate with the Code of Hammurabi and a Nuzi text regarding surrogacy as well as her alleged familiarity with Hurrian family law. Nahum Sarna’s  JPS Torah Commentary on Genesis discusses Hagar’s Egyptian origins and notes the irony in Hebrew peoples having possession of an enslaved Egyptian woman. He mentions the Hagrites (Ps. :;  Chron. :, ) as desert dwelling pastoralists and claims that there could be a connection between Hagar and the northern Arabian Agraioi or Agreis mentioned by Classical Greek writers. He notes that Hagar’s name may link to the Arabic term for “to flee” and also suggests that Hagar’s name may form a wordplay with the Hebrew term “ger” (gēr), which means stranger.¹⁹ In commenting on :, Sarna claims that Hagar’s flight is toward Egypt as she is on the road to Shur. The Israelites stop at Shur after crossing the Red Sea en route to Canaan in Exodus :. Here, he mentions Shur as related to Egyptian fortifications built to keep out Asiatics. Sarna explains the description of Ishmael as a “wild ass of a man” (:) by connecting the Ishmaelites with the “almost impossible to domesticate,” “sturdy, fearless, and fleet-footed Syrian onager.”²⁰ This onager refers to the Arabian wild donkey.²¹ For Sarna, there is irony, as an enslaved woman becomes the ancestress of the Ishmaelites, whom he refers to as “a people free and undisciplined.”²² Sarna suggests connections between Hagar and northern Arabian peoples but does not link her to any contemporary peoples or issues.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

Hagar as African and Egyptian African American biblical scholarship provides the first traces of Black Hagar linked closely to biblical Hagar. Some African American scholars sought to offer a corrective to the prevailing Eurocentric view of biblical characters as non-African. While emphasizing the presence and importance of Africa within biblical texts, their aim was not necessarily to identify particular characters as racially Black. For instance, as noted in previous chapters, some scholars noted that Hagar was African because she was Egyptian, which is not necessarily the same as claiming that Hagar was Black. Nevertheless, when scholars emphasized this African presence in connection with Hagar, such Africanness became linked with Blackness, especially since such scholarship was written within the context of US constructions of race that directly challenged the White default in biblical studies. Thus, even if the author’s intent was not to racialize the character, for some readers, to mark a character as African would serve to connect that character with the history and heritage of persons of African descent in the US, who are generally identified as Black. As unmarked, Hagar, along with most biblical characters, is constructed as White. If marked African, for some readers, she is interpreted as Black. So, Blackness is read back into Africanness even if that is not stated or intended by the scholar. Egypt as a geographic and ethnic marker becomes a racial marker and contributes to Egyptian Hagar being interpreted as Black Hagar. Hagar is not a prominent figure within African American biblical scholarship, including scholarship that focuses on the significance of Africa within biblical texts.²³ Even in instances in which particular biblical characters are identified as Black African, Hagar is usually not mentioned. Biblical scholar Charles B. Copher was a pioneer in arguing for the African presence in the Bible.²⁴ His  discussion of Black presence and biblical studies acknowledges the fluidity of Black identity but identifies some biblical peoples as “Black,” including Nubians, Egyptians, Ethiopians, and Hebrews. Furthermore, he classifies some individual biblical characters as “Black,” including the Cushite in David’s Army ( Sam. :–), Ebed-Melech (Jer. :–), Moses’s Cushite wife (Num. :), the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts :–), and Symeon called Nigher (Acts :). Yet, he does not mention Hagar by

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Black Hagar



name.²⁵ His discussion of key biblical characters and events that are mentioned frequently in Black Christian songs, sermons, and prayers does not mention Hagar.²⁶ In his  article “African Roots of Christianity,” Copher identifies Hagar as African when describing her as the wife of Abraham and the mother of Ishmael, but he does not identify Hagar as Black.²⁷ Since Copher links Africa with Blackness in this later article, it implies a connection between her Egyptianness and Blackness even if he does not make this claim explicitly. Biblical scholar Robert A. Bennett Jr.’s  article “Africa and the Biblical Period” provides an early foray into the importance of the African presence in biblical texts. Bennett’s work offers a historical perspective on the lack of attention to the African presence in biblical scholarship.²⁸ He uses a Christian theological perspective in treating biblical texts as God’s Word and seeks to employ biblical texts in support of Black physical and spiritual liberation. Bennett discusses characters such as Phineas, the Cushite wife of Moses, the queen of Sheba, and others, but he does not mention Hagar. More recent African American biblical scholarship includes different treatments of Hagar. Cain Hope Felder’s influential Troubling Biblical Waters: Race, Class, and Family () identifies Hagar as Black within a list of Hebrew Bible characters but does not provide a substantial discussion of Hagar.²⁹ Rather, he writes, “There is an impressive array of Black people in the Old Testament.”³⁰ After listing characters including Hagar, Felder continues, “Many of these passages attest to the greatness and power of African Blacks participating in the salvation drama of ancient Israel.”³¹ Christian origins scholar Vincent Wimbush’s  massive edited volume, African Americans and the Bible: Sacred Texts and Social Textures, does not discuss Hagar as Black. Despite the dozens of authors within this work, none mention a Hagar tradition within African American biblical interpretation.³² New Testament scholar Allen Dwight Callahan’s  The Talking Book: African Americans and the Bible analyzes the relationship of African Americans to the Bible as “The Talking Book,” “The Poison Book,” and “The Good Book.” He highlights four themes, including Exile, Exodus, Ethiopia, and Emmanuel.³³ Despite covering centuries of the use of biblical texts by enslaved Africans and their descendants in the US, Callahan does not mention biblical Hagar or any Aunt Hagar tradition.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

Although Hagar was not a frequently cited biblical character within African American biblical scholarship, the work of African American scholars provides a clue to the development of a Black Hagar figure through its emphasis on the African presence within biblical studies and on African biblical characters. While this work does not identify Hagar as racially Black, it provides the groundwork for later contextual scholarship that links Hagar with the experiences of African American women. Reading Hagar with contemporary parallels Biblical scholars Phyllis Trible and Renita Weems and theologian Elsa Tamez offer readings of Hagar that create parallels with contemporary women. In contrast to earlier biblical scholarship, they engage issues of race, ethnicity, gender, and class directly. The work on Hagar by these three women became well cited within religious studies and biblical studies. Like African American biblical scholarship on Hagar, these interpretations provided new perspectives on the Hagar narratives and contributed to the view of Hagar as a Black woman. Hebrew Bible scholar Phyllis Trible’s  book Texts of Terror: Literary-Feminist Readings of Biblical Narrative is a classic work in feminist biblical studies. The book “recounts tales of terror in memoriam to offer sympathetic readings of abused women” and offers commentary on four women biblical characters: Hagar, Tamar ( Sam. :–), the unnamed woman (Judg. :–) and the Daughter of Jephthath (Judg. :–).³⁴ Trible identifies Hagar as Black and as African but does not identify other biblical women by race or ethnicity. The image accompanying the chapter on Hagar is a tombstone on which is written: “Hagar, Egyptian Slave Woman / She was wounded for our transgressions; she was bruised for our iniquities.”³⁵ At the end of the chapter, Trible comments on this quotation of Isaiah :a (cf.  Pet. :) by treating Hagar as a type of Christ figure who bears Israel’s burdens. Trible discusses Hagar’s Blackness within the context of oppression based on nationality, class, and sex. Trible acknowledges how different groups respond to the Hagar story. She writes, “As a symbol of the oppressed, Hagar becomes many things to many people. Most especially, all sorts of rejected women find their stories in her.”³⁶

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Black Hagar



Trible’s reading may be inspired partly by her experience of “hearing a black woman describe herself as a daughter of Hagar outside the covenant.”³⁷ Trible lists a number of different types of stories that Hagar reflects. Among these stories, she includes “the black woman used by the male and abused by the female of the ruling class.”³⁸ In a footnote, Trible writes, “While racial ties between the ancient Egyptians and black people are problematic, cultural affinities are certain. Hagar was an African woman. On this issue in general, see Robert A. Bennett, Jr.”³⁹ While not identifying Hagar as racially Black, Trible claims a cultural tie between ancient Egyptians and Black people but also claims that Hagar was an African woman. Published originally in Spanish in  and republished in English translation in , an article by theologian Elsa Tamez provides a well-cited example of a theological engagement with Hagar. In “The Woman Who Complicated the History of Salvation,” Tamez does not identify Hagar as Black but draws parallels between Hagar’s experiences and those of Latin American women. Tamez writes, “It is a scenario familiar to domestic servants today.”⁴⁰ She connects Hagar with women who are domestic servants and who are rejected after they are raped and impregnated by the son of the householder. Arguing as a Christian theologian, Tamez claims that most treatments of Genesis  read from Sarah’s perspective and regard Hagar negatively since she “became rebellious and wouldn’t submit to Sarah’s wishes.”⁴¹ Tamez identifies Hagar as Egyptian while stressing that she is oppressed due to her “slave status, her race, and her sex.”⁴² Tamez reads this text as stressing the importance of those who are marginalized and how God acts on their behalf. For her, the marginalized are included within God’s salvation history. She writes, “The marginalized demand as first-born sons to be included in the history of salvation.”⁴³ Tamez claims that Hagar experiences a change of status from slave to concubine in Genesis . In her discussion of Genesis , Tamez links contemporary domestic servitude with Hagar’s expulsion and objectification. Also, she reads the expulsion as an opportunity for Hagar to serve as sole parent, without interference from Abraham and Sarah, and to live away from both “Egyptian oppressors and Hebrew discrimination.”⁴⁴ Tamez interprets Hagar’s experience with the messenger as one in which she is privileged to see, hear, and name God.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

One of the earliest clues regarding the development of a Black Hagar figure within biblical studies is found in Just a Sister Away: A Womanist Vision of Women’s Relationships in the Bible by Hebrew Bible scholar Renita Weems.⁴⁵ Written for a lay audience, her book discusses relationships between biblical women. Published in , it was the first book within biblical studies identified as a womanist work. It is often assigned reading for students in theological education and biblical studies.⁴⁶ Just a Sister Away features what Weems calls “creative reconstructions” regarding the intimate lives of biblical women.⁴⁷ Weems argues that although biblical women lived in very different contexts, they “were compelled by the same passions as we.”⁴⁸ She links African American women’s experiences with Hagar’s experiences in Abraham’s household. In chapter one of Just a Sister Away, entitled “A Mistress, a Maid, and No Mercy,” Weems offers her interpretation of the Hagar and Sarah stories by reading these narratives through the lens of relationships between Black and White women in the US. Although Weems does not identify Hagar as a Black woman explicitly, she relates the struggles of Black women with Hagar’s experiences as depicted in Genesis. She writes, “For black women, Hagar’s story is peculiarly familiar. It is as if we know it by heart.” Weems identifies the ethnic, racial, and class differences between Hagar and Sarah as “an African woman and a Hebrew woman, a woman of color and a white woman, a Third World woman and a First World woman.”⁴⁹ Weems acknowledges that these differences are not solely racial but include “ethnic prejudice exacerbated by economic and sexual exploitation.” As well, she indicates that difficult circumstances affect all women. She writes, “At some time in all our lives, whether we are black or white, we are all Hagar’s daughters.”⁵⁰ Here, Weems is not using the “all Aunt Hagar’s children” expression discussed in Chapter . Still, she understands the Sarah and Hagar stories as relating to “the similarity of our stories, as black and white women in America.”⁵¹ The illustrations and discussion questions within Just a Sister Away may also contribute to the view of Hagar as Black. The illustrations for the cover and each chapter of the first edition feature black and white drawings of dark-skinned women, and the accompanying illustration for chapter one has a very dark Hagar and Ishmael with a

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Black Hagar



lighter-colored Sarah. Weems includes discussion questions at the end of the chapter that highlight issues of difference among women, including racial and ethnic difference. For instance, she asks: “How would you evaluate the relationship between black and white women in America today? Black and Latina women? Protestant and Jewish women? How does our shared faith in Jesus Christ (or God) help ease the differences between us or help erase the memories of what has taken place in the past between us?”⁵² Weems’s creative reading strategy does not specify that Hagar is a Black woman, but her reading lens would make it difficult for a reader not to think of her in this way. These works by Trible, Tamez, and Weems have become classic treatments of Hagar. Their unique contextual readings share similarities in that they offer parallels between the experiences of Hagar and those of contemporary women.⁵³ In particular, Weems’s reading of Hagar offers a unique perspective that focused on African American women. While scholars had acknowledged Hagar’s class position as an enslaved woman, Weems’s close intertwining with African American women was entirely new and unprecedented within biblical studies. Stony the Road We Trod The next major element in discovering the roots of Hagar’s Blackness within biblical scholarship comes from several essays within the edited volume Stony the Road We Trod: African American Biblical Interpretation. Published in  and edited by New Testament scholar Cain Hope Felder, Stony the Road has become a classic work within biblical studies and especially within theological education. In addition, it is one of a limited number of biblical studies volumes that became popular with those outside the academy. Essays by Renita Weems, Randall Bailey, John Waters, and Charles B. Copher mention Hagar in some way and contribute to the interpretation of Hagar as a Black woman within biblical studies. Following the publication of Just a Sister Away, Weems discusses Hagar further in this edited volume in “Reading Her Way through the Struggle: African American Women and the Bible.”⁵⁴ Here, Weems continues to construct parallels between Hagar and the lives of African American women. She seeks to understand how biblical texts remain meaningful for those from marginalized groups even as those same

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

texts are employed to support their marginalization. Her primary claim is that women are not natural allies, and she points to the story of Hagar and Sarah as an example of this discord. She claims that African American women “have perceived uncanny parallels between the plight and status of Hagar and themselves.”⁵⁵ In her interpretation of Hagar, Weems identifies Hagar as Egyptian and as different from Sarah in ethnic and socio-economic terms, although she does not identify Sarah as White. Weems writes, “Here the status, ethnicity, gender, and circumstances of a biblical character have been seen as unmistakably analogous to those of the African American reader.”⁵⁶ Also, she regards Hagar as a victim of sexual molestation and as a single mother. Thus, Weems regards this text as “familiar, even haunting to African American female readers.”⁵⁷ In Stony the Road, Hebrew Bible scholar Randall Bailey does not address ethnicity within his article “Beyond Identification: The Use of Africans in Old Testament Poetry and Narratives.” Instead, Bailey notes the presence of African individuals within the Hebrew Bible and draws attention to the instances in which they are high status persons. He identifies Hagar as a “servant” or “maid” and argues that having a servant was unusual during the patriarchal period and uncommon for nomadic peoples.⁵⁸ Bailey argues that traditional interpretations of Hagar as well as feminist and womanist readings, including Weems’s Just a Sister Away, do not acknowledge that to have an Egyptian “servant” was rare.⁵⁹ Thus, Bailey contends that having Hagar within their household elevates the status of Abraham and Sarah. Bailey does not identify Hagar as racially Black but as African. The most thorough treatment of Hagar in Stony the Road comes from Hebrew Bible scholar John Waters. In his essay “Who Was Hagar?,” Waters takes what would be considered today to be a fairly conservative historical-critical approach that treats these texts as pointing to historical realities.⁶⁰ Writing to combat European and American biblical scholarship that tends to erase Africanness, he reexamines perceptions about Hagar’s role within Abraham’s household and argues that the perception of Hagar as an enslaved woman comes from non-biblical sources. Waters notes that the Genesis narrative is set in Northern Africa. He identifies the Egyptians as “sons of Ham” based on the Table of Nations (Gen. ) and identifies Ishmael as a “Bedouin” in both

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Black Hagar



Genesis  and . He revisits what he terms the “traditional interpretation” of Genesis  and  by reconsidering the Yahwist and Elohist accounts of the text. He argues that Hagar is an Egyptian “maid” in the Yahwistic account but a “slave woman” in the Elohistic account.⁶¹ In addition, he argues that the Hebrew words that he transliterates as “shiphahah” and “’amah” are synonymous. (For a discussion of these terms, consult Chapter .) Waters contends that Egyptians would have held primarily Asiatic slaves during this period, although he also claims that biblical texts portray the Hebrews/Israelites as superior to other peoples. Citing Skinner’s A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Genesis, Waters claims that Hagar is “no ordinary slave” in Yahwistic or Elohistic texts due to her later acquisition of a wife for her son.⁶² For Waters, she is not a slave “in the sense of being in bondage.”⁶³ He suggests that the King James translation of the Bible and a “racist tendency” to have contempt for African peoples have led to the view of Hagar as an Egyptian slave and surmises that this tradition comes from extra-biblical sources. He writes, “The language and ‘feeling’ of the story suggest that she was a free person.”⁶⁴ In an excursus in the same article, Waters discusses issues of race and ethnicity in biblical studies. He regards the ancient Egyptians as well as the Ishmaelites as diverse and of mixed ethnicity. He cites Simpson in claiming that the word “Egyptian” is inserted by a Priestly redactor. He does not identify Hagar as Black but connects her with Egypt and Northern Africa. Still, within the context of an edited volume on African American biblical interpretation, it would be difficult for any reader not to come away with an impression of Egyptians as ethnically distinctive and of Hagar as a Black African. Unlike Bailey and Waters, Copher’s article “The Black Presence in the Old Testament” directly identifies Hagar as Black. Extending his earlier work on the Black presence in the Bible, in his discussion of biblical characters in the patriarchal period, he points to Hagar, Ishmael, Ishmael’s wife, and Ishmael’s sons as examples of the Black presence in biblical texts.⁶⁵ The African presence is not the same as a racial identification, but the use of these notions is very slippery such that within the context of this discussion on the importance of Africa within biblical texts, a reader would be likely to take this as related to Blackness.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

Stony the Road provides another important element within our search for Black Hagar. This single volume includes Weems’s contextual treatment of Hagar that parallels her with contemporary African American women as well as discussions of Hagar related to the reclamation of Egypt as part of Africa by Bailey, Waters, and Copher. These novel approaches to Hagar are significant elements in understanding how Hagar became Black. The volume’s subtitle, “African American Biblical Interpretation,” would suggest to its readers that these interpretations were part of a larger African American interpretive tradition. Furthermore, most African Americans would recognize the title as a reference to the lyrics of “Lift Every Voice and Sing,” which is often called the “Negro National Anthem.”⁶⁶ Still, none of the scholars who discuss Hagar within Stony the Road indicate a long-standing tradition of biblical interpretation of Hagar by African Americans. Nor do they mention an Aunt Hagar tradition. Yet, their scholarship within this well-cited volume has contributed to the development of a Black Hagar interpretive tradition within religious studies and biblical studies that becomes part of the larger Black biblical Hagar cultural tradition. Contemporary parallels continued Like the Stony the Road volume, The Original African Heritage Study Bible was an innovative effort within biblical interpretation.⁶⁷ It includes some mentions of Hagar that support a biblical Black Hagar figure. It was published in , and the general editor was Cain Hope Felder. The contributors include biblical scholars such as Felder and William Myers as well as pastors and scholars in other disciplines. Major reference authors include well-known African studies scholars such as Molefi Kete Asante, John Mbiti, and Ivan Van Sertima. This Study Bible was not a new translation, since it uses the Authorized King James Version, but the articles, footnotes, photographs, and use of shading for emphasis make this a unique contribution. The introduction to the Study Bible identifies “Afrocentricity” as its methodology for biblical interpretation. Afrocentricity is defined as “the idea that African and persons of African descent must be understood as making significant contributions to world civilization as proactive subjects within history.”⁶⁸ Also, the introduction explains that its purpose is not to offer a racist perspective but a more inclusive

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Black Hagar



one than found in traditional European and Euro-American scholarship. It seeks to link Black history not just to African Americans but also to the continent of Africa. The volume emphasizes that the original, “Edenic” people were those from Africa, and gray-shaded biblical passages in the Study Bible are those related to the “Edenic/ African presence.” It contends that skin color was not emphasized in biblical texts because of a lack of racial prejudice and color prejudice. The volume includes photographs of various Black actors costumed as biblical characters. Genesis  and Genesis :– are shaded gray, and thus are interpreted as relating to Edenic/African peoples. The annotation on chapter  identifies Hagar as an African woman and as an Egyptian. It argues that Abraham joins “the two great African people of Shem and Ham, placing Abraham as the father of both the Israelite and Ishmaelite (Arab) nations.”⁶⁹ The footnote on Genesis  indicates that Abraham expelled Hagar and Ishmael due to the Code of Hammurabi, who is described as “the great black African king of Babylon.”⁷⁰ This volume does not explicitly name Hagar as a Black woman, but its description of her as African and as Egyptian within the context of a volume that focuses on Afrocentricity make it unlikely that a reader would have thought of Hagar as other than Black. This Study Bible is not mainstream biblical scholarship, especially as only a limited number of professional biblical scholars are contributors. Hagar is not a point of emphasis in the volume. She is not singled out in any way and is only one among many biblical characters who are linked with the African presence in biblical texts. Still, this Study Bible is another element within what becomes a perception of Hagar as a Black woman. Sisters in the Wilderness Sisters in the Wilderness: The Challenge of Womanist God-Talk by theologian Delores Williams was a groundbreaking bestseller within religious studies and related fields. Published in , Williams’s work has become a standard text in theology and remains on many seminary and divinity school syllabi and reading lists. Her book brought renewed attention to biblical Hagar and to African American appropriation of Hagar. The book has two parts. “Part One: Sisters in the

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

Wilderness” explores the Hagar narratives and addresses motherhood, surrogacy, racism and colorism, and Black women’s resistance strategies. “Part Two: Womanist God-Talk” offers a new theology or “God-talk” that centers Black women’s experiences and is more inclusive than the traditionally male-dominated Black liberation theology. It addresses similarities and differences between womanist and feminist discourse and highlights the “Black Church,” African American denominational churches, and the Universal Hagar’s Spiritual Church. Williams’s project utilizes the experiences of African American women as a source for theological reflection. Williams quotes Alice Walker’s definition of “womanist” in its entirety in a footnote.⁷¹ Specifically, Williams engages one element of Alice Walker’s definition of “womanist” indirectly by suggesting that black women should “love themselves. Regardless.”⁷² To be clear, Williams’s treatment of Hagar is only one element within her larger laudable project intended to construct a womanist theology or god-talk that takes seriously Black women’s experiences. Williams’s book has promoted the notion of an intimate relationship between biblical Hagar and Black women. Although not the first theologian to comment on Hagar, she is among the first to focus this type of attention on Hagar in conjunction with the historical experiences of African American women. The construction of biblical Hagar as a Black woman is achieved through Williams’s use of African American women’s historical experiences and African American literary and cultural engagement with Hagar. Even more extensively than Trible, Tamez, or Weems, Williams draws numerous parallels between the experiences of African American women and biblical Hagar. Although Williams does not claim that Hagar was Black, she identifies her as African, and the parallels she makes contribute to the notion of a biblical Black Hagar tradition. She writes, “Hagar’s heritage was African as was black women’s. Hagar was a slave. Black American women had emerged from a slave heritage and still lived in light of it.”⁷³ Williams describes Hagar’s story as an “analogue for African American women’s historic experience.”⁷⁴ Furthermore, she explains, “Even today, most of Hagar’s situation is congruent with many African American women’s predicament of poverty, sexual and economic exploitation, surrogacy, domestic violence, homelessness, rape, motherhood, single-parenting, ethnicity and meetings with

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Black Hagar



God.”⁷⁵ Although Williams does not state explicitly that Hagar is Black, the comparisons that she draws with African American women would make it unlikely that a reader would think otherwise. In Sisters in the Wilderness, Williams cites numerous instances of what she identifies as the “appropriation” of Hagar by African Americans. She describes Black women as testifying that “God helped them make a way out of no way.”⁷⁶ This God participates not only in their “survival struggle” but also in a “struggle for quality of life.”⁷⁷ Williams identifies this as a “female-centered tradition of African-American biblical appropriation” that “could be named the survival/quality-of-life tradition of African-American biblical appropriation” (italics original).⁷⁸ In support of this tradition, she has an extensive footnote with a number of literary and cultural references to Hagar to suggest the importance of Hagar within African American culture.⁷⁹ Although it is only one footnote, this footnote is the foundation for Williams’s understanding of this tradition of biblical appropriation. Williams cites various sources in African American literature that mention the name “Hagar,” but she does not specify whether the various uses of the name refer to biblical Hagar or to characters named Hagar who are unrelated to biblical Hagar. Williams claims that there is a cultural tradition of Black Hagar, but she herself has contributed to the creation of this tradition by linking cultural Aunt Hagar back to biblical Hagar. In this nearly page-long footnote, Williams offers eleven examples of the use of Hagar by African Americans in different time periods and mediums in supporting her claim of a long-standing tradition. Yet, these examples illustrate Williams’s fusion of biblical Hagar with Aunt Hagar, the Black woman ancestor figure of African American culture. For example, Williams mentions Edmonia Lewis’s sculpture “Hagar in the Wilderness” as an example of this tradition. Yet, as discussed in Chapter , the racial and ethnic identification of the sculpture remains in question. Williams mentions a Black woman writing in  who identifies her grandmother’s daughter as “Hagar Ann.” Yet, we know that biblical names were common for many people, including African Americans. So, the presence of this name within a Black woman’s narrative is not evidence of a Hagar tradition. Williams mentions Paul Lawrence Dunbar’s use of “the members of the Afro-American Sons of Hagar Social Club.” She neglects to explain that this phrase is from Dunbar’s short story “The Defection of Marla Ann Gibbs” within his

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

collection Old Plantation Days. It is not evidence of a historical social club with this name. She notes that Richard Wright refers to an African American family as “Hagar’s children.” She does provide a citation for this quote, but I was unable to confirm it. Still, it suggests a connection with Aunt Hagar rather than with biblical Hagar. She mentions that Toni Morrison’s Song of Solomon has a Hagar character, but as discussed in Chapter , a biblical name does not suggest that the biblical character is being referred to here. Also, she cites John Langston Gwaltney’s glossary in Drylongso, which defines Aunt Hagar as “a mythical apical figure of the core black American nation.” Drylongso is a collection of personal responses from African Americans reflecting on their culture, and its glossary definition indicates an Aunt Hagar figure.⁸⁰ The dedication of the same collection reads, “For Lucy and all the other flowers in Aunt Hagar’s garden.” Both instances refer to an Aunt Hagar ancestor figure that is unrelated to biblical Hagar. By focusing on the name “Hagar,” Williams has fused biblical Hagar and the Black Aunt Hagar traditions, which creates the impression of a single African American tradition involving biblical Hagar that existed prior to the ’s biblical scholarship on Hagar. In addition, the cover of the  edition of Williams’s book includes three photos of a brown-skinned woman wearing her hair back and covered by a scarf. The gold necklace she wears suggests a modern date, but the woman could also represent a woman of an earlier era. The cover model could be a contemporary African American woman, or it could represent an interpretation of biblical Hagar. Although Williams may not have had editorial control over the cover, having a Black woman cover model would again point the reader toward thinking of biblical Hagar as a Black woman. Williams revisits Hagar in the article “Hagar in African American Biblical Appropriation” in the edited volume Hagar, Sarah, and Their Children: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Perspectives (). Once again, Williams reiterates her view of the appropriation of Hagar by African American readers. She regards Hagar as “an analogue for African American womanhood.”⁸¹ In this article, she writes, “Some African American slave women experienced upperclass white women taking their children away from them.”⁸² Also, she claims, “Hagar and African American women have a heritage rooted in Africa.”⁸³ Because she focuses on what she perceives as the

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Black Hagar



long-standing tradition of the appropriation of biblical Hagar by African Americans, Williams does not acknowledge her own influence in naming and constructing this tradition of Black biblical Hagar. Hagar parallels after Williams Because Williams outlines an interpretive history for Black Hagar that includes what I am calling an Aunt Hagar tradition, she creates a longer interpretive history for biblical Hagar as a Black woman than is warranted. This view of Black biblical Hagar as a fusion of Aunt Hagar and biblical Hagar became extraordinarily influential in subsequent biblical scholarship, especially by African American scholars and those in conversation with such scholarship. In part because Williams identifies this as a long-standing tradition, later scholars, even when citing Williams, do not acknowledge her role in constructing this tradition. Writing after Weems and Williams, Wilma Ann Bailey does not identify Hagar as Black in her  article on Hagar.⁸⁴ Yet, she uses Hagar to illustrate a racial division within feminism by characterizing Anabaptist feminism as dominated by relatively affluent Caucasian women. Bailey cites Weems’s Just a Sister Away in order to point out how White women persist in supporting their superiority. She notes the particular experiences of Black women in contrast to White women regarding enslavement, the suffrage movement, and contemporary economic struggle. Bailey encourages greater sensitivity relating to issues of race, class, and ethnicity. Paraphrasing Galatians :, she entreats Anabaptist feminists who contend that there is in Christ no male or female to be more inclusive in their feminism. She contends that free women in biblical texts such as Abel-Beth-Maacah ( Sam. :–) should be thought of as much as women like Hagar, the foreigner who is unfree. Later, in a  article, Bailey discusses Black women’s and Jewish women’s perspectives on Hagar, in which she stresses the importance of social location in biblical scholarship.⁸⁵ Theologian Kwok Pui-Lan discusses the use of Hagar within her chapter “Racism and Ethnocentrism in Feminist Biblical Interpretation” in her  book Discovering the Bible in the non-Biblical World. In this chapter, Kwok offers ten theses related to challenges within feminist scholarship. Thesis four reads: “Feminist interpretation of the

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

Bible must take into serious consideration simultaneously the multiple oppression of women in terms of class, gender, and race.”⁸⁶ In discussing feminist biblical interpretation, Kwok points out the variety of ways that Hagar is reinterpreted by different women. Citing both Tamez and Weems, Kwok contends that African American women focus on Hagar as an enslaved woman, while Latin Americans focus on issues of poverty. Also, she argues that African scholars consider issues of polygamy, and that Asians underscore her loss of cultural identity. Although she makes generalizations regarding these perspectives, Kwok’s treatment illustrates how the view of Hagar through the lens of each group’s experiences has become a familiar way of reading this text. Theologian Diana Hayes discusses Hagar in conversation with African American women’s experiences in Hagar’s Daughters: Womanist Ways of Being in the World (). This book is a revision of her  Madeleva Lecture in Spirituality at the Center for Spirituality of Saint Mary’s College in Notre Dame, Indiana. Hayes reflects on the spirituality of Black Christian women and engages Hagar as a distant ancestor of Black women. Hayes cites both Weems’s Just a Sister Away and Williams’s Sisters in the Wilderness. She identifies Black women as the daughters of Black women pioneers, including “Maria Stewart, Ida B. Wells Barnett, Harriet Tubman, Sojourner Truth, Mary McLeod Bethune, Rebecca Jackson, and Zora Neale Hurston.”⁸⁷ She ends the list by identifying Black women as daughters of “Hagar, the rejected and cast-out slave, Mother of Ishmael, concubine of Abraham, and threat to Sarah, his barren wife.”⁸⁸ Hayes does not identify biblical Hagar specifically as African or as Black, but she treats her descendants as African. She writes, “We are all children of Africa, the children of Hagar, the slave.”⁸⁹ Here, context suggests that Hayes refers not to the “all Aunt Hagar’s children” expression but to biblical Hagar. For Hayes, the suffering and strength of Black women bind them together and to Hagar. Although not in religious studies, Gabler-Hover provides a substantial discussion of Hagar in her book Dreaming Black/Writing White: The Hagar Myth in American Cultural History. Gabler-Hover’s book illustrates the influence of Williams’s work beyond religious studies fields. Due to her reliance on Williams, Gabler-Hover claims that the view of Hagar as Black “creates a stunning enigma” as

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Black Hagar



nineteenth-century White novelists depicted Hagar as White.⁹⁰ Gabler-Hover admits her reliance on Williams’s Sisters in the Wilderness, and similar to Williams, Gabler-Hover links together a biblical Hagar and a Black Hagar. She argues, “Through African American tradition, Hagar has been understood to be black because of her Egyptian affiliation.”⁹¹ Yet, as demonstrated in Chapter , Hagar was not often interpreted as Black in nineteenth-century pro- or anti-slavery texts, since Egypt was not treated as “Black” Africa during this period. While biblical Hagar was understood as Egyptian, Egyptian did not correspond to “Black.” Gabler-Hover’s “stunning enigma” is easily explained if one disentangles biblical Hagar and Aunt Hagar. Religion and art scholar Kimberleigh Jordan’s article “The Body as Reader: African Americans, Freedom, and the American Myth” identifies two perspectives for viewing the American myth, including what she identifies as the Abrahamic and Hagar models. She is in conversation with and cites both Weems and Williams. She identifies Hagar as an “African slave woman in Genesis” (italics original) whose experiences have “resonated with the dominated, including Black people, and particularly Black women.”⁹² Stressing the importance of Hagar with African American communities, she cites Harper’s Iola Leroy, Morrison’s Song of Solomon, and other literary and cultural images of Hagar. Yet, as discussed in Chapter , these are not biblical Hagar figures. The linking of Hagar with African American women’s experiences continues in the biblical commentary The Africana Bible (). In Hebrew Bible scholar Rodney Sadler’s article “Genesis,” he does not identify Hagar as Black, but he engages Weems’s Just a Sister Away and connects Hagar’s experiences with those of African American women. For example, in commenting on Sarai’s instructions to Abraham to go into Hagar, Sadler writes, “That sexual language is used for this nonconsensual contact should remind us of enslaved Africana foremothers and forefathers raped by masters and enslavers who used their bodies for sexual gratification and their offspring as slaves.”⁹³ He connects Hagar’s story with the  autobiography Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl by formerly enslaved African American woman Harriet Jacobs. He also compares Hagar’s plight with the sexual abuse endured by Celie, an African American woman character in Alice Walker’s novel The Color Purple. Sadler cites and disagrees with

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

Weems in discussing Hagar’s return to Abraham’s household. Whereas Weems claims that Hagar returns to Sarah because Hagar considered herself to be property, Sadler focuses on God’s role in sending Hagar back. Within the context of a volume dedicated to engaging the lives and cultures of peoples of Africa and the African diaspora, and in an essay that places Genesis into conversation with the fiction and cultural production of African peoples, the reader would have no difficulty in thinking of Hagar as a Black African woman. In , New Testament scholar Stephanie Buckhanon Crowder continued in the tradition of paralleling the lives of African American women with Hagar. Her work, When Momma Speaks: The Bible and Motherhood from a Womanist Perspective, includes a chapter on Hagar that considers Hagar in light of homelessness and economic insecurity among African Americans. Crowder engages Williams’s work on Hagar and offers her own retelling of the family tension in contemporary terms. She writes, “Abraham, the baby daddy of Ishmael and Isaac, must intervene and fix the mess one baby momma created. The core of the matter is one baby momma not wanting to share the goods with another baby momma.”⁹⁴ She discusses infertility and surrogacy among African Americans, including the kinship bonds formed among non-blood-related persons during and after enslavement. Like others, Crowder links Hagar with the concerns of contemporary African American women. These contextual readings provided new ways of thinking about Hagar that had not been a substantial part of the history of interpretation. Williams did not originate but contributed to the popularization of constructing parallels between biblical Hagar and African American women’s experiences. Following her work, it became more common for other scholars to do so. The notion of biblical Hagar as Black is in part a corrective to scholarship that refused to acknowledge the African presence in biblical texts. Also, within a tradition of biblical interpretation that often neglects women characters and that assumes Whiteness as normative, this biblical Black Hagar provides African American women with a big, bright entry point into the biblical narrative. To analogize in this way allows African American women to interpret Hagar in ways that resonate with their experiences and

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Black Hagar



concerns.⁹⁵ Some African American women have found a way to engage biblical texts to speak to their own circumstances.⁹⁶ Concerns with Hagar parallels Despite the growth of the biblical Black Hagar tradition, some scholars have rejected the appropriation of Hagar as a Black woman. Still, even this rejection points to the existence and staying power of such appropriation. Hebrew Bible scholar Alice Bellis counters efforts to focus on the presumed similarities between Hagar and Sarah and US Black and White women. She offers a corrective to previous scholarship on Hagar in her Helpmates, Harlots, and Heroes: Women’s Stories in the Hebrew Bible (). In her chapter “The Women of Genesis,” Bellis describes the story of Hagar and discusses several interpretations of Hagar by biblical scholars and theologians. She describes Hagar’s story as involving “a servant and her mistress,” “surrogate motherhood,” “a struggle for status,” and “abuse and exile.”⁹⁷ Bellis questions Weems’s assessment of Hagar’s story as one of “ethnic prejudice,” since Bellis argues that prejudice against Africans did not exist at the time. Arguing against Weems and others who parallel Hagar’s plight to that of African American women, Bellis contends, “It is not the story of a black woman oppressed by a white one.”⁹⁸ Bellis understands the story as one related to those with privilege and their relationships with those who do not share that privilege. In addition, she sees the role of technology and surrogacy as key. Yet, she contends, “Whatever ethnic tensions underlie this story, they are not the ones familiar to people living in the United States.”⁹⁹ For Bellis, the specific ethnic parallel with US Black and White women does not hold, but the broader question of privilege remains compelling. In a  article, Hebrew Bible scholar Randall Bailey acknowledges the importance of feminist and womanist work while also questioning the perspectives of some scholars who create analogies with Hagar. Bailey argues that the “God of Survival” that Williams claims is in fact a “God of Oppression, not a God of Liberation.”¹⁰⁰ Similarly, he challenges Weems’s efforts to absolve a text that requires an enslaved woman to return to her oppressors. Bailey recounts his

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

own experience of teaching Hagar in Bible study. The participants read the traditional view of Hagar as becoming “uppity” when she becomes pregnant.¹⁰¹ After prompting them to consider experiences of women who work as domestics and were raped by their employer, resulting in pregnancy, their views changed. They considered the feelings of the abused women who were “angry” and who “despised” the women for whom they worked.¹⁰² Bailey contends that it is incumbent upon readers not to ignore their own cultural biases and to consider their own experiences of oppression. For African American Christian women in particular, Hagar can become a heroine and an icon whose story of survival involves a God of the oppressed. New Testament scholar Amy-Jill Levine discusses difficulties in interfaith dialogue. In “Settling at Beer-lahai-roi,” she reflects on her position as a Jewish feminist who is asked at various times to join interfaith conversations. She considers various ways of understanding Hagar, and citing Phyllis Trible and Delores Williams, Levine describes positive reappraisals of Hagar that rely on parallels as “metonymic connections.”¹⁰³ Levine appreciates the insights offered by new perspectives and regards such “empathetic reclamation” as important.¹⁰⁴ Yet, Levine cautions that Hagar can become an “archetypal minority victim,” while “Sarah comes to epitomize white, colonialist, patriarchal, and usually ‘Jewish’ privilege.”¹⁰⁵ Her concern is that binary views of oppressed and oppressor can result in the oppressor being uncritically identified as “the Jews.”¹⁰⁶ Hebrew Bible scholar Vanessa Lovelace focuses on ethnicity and class in efforts to stress questions of belonging within Israelite communities and specifically eschews racial identification with the Hagar narratives.¹⁰⁷ Religious studies scholar Renee K. Harrison rejects the wholesale appropriation of Hagar by Black women and offers a hermeneutics of rejection. In her article “Hagar Ain’t Workin’, Gimme Celie: ‘A Hermeneutic of Rejection and a Risk of Re-appropriation,’” Harrison claims that Williams’s emphasis on survival within the Hagar narrative supports the continued oppression of African American women.¹⁰⁸ In rejecting such oppressive biblical texts, Harrison offers African American women’s literature as a potential resource for African American women in moving from survival to thriving. She suggests that Celie within Alice Walker’s novel The Color Purple may serve as a better and more appropriate model than Hagar, as

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Black Hagar



Celie overcomes her circumstances and creates a new life for herself. Harrison does not focus on interpreting Hagar but challenges Williams’s parallel of Hagar and African American women. Conclusion Although biblical Hagar is an Egyptian enslaved woman, the notion of a biblical Hagar read through the lens of the African American experience is a relatively recent one. Biblical scholars did not make that connection readily. It was the work of African American scholars who began to create space for this type of reading. This view of Hagar as Egyptian linked to Africa and to racialized Blackness is further developed by African American women scholars, but it is a distinctive perspective separate from the notion of a Black Aunt Hagar. While her work is focused on theology, Delores Williams’s Sisters in the Wilderness has contributed to the notion of a Black biblical Hagar. Her work is heavily cited within religious studies and biblical studies, especially within feminist scholarship in religious studies and biblical studies that mentions issues of race and ethnicity in the text.¹⁰⁹ The work of Trible, Tamez, and Weems in addition to African American biblical scholarship on Hagar and the work of Delores Williams all helped to provide the staying power of the appropriation of Hagar by African American women, which is illustrated by the perpetuation of this idea of a single Black Hagar tradition. It demonstrates how, over time, this idea continues to have resonance. The parallels created by religious scholars and biblical scholars limit awareness of African American cultural production by narrowing those rich Hagar traditions into a single biblical Black Hagar. Notes . Islamic theologian Riffat Hassan describes Hagar as “a black slave-girl,” who “rose from the lowliest of positions to the highest place of honor in the Islamic tradition.” She uses Hagar as an example of the inclusivity of Islam as welcoming to all, including those on the margins. Riffat Hassan, “Islamic Hagar and Her Family,” in Hagar, Sarah, and Their Children: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Perspectives, ed. Phyllis Trible and Letty M. Russell (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, ), . For other examples,

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Reimagining Hagar see Hibba Abugideiri, “Hagar: A Historical Model for ‘Gender Jihad,’” in Daughters of Abraham: Feminist Thought in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, ed. Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad and John L. Esposito (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, ), –; Azizah Y. Al-Hibri, “Hagar on My Mind,” in Philosophy, Feminism, and Faith, ed. Ruth E. Groenhout and Marya Bower (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, ), –. Hermann Gunkel and William Herbert Carruth, The Legends of Genesis, the Biblical Saga and History (New York: Schocken Books, ), . Ibid., . Ibid. Ibid., . Ibid., –. Hermann Gunkel, “The Hagar Traditions,” in Water for a Thirsty Land: Israelite Literature and Religion, ed. K. C. Hanson (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, ), . Ibid., . S. R. Driver, The Book of Genesis, nd ed. (London: Methuen, ), . Bedawi is an alternate spelling of Bedouin based on Arabic. Ibid., . Ibid., n. John Skinner, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Genesis (New York: Scribner, ), . Ibid., . Ibid. Gerhard von Rad, Genesis: A Commentary, rev. ed. (Philadelphia: Westminster, ), . Originally published in . Ibid., . Ibid., . E. A. Speiser, Genesis (AB ; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, ), . Nahum M. Sarna, The JPS Torah Commentary-Genesis: The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, ), . Ibid., . Ekaterina Kozlova, “‫פרא אדם‬/‘An Onager Man’ (Gen :α) as a Metaphor of Social Oppression,” Vetus Testamentum , no.  (): –. doi:./-. Sarna, The JPS Torah Commentary-Genesis, . Classicist Frank Snowden was one of the first to argue that there was no “color prejudice” in ancient Greek and Roman societies. Frank M. Snowden, Blacks in Antiquity; Ethiopians in the Greco-Roman Experience (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, ) and Frank

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Black Hagar

.

. . . . . . . . .

. . . .



M. Snowden, Before Color Prejudice: The Ancient View of Blacks (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, ). Others have challenged his findings by pointing out the many negative associations with Blackness in the ancient world, but his scholarship paved the way for many classicists and scholars in related fields. For example, see Edwin M. Yamauchi, Africa and Africans in Antiquity (East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, ) and Robert E. Hood, Begrimed and Black: Christian Traditions on Blacks and Blackness (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, ). Nyasha Junior and Stephanie Buckhanon Crowder, “Pioneering Biblical Scholar: Charles B. Copher,” The Huffington Post, February , . https://www.huffingtonpost.com/nyasha-junior/pioneering-biblical-schol_ b_.html. Charles B. Copher, “Perspectives and Questions: The Black Religious Experience and Biblical Studies,” Theological Education , no.  (): –. Charles B. Copher, “Biblical Characters, Events, Places and Images Remembered and Celebrated in Black Worship,” Journal of the Interdenominational Theological Center  (): –. Charles B. Copher, “African Roots of Christianity: Our First Ancestors and the Biblical World,” A.M.E. Zion Quarterly Review , no.  (), . Robert A. Bennett Jr., “Africa and the Biblical Period,” Harvard Theological Review  (): –. Cain Hope Felder, Troubling Biblical Waters: Race, Class, and Family. The Bishop Henry McNeal Turner Studies in North American Black Religion, vol. , ed. James H. Cone (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, ). Ibid., . Ibid. Vincent L. Wimbush, ed., African Americans and the Bible: Sacred Texts and Social Textures (New York: Continuum, ). Allen Dwight Callahan, The Talking Book: African Americans and the Bible (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, ), . For a review of Callahan’s work, see Nyasha Junior “Review of Allen Dwight Callahan’s The Talking Book: African Americans and the Bible,” Review of Biblical Literature, https://www.bookreviews.org/bookdetail.asp?TitleId=. Phyllis Trible, Texts of Terror: Literary-Feminist Readings of Biblical Narratives (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, ), . Ibid., . Ibid., . Ibid., . Trible does not provide details on this encounter. The woman may have been alluding to her religious tradition as a Muslim or referring to African American appropriation of Hagar.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

. Ibid., . . Trible muddles several different notions of blackness here by discussing ethnicity, color, and geography together. Furthermore, while she identifies Hagar as Egyptian and African, Trible does not clearly identify other characters as White or as non-African. She is in conversation with African American biblical scholarship by citing Robert Bennett, but she does not mention the appropriation of Hagar by African Americans or view this text through the lens of US chattel slavery. Ibid., n. . Elsa Tamez, “The Woman Who Complicated the History of Salvation,” in New Eyes for Reading: Biblical and Theological Reflections by Women from the Third World, ed. John S. Pobee and Barbel von Wartenberg-Potter (Geneva: World Council of Churches, ), . . Ibid., . . Ibid., . . Ibid., . Salvation history refers to the Christian notion that God operates within human history. It reads biblical texts as largely historical and understands the redemptive death of Jesus and his resurrection to be necessary for salvation. . Ibid., . . Renita J. Weems, Just a Sister Away: A Womanist Vision of Women’s Relationships in the Bible (San Diego, CA: LuraMedia, ). Revised and updated as Renita J. Weems, Just a Sister Away: Understanding the Timeless Connection between Women of Today and Women in the Bible (New York: Warner Books, ), . . On the history and development of womanist approaches within biblical studies, see Nyasha Junior, An Introduction to Womanist Biblical Interpretation (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, ). Over the years, I have received at least three copies of Weems’s book as gifts. . Weems, Just a Sister Away, x. . Ibid. . Ibid., . . Ibid., . . Ibid., . . Ibid., . . This discussion focuses on African American women, but African women scholars have written on Hagar. For example, Musimbi Kanyoro R.A., “Interpreting Old Testament Polygamy through African Eyes,” in The Will to Arise: Women, Tradition, and the Church in Africa, ed. Mercy Amba Oduyoye and Rachel Angogo Kanyoro (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, ), –, and Dora R. Mbuwayesango, “Childlessness and Woman-to-Woman Relationships in Genesis and in African Patriarchal

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Black Hagar

.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



Society: Sarah and Hagar from a Zimbabwean Women’s Perspective (Genesis :–; :–),” Semeia  (): –. Renita J. Weems, “Reading Her Way through the Struggle: African American Women and the Bible,” in Stony the Road We Trod: African American Biblical Interpretation, ed. Cain H. Felder (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, ), –. Ibid., . Ibid., . Ibid. Randall C. Bailey, “Beyond Identification: The Use of Africans in Old Testament Poetry and Narratives,” in Stony the Road We Trod, . Ibid. John W. Waters, “Who Was Hagar?” in Stony the Road We Trod, –. Ibid., . Ibid., . Ibid. Ibid., . Charles B. Copher, “The Black Presence in the Old Testament,” in Stony the Road We Trod, –. Imani Perry, May We Forever Stand: A History of the Black National Anthem (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, ). Cain Hope Felder, ed., The Original African Heritage Study Bible King James Version with Special Annotations Relative to the African/Edenic Perspective (Iowa Falls, IA: Word Bible Publishers, ). Ibid., v. Ibid., n. This interpretation assumes that Ham is the Father of Egypt (“Mizraim” KJV [Gen. :]) and that Hagar descends from Egypt. Ibid., n. Delores S. Williams, Sisters in the Wilderness: The Challenge of Womanist God-Talk (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, ), iii, note . Ibid., xvi. On uses of Walker’s definition within womanist work, see Junior, An Introduction to Womanist Biblical Interpretation. Williams, Sisters in the Wilderness, . Ibid., . Ibid., . Ibid., . Ibid. Ibid. Ibid., n.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

. John Langston Gwaltney, Drylongso: A Self-Portrait of Black America (New York: Random House, ), . . Delores S. Williams, “Hagar in African American Biblical Interpretation” in Hagar, Sarah, and Their Children: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Perspectives, eds. Phyllis Trible and Letty M. Russell (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, ), . . Ibid., . . Ibid., . . Wilma Ann Bailey, “Hagar: A Model for an Anabaptist Feminist?,” The Mennonite Quarterly Review , no.  (): –. . Wilma Ann Bailey, “Black and Jewish Women Consider Hagar,” Encounter , no. – (): –. . Pui-lan Kwok, Discovering the Bible in the Non-Biblical World (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, ), . . Diana L. Hayes, Hagar’s Daughters: Womanist Ways of Being in the World (New York: Paulist Press, ), . . Ibid. . Ibid., . . Janet Gabler-Hover, Dreaming Black/Writing White: The Hagar Myth in American Cultural History (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, ), . . Ibid., . . Kimberleigh Jordan, “The Body as Reader: African-Americans, Freedom, and the American Myth,” in The Bible and the American Myth: A Symposium on the Bible and Constructions of Meaning, ed. Vincent L. Wimbush, Studies in American Biblical Hermeneutics  (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, ), . . Rodney S. Sadler Jr., “Genesis,” in The Africana Bible: Reading Israel’s Scriptures from Africa and the African Diaspora, ed. Hugh R. Page and Randall C. Bailey (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, ), . . Stephanie R. Buckhanon Crowder, When Momma Speaks: The Bible and Motherhood from a Womanist Perspective, (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, ), . . On the limits of analogy, see Sheila Briggs, “Can an Enslaved God Liberate? Hermeneutical Reflections on Philippians :–,” Semeia  (): –. . African scholars have also generated contextual readings of Hagar that link Hagar with the concerns of African women, including kinship, polygamy, and surrogacy. See Mmadipoane Ngwana ‘Mphahlele Masenya, “A Bosadi (Womanhood) Reading of Genesis ,” Old Testament Essays , no.  (): –.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Black Hagar



. Alice O. Bellis, Helpmates, Harlots, and Heroes: Women’s Stories in the Hebrew Bible (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, ), . . Ibid., . . Ibid. . Randall C. Bailey, “The Danger of Ignoring One’s Own Cultural Bias in Interpreting the Text,” in The Postcolonial Bible, ed. R. S. Sugirtharajah (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, ), . . Ibid. . Ibid. . Amy-Jill Levine, “Settling at Beer-Lahai-Roi,” in Daughters of Abraham: Feminist Thought in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, ed. Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad and John L. Esposito (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, ), . . Ibid., . . Ibid., . . Ibid., . . Vanessa Lovelace, “ ‘This Woman’s Son Shall Not Inherit with My Son’: Towards a Womanist Politics of Belonging in the Sarah-Hagar Narratives,” The Journal of the Interdenominational Theological Center  (Spring ): –. . Renee K. Harrison, “ ‘Hagar Ain’t Workin’, Gimme Me Celie’: A Hermeneutic of Rejection and a Risk of Re-Appropriation,” Union Seminary Quarterly Review , no. – (): –. Harrison’s work is part of the conference proceedings of Songs We Thought We Knew: A Conference Celebrating the Life and Work of Delores S. Williams and the Future of Womanist Theology, which were published in  in Union Seminary Quarterly Review . . On the relationship of Sarah and Hagar within feminist biblical scholarship, see Anna Fisk, “Sisterhood in the Wilderness: Biblical Paradigms and Feminist Identity Politics in Readings of Hagar and Sarah,” in Looking through a Glass Bible: Postdisciplinary Biblical Interpretations from the Glasgow School, ed. A. K. M. Adam and Samuel Tongue (Boston: Brill, ), –.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Epilogue

The purpose of this book was to discover how Hagar becomes Black. Certainly, there could be other ways of telling the story of Hagar and Blackness. I have determined one possible way of connecting the dots to explain how Hagar becomes Black, especially for African Americans. The Hagar of the Bible was not “Black,” as the racialized notion of Blackness was not available to biblical writers. Due to the association of enslavement and Blackness, the Hagar in some Islamic traditions becomes Black for some interpreters, but again not in the modern racialized sense. There is no single view of Hagar in the antebellum United States. In the early twentieth century, a Black Aunt Hagar emerges as a cultural icon in the United States. Some African American scholars mention Hagar occasionally, but she is by and large not treated as racially Black. Only in the late twentieth century do scholars begin to relate the treatment of biblical Hagar to the struggles of African American women. Although these scholars may not have identified Hagar explicitly as a Black woman, the close parallels they drew between Hagar and the historical experiences of African American women helped to construct a view of biblical Hagar as a Black woman. In particular, Delores Williams creates an influential cultural history of Hagar that contributes to understandings of biblical Hagar as a Black woman when she fuses Aunt Hagar and biblical Hagar into one cultural tradition. Interpreters have understood biblical Hagar in a variety of ways. Specifically, linking biblical Hagar with Blackness places the experiences of African American women in conversation with the Hagar narratives. Catalyzed by the work of Delores Williams, such linkage provides an entry point for Christian theological engagement that centers Black women. Assigning a particular racial identification to Hagar allows some readers to claim kinship with Hagar and to more closely identify with her. When Black women choose to align

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi

Epilogue



themselves with this character, it creates a biblical narrative that is inclusive of Black womanhood. Given the historic and ongoing importance of biblical texts, it is understandable how those from marginalized communities would wish to see ourselves reflected in these texts. Various groups have taken texts that have been used to oppress them and have found creative ways to reimagine and repurpose them. In particular, African American Christians have employed ingenious ways to reread and reinterpret biblical texts despite the use of biblical texts to support White supremacy. Yet, the fusion of Aunt Hagar and biblical Hagar to create analogies to African American experiences can lead us to neglect the richness of the African American cultural heritage. It can serve to privilege the biblical text over both the particular real-life experiences of flesh-andblood African Americans. Certainly, African American artists, musicians, writers, and scholars have employed biblical imagery, themes, and characters within their work. Nevertheless, if we know biblical Hagar’s story, we should be as familiar with traditions of Aunt Hagar instead of seeking to make the ancient literary past of the Bible relevant to our contemporary era. As detailed in this volume, sculpture by Edmonia Lewis, music by W. C. Handy, short stories by Edward P. Jones, and the work of many others speak to the vast literary and artistic production of Black communities. African Americans need not focus on seeing themselves in one anthology of ancient texts. The richness of this African American art, literature, and music is evident when one disentangles it from a strict focus on biblical texts. Black people can reflect on our own experiences and our own cultural productions to testify to our survival. We can see ourselves, embrace ourselves, love ourselves, and the deep well of literature, music, and art that we ourselves have created, and seek shelter and comfort from our own vine and fig tree. I hope that my work will not be used to dismiss the considerable scholarship of Delores Williams. My aim is not to displace her theological work but to offer a different perspective on biblical Hagar and Blackness. In the coda to her biography of Sojourner Truth, historian Nell Painter writes of the persistent resistance from students and other scholars to her work on Truth, because it conflicts with popular notions of Truth and Truth’s famed “ar’n’t I a woman?” speech. In writing of the importance of the symbolic Sojourner Truth,

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 30/4/2019, SPi



Reimagining Hagar

Painter concedes that Truth’s function as a symbol is “stronger and more essential in our culture than the complicated historic person.”1 While I acknowledge the symbolic importance of biblical Black Hagar, I hope that my work will serve to generate new and complex questions regarding African American biblical interpretation. This project foregrounds questions of Blackness and engages the concerns of Black interpreters. I hope that my work encourages more interest in the multiplicity of ways that African Americans and others within the African Diaspora have engaged biblical texts through music, art, and literature. Even if Aunt Hagar is unrelated to biblical Hagar, they are both still part of a wondrous African American legacy. Note . Nell Irvin Painter, Sojourner Truth: A Life, A Symbol (New York: W. W. Norton, ).

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Bibliography

A South Carolinian [Frederick Dalcho]. Practical Considerations Founded on the Scriptures, Relative to the Slave Population of South Carolina. Charleston, SC: A. E. Miller, . Abdel Haleem, M. A. S. The Qurʼan. New York: Oxford University Press, . Abugideiri, Hibba. “Hagar: A Historical Model for ‘Gender Jihad.’ ” In Daughters of Abraham: Feminist Thought in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, edited by Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad and John L. Esposito, –. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, . Al-Hibri, Azizah Y. “Hagar on My Mind.” In Philosophy, Feminism, and Faith, edited by Ruth E. Groenhout and Marya Bower, –. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, . Alexander, T. Desmond. “The Hagar Traditions in Genesis Xvi and Xxi.” In Studies in the Pentateuch, edited by J. A. Emerton, –. Leiden: Brill, . Allen, Isaac. Is Slavery Sanctioned by the Bible? Boston: American Tract Society, . Allen, Theodore. The Invention of the White Race. nd ed. Vol. : Racial Oppression and Social Control. New York: Verso, a. Allen, Theodore. The Invention of the White Race. nd ed. Vol. : The Origin of Racial Oppression in Anglo-America. New York: Verso, b. Alpert, Rebecca. “Translating Rabbinic Texts on the Curse of Ham: What We Learn from Charles Copher and His Critics.” In Re-Presenting Texts: Jewish and Black Biblical Interpretation, edited by David W. Nelson and Rivka Ulmer, –. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, . Anadolu-Okur, Nilgun. Dismantling Slavery: Frederick Douglass, William Lloyd Garrison, and Formation of the Abolitionist Discourse, –. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, . Anonymous. “Slavery and the Bible.” De Bow’s Review , no.  (September ): –. Arjana, Sophia Rose. Pilgrimage in Islam: Traditional and Modern Practices. London: Oneworld Publications, . Avalos, Hector. Slavery, Abolitionism, and the Ethics of Biblical Scholarship. Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, . Baden, Joel S. The Promise to the Patriarchs. Oxford: Oxford University Press, .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Bibliography

Baden, Joel S. “Tradition-Historical Criticism.” In Oxford Encyclopedia of Biblical Interpretation, edited by Stephen L. McKenzie. Oxford: Oxford University Press, . Bailey, Randall C. “Beyond Identification: The Use of Africans in Old Testament Poetry and Narratives.” In Stony the Road We Trod: African American Biblical Interpretation, edited by Cain H. Felder, –. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, . Bailey, Randall C. “The Danger of Ignoring One’s Own Cultural Bias in Interpreting the Text.” In The Postcolonial Bible, edited by R. S. Sugirtharajah, –. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, . Bailey, Randall C. “Academic Biblical Interpretation among African Americans in the United States.” In African Americans and the Bible: Sacred Texts and Social Textures, edited by Vincent L. Wimbush, –. New York: Continuum, . Bailey, Randall C. Yet with a Steady Beat: Contemporary U.S. Afrocentric Biblical Interpretation. Society of Biblical Literature Semeia Studies . Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, . Bailey, Randall C., and Jacquelyn Grant, eds. The Recovery of Black Presence: An Interdisciplinary Exploration: Essays in Honor of Dr. Charles B. Copher. Nashville: Abingdon Press, . Bailey, Wilma Ann. “Hagar: A Model for an Anabaptist Feminist?” The Mennonite Quarterly Review , no.  (): –. Bailey, Wilma Ann. “Black and Jewish Women Consider Hagar.” Encounter , no. – (): –. Bakhos, Carol. The Family of Abraham: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Interpretations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, . Bassard, Katherine Clay. Transforming Scriptures: African American Women Writers and the Bible. Athens: University of Georgia Press, . Beal, Timothy. “Reception History and Beyond: Toward the Cultural History of Scriptures.” Biblical Interpretation  (): –. Begley, Sharon, Farai Chideya, and Larry Wilson. “Out of Egypt, Greece.” Newsweek , no.  (September , ): –. Behnken, Brian D., and Gregory D. Smithers. Racism in American Popular Media: From Aunt Jemima to the Frito Bandito. Racism in American Institutions. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, . Bellis, Alice O. Helpmates, Harlots, and Heroes: Women’s Stories in the Hebrew Bible. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, . Ben Zvi, Ehud, and Diana Vikander Edelman, eds. Imagining the Other and Constructing Israelite Identity in the Early Second Temple Period. Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies . New York: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Bibliography



Benckhuysen, Amanda W. “Reading Hagar’s Story from the Margins: Family Resemblances between Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century Female Interpreters.” In Strangely Familiar: Protofeminist Interpretations of Patriarchal Biblical Texts, edited by Nancy Calvert-Koyzis and Heather E. Weir, –. Boston: Brill, . Bennett, Robert A., Jr. “Africa and the Biblical Period.” Harvard Theological Review  (): –. Berlin, Adele. Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative. Sheffield: Almond Press, . Berlin, Ira. Generations of Captivity: A History of African-American Slaves. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, . Berlinerblau, Jacques. Heresy in the University: The Black Athena Controversy and the Responsibilities of American Intellectuals. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, . Bernal, Martin. Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, . Bernal, Martin, and David Chioni Moore. Black Athena Writes Back: Martin Bernal Responds to His Critics. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, . Berry, Daina Ramey. The Price for Their Pound of Flesh: The Value of the Enslaved from Womb to Grave in the Building of a Nation. Boston: Beacon Press, . Bindman, David, and Henry Louis Gates. The Image of the Black in Western Art. Vol IV, part . Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, . Blackett, R. J. M. The Captive’s Quest for Freedom: Resistance to the  Fugitive Slave Law. Slaveries since Emancipation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, . Block, Sharon. Colonial Complexions: Race and Bodies in Eighteenth-Century America. Early American Studies. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, . Bogle, Donald. Toms, Coons, Mulattoes, Mammies, and Bucks: An Interpretive History of Blacks in American Films. New York: Continuum, . Bond, Sarah E. “Why We Need to Start Seeing the Classical World in Color.” Hyperallergenic. Accessed June , . https://hyperallergic.com/ /why-we-need-to-start-seeing-the-classical-world-in-color/. Botta, Anne C. Lynch. Poems. New enlarged ed. New York: G. P. Putnam, . Bowman, Robert M., Jr. “Abraham, Hagar, and Joseph Smith’s Polygamy: The Mormon Use of Abraham as Precedent for Plural Marriage.” Institute for Religious Research (December , ). Braxton, Brad Ronnell. No Longer Slaves: Galatians and African American Experience. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Bibliography

Breen, Patrick H. The Land Shall be Deluged in Blood: A New History of the Nat Turner Revolt. New York: Oxford University Press, . Brett, Mark G., ed. Ethnicity and the Bible. Biblical Interpretation Series, vol. . New York: Brill, . Bridge, Edward J. “Female Slave vs Female Slave: ʼamah and šipḥah in the HB.” The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures  (). Briggs, Sheila. “Can an Enslaved God Liberate? Hermeneutical Reflections on Philippians :–.” Semeia  (): –. Brown, Michael Joseph. Blackening of the Bible: The Aims of African American Biblical Scholarship. African American Religious Thought and Life, edited by Anthony B. Pinn and Victor Anderson. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, . Brown, Thomas, and Leah Sims. Fugitive Slave Advertisements in the City Gazette: Charleston, South Carolina, –. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, . Buell, Denise Kimber. Why This New Race: Ethnic Reasoning in Early Christianity. Gender, Theory, and Religion. New York: Columbia University Press, . Buick, Kirsten Pai. “The Ideal Works of Edmonia Lewis: Invoking and Inverting Autobiography.” American Art , no.  (): –. Buick, Kirsten Pai. Child of the Fire: Mary Edmonia Lewis and the Problem of Art History’s Black and Indian Subject. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, . Bukhārī, Muḥammad ibn Ismāʻīl, and Muhammad Muhsin Khan. The Translation of the Meanings of Ṣahih Al-Bukhari: Arabic-English = [Ṣaḥīḥ Al-Bukhārī]. th ed. Lahore, Pakistan: Kazi Publications, . Butler, Octavia E. Kindred. Black Women Writers Series, vol. . Boston: Beacon Press, . Byrne, Brendan. “Jerusalem’s Above and Below: A Critique of J. L. Martyn’s Interpretation of the Hagar-Sarah Allegory in Gal .–..” New Testament Studies , no.  (): –. Byron, Gay L. Symbolic Blackness and Ethnic Difference in Early Christian Literature. New York: Routledge, . Callahan, Allen Dwight. The Talking Book: African Americans and the Bible. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, . Cheever, George B. The Guilt of Slavery and the Crime of Slaveholding Demonstrated from the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures. New York: s.n., . Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. “Race and the Priesthood.” https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng. Clark, Charlotte Moon. The Modern Hagar: A Drama. New York: G. W. Harlan, .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Bibliography



Clark, Elizabeth A. “Interpretive Fate Amid the Church Fathers.” In Hagar, Sarah, and Their Children: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Perspectives, edited by Phyllis Trible and Letty M. Russell, –. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, . Cliff, Michelle. “Object into Subject: Some Thoughts on the Work of Black Women Artists.” Heresies: A Feminist Publication on Art and Politics , no.  (): –. Clinton, Catherine. Harriet Tubman: The Road to Freedom. Boston, MA: Little, Brown, . Cody, Cheryll Ann. “There was no ‘Absalom’ on the Ball Plantations: SlaveNaming Practices in the South Carolina Low Country, –.” The American Historical Review , no.  (): –. doi:./ . Cohen, Hennig. “Slave Names in Colonial South Carolina.” American Speech , no.  (): –. doi:./. Copher, Charles B. “Perspectives and Questions: The Black Religious Experience and Biblical Studies.” Theological Education , no.  (): –. Copher, Charles B. “Biblical Characters, Events, Places and Images Remembered and Celebrated in Black Worship.” Journal of the Interdenominational Theological Center  (): –. Copher, Charles B. “African Roots of Christianity: Our First Ancestors and the Biblical World.” A.M.E. Zion Quarterly Review , no.  (): –. Copher, Charles B. “The Black Presence in the Old Testament.” In Stony the Road We Trod: African American Biblical Interpretation, edited by Cain Hope Felder, –. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, . Crowder, Stephanie R. Buckhanon. When Momma Speaks: The Bible and Motherhood from a Womanist Perspective. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, . Davies, Graham I. “Hagar, El-Heǧra and the Location of Mount Sinai: With an Additional Note on Reqem.” Vetus Testamentum , no.  (): –. Davis, David Brion. Inhuman Bondage: The Rise and Fall of Slavery in the New World. Oxford: Oxford University Press, . Davis, Stacy Nicole. This Strange Story: Jewish and Christian Interpretation of the Curse of Canaan from Antiquity to . Lanham, MD: University Press of America, . De Groot, Christiana, and Marion Ann Taylor. Recovering NineteenthCentury Women Interpreters of the Bible. Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series, vol. . Boston: Brill, . Denon, Vivant. Travels in Upper and Lower Egypt: During the Campaigns of General Bonaparte in That Country; and Published Under His Immediate

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Bibliography

Patronage [Voyage dans la Basse et la Haute Égypte]. The Middle East Collection. New York: Arno Press, . Derks, Ton, and Nico Roymans. Ethnic Constructs in Antiquity: The Role of Power and Tradition. Amsterdam Archaeological Studies . Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, . Driver, S. R. The Book of Genesis. nd ed. Westminster Commentaries. London: Methuen, . Dunn, James D. G. The Epistle to the Galatians. Black’s New Testament Commentary Series. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, . Earle, T. F., and K. J. P. Lowe. Black Africans in Renaissance Europe. Repr. New York: Cambridge University Press, . Edwards, Jonathan. The Injustice and Impolicy of the Slave Trade, and of the Slavery of the Africans: Illustrated in a Sermon Preached before the Connecticut Society for the Promotion of Freedom, and for the Relief of Persons Unlawfully Holden in Bondage, at their Annual Meeting in New Haven, September , . rd ed. New Haven, CT: New Haven Anti-Slavery Society, . Egerton, Douglas R. He Shall Go Out Free: The Lives of Denmark Vesey. Rev. ed. American Profiles. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, . Egerton, Douglas R. and Robert L. Paquette, The Denmark Vesey Affair: A Documentary History. Southern Dissent. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, . Egger, Monika. “Hagar, Woher Kommst Du? Und Wohin Gehst Du?” (Gen , *): Darstellung und Funktion der Figur Hagar im Sara(i)-Abra(Ha)m-Zyklus (Gen ,–,). Herders Biblische Studien . Freiburg: Herder, . Elliot, Charles. The Bible and Slavery; in which the Abrahamic and Mosaic Discipline is Considered in Connection with the Most Ancient Forms of Slavery; and the Pauline Code on Slavery as Related to Roman Slavery and the Discipline of the Apostolic Churches. Cincinnati, OH: L. Swormstedt and A. Poe, . Elmer, Ian J. Paul, Jerusalem, and the Judaisers: The Galatian Crisis in its Broadest Historical Context. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament . Reihe, vol. . Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, . Englard, Yaffa. “Ishmael Playing?: Exegetical Understandings and Artistic Representations of the Verb Meṣaḥēq in Genesis ..” Biblical Reception  (): –. Erickson, Peter, and Clark Hulse. Early Modern Visual Culture: Representation, Race, and Empire in Renaissance England. New Cultural Studies. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, . Esposito, John L. Islam: The Straight Path. th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, . Exum, J. Cheryl. Song of Songs: A Commentary. The Old Testament Library. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Bibliography



Felder, Cain Hope. Troubling Biblical Waters: Race, Class, and Family. The Bishop Henry McNeal Turner Studies in North American Black Religion, vol. , edited by James H. Cone, Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, . Felder, Cain Hope, ed. The Original African Heritage Study Bible King James Version with Special Annotations Relative to the African/Edenic Perspective. Iowa Falls, IA: Word Bible Publishers, . First published  by James C. Winston (Nashville). Fenner, Thomas P. Cabin and Plantation Songs as Sung by the Hampton Students, rd ed. New York: G. P. Putnam’s sons, . Fisk, Anna. “Sisterhood in the Wilderness: Biblical Paradigms and Feminist Identity Politics in Readings of Hagar and Sarah.” In Looking through a Glass Bible: Postdisciplinary Biblical Interpretations from the Glasgow School, edited by A. K. M. Adam and Samuel Tongue, –. Boston: Brill, . Frazier, E. Franklin. The Negro Family in the United States. The University of Chicago Sociological Series. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, . Frey, Hugo. A Collection of  Selected Famous Negro Spirituals. Frances G. Spencer Collection of American Popular Sheet Music. New York: Robbins-Engel, . Fuller, Randall. The Book that Changed America: How Darwin’s Theory of Evolution Ignited a Nation. New York: Viking, . Gabler-Hover, Janet. Dreaming Black/Writing White: The Hagar Myth in American Cultural History. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, . Gerbner, Katharine. Christian Slavery: Conversion and Race in the Protestant Atlantic World. Early American Studies. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, . Gignilliat, Mark. “Isaiah’s Offspring: Paul’s Isaiah : Quotation in Galatians :.” Bulletin for Biblical Research , no.  (): –. Glymph, Thavolia. Out of the House of Bondage: The Transformation of the Plantation Household. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, . Goldenberg, David M. The Curse of Ham: Race and Slavery in Early Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, . Goodell, Abner C. “John Saffin and His Slave Adam.” Publications of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts  (): –. Goodman, Martin, Geurt Hendrik van Kooten, and J. van Ruiten, eds. Abraham, the Nations, and the Hagarites: Jewish, Christian, and Islamic Perspectives on Kinship with Abraham. Themes in Biblical Narrative . Boston: Brill, . Greenberg, Kenneth S. and Nat Turner. The Confessions of Nat Turner with Related Documents. nd ed. The Bedford Series in History and Culture. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Bibliography

Griffith, Sidney Harrison. The Bible in Arabic: The Scriptures of the “People of the Book” in the Language of Islam. Jews, Christians, and Muslims from the Ancient to the Modern World. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, . Gunkel, Hermann. “The Hagar Traditions.” In Water for a Thirsty Land: Israelite Literature and Religion, edited by Hermann Gunkel and K. C. Hanson, –. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, . Gunkel, Hermann, and William Herbert Carruth. The Legends of Genesis, the Biblical Saga and History. New York: Schocken Books, . Gutman, Herbert George. The Black Family in Slavery and Freedom, –. New York: Vintage Books, . Gwaltney, John Langston. Drylongso: A Self-Portrait of Black America. New York: Random House, . Haney-López, Ian. White by Law: The Legal Construction of Race. Critical America. Rev. ed. New York: New York University Press, . Harrison, Renee K. “ ‘Hagar Ain’t Workin’, Gimme Me Celie’: A Hermeneutic of Rejection and a Risk of Re-Appropriation.” Union Seminary Quarterly Review , no. – (): –. Hassan, Riffat. “Islamic Hagar and Her Family.” In Hagar, Sarah, and Their Children: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Perspectives, edited by Phyllis Trible and Letty M. Russell, –. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, . Hatch, Reuben. Bible Servitude Re-Examined; With Special Reference to ProSlavery Interpretations and Infidel Objections. Cincinnati, OH: Applegate, . Hayes, Diana L. Hagar’s Daughters: Womanist Ways of Being in the World. Madeleva Lecture in Spirituality. New York: Paulist Press, . Heinsohn, Nina. Zwischen Verheissung und Verborgenheit: Studien zur Theologie und Anthropologie der Hagar-Erzählungen in Genesis  und . BiblischTheologische Studien . Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, . Henderson, Harry, and Albert Henderson. The Indomitable Spirit of Edmonia Lewis: A Narrative Biography. Milford, CT: Esquiline Hill Press, . Heng, Geraldine. “The Invention of Race in the European Middle Ages I: Race Studies, Modernity, and the Middle Ages.” Literature Compass , no.  (): –. Heng, Geraldine. “The Invention of Race in the European Middle Ages II: Locations of Medieval Race.” Literature Compass , no.  (): –. Henson, Josiah, and Samuel Atkins Eliot. The Life of Josiah Henson, Formerly a Slave, Now an Inhabitant of Canada. Boston: Arthur D. Phelps, . Heyward, DuBose. Mamba’s Daughters. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, Doran, .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Bibliography



Hidayatullah, Aysha A. Feminist Edges of the Qur’an. New York: Oxford University Press, . Hirsch, Charlotte Teller. “Hagar and Ishmael.” The Crisis , no.  (): –. Hockey, Katherine M., and David G. Horrell, eds. Ethnicity, Race, and Religion: Identities and Ideologies in Early Jewish and Christian Texts, and in Modern Biblical Interpretation. London: T & T Clark, . Hogeterp, Albert L. A. “Hagar and Paul’s Covenant Thought.” In Abraham, the Nations, and the Hagarites: Jewish, Christian, and Islamic Perspectives on Kinship with Abraham, edited by Martin Goodman, Geurt Hendrik van Kooten, and J. van Ruiten, –. Themes in Biblical Narrative . Boston: Brill, . Holloway, Joseph E. Africanisms in American Culture. Blacks in the Diaspora. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, . Hood, Robert E. Begrimed and Black: Christian Traditions on Blacks and Blackness. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, . Hopkins, Pauline. Hagar’s Daughter. London: The X Press, . Horton-Stallings, LaMonda. “African American Vernacular Tradition.” Oxford Bibliographies. http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo/obo--.xml. Hughes, Langston. Not without Laughter. New York: Knopf, . Ignatiev, Noel. How the Irish Became White. Routledge Classics. New York: Routledge, . Isaac, Benjamin H. The Invention of Racism in Classical Antiquity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, . Jeffers, Honorée Fanonne. Outlandish Blues. Wesleyan Poetry. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press, . Jefferson, Lynne T. “The Emergence of a Pioneer: The Manipulation of Hagar in Nineteenth-Century American Women’s Novels.” PhD diss., Indiana University of Pennsylvania, . Johnson, Luke T. “The New Testament’s Anti-Jewish Slander and the Conventions of Ancient Polemic.” Journal of Biblical Literature , no.  (): –. Johnson, Sylvester A. The Myth of Ham in Nineteenth-Century American Christianity: Race, Heathens, and the People of God. Black Religion, Womanist Thought, Social Justice. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, . Jones, Edward P. All Aunt Hagar’s Children. New York: Harper Perennial, . Jordan, Kimberleigh. “The Body as Reader: African-Americans, Freedom, and the American Myth.” In The Bible and the American Myth: A Symposium on the Bible and Constructions of Meaning, edited by Vincent L. Wimbush, –. Studies in American Biblical Hermeneutics . Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Bibliography

Junior, Nyasha. An Introduction to Womanist Biblical Interpretation. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, . Junior, Nyasha. “Review of Allen Dwight Callahan’s the Talking Book: African Americans and the Bible.” Review of Biblical Literature. https:// www.bookreviews.org/bookdetail.asp?TitleId=. Junior, Nyasha, and Stephanie Buckhanon Crowder. “Pioneering Biblical Scholar: Charles B. Copher.” The Huffington Post. February , . https://www.huffingtonpost.com/nyasha-junior/pioneering-biblical-schol_ b_.html. Junior, Nyasha, and Jeremy Schipper. Black Samson: The Untold Story of an American Icon. New York: Oxford University Press, forthcoming. Junkin, George. The Integrity of Our National Union, Vs. Abolitionism: An Argument from the Bible, in Proof of the Position That Believing Masters Ought to Be Honored and Obeyed by Their Own Servants, and Tolerated in, Not Excommunicated from, the Church of God:. Cincinnati, OH: R. P. Donogh, . Kahf, Mohja. Hagar Poems. Fayetteville: University of Arkansas Press, . Kaltner, John. Ishmael Instructs Isaac: An Introduction to the Qurʼan for Bible Readers. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, . Kaltner, John, and Younus Mirza. The Bible and the Qur’an: Biblical Figures in the Islamic Tradition. London: Bloomsbury, . Kanyoro, Musimbi, R.A. “Interpreting Old Testament Polygamy through African Eyes.” In The Will to Arise: Women, Tradition, and the Church in Africa, edited by Mercy Amba Oduyoye and Rachel Angogo Kanyoro, –. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, . Kelley, Shawn. Racializing Jesus: Race, Ideology, and the Formation of Modern Biblical Scholarship. Biblical Limits. New York: Routledge, . Ketchum, Annie Chambers. Christmas Carillons, and Other Poems. New York: D. Appleton, . Killebrew, Ann E. Biblical Peoples and Ethnicity: An Archaeological Study of Egyptians, Canaanites, Philistines, and Early Israel (– B.C.E.). Society of Biblical Literature Archaeology and Biblical Studies , edited by Andrew G. Vaughn. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, . Kozlova, Ekaterina. “‫ אדם פרא‬/‘An Onager Man’ (Gen :α) as a Metaphor of Social Oppression.” Vetus Testamentum , no.  (): –. doi:./-. Krauss, Laura Greig. “Restoring Hagar: Rembrandt Van Rijn’s Painting Abraham Dismissing Hagar and Ishmael in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London.” Biblical Reception  (): –. Kwok, Pui-lan. Discovering the Bible in the Non-Biblical World. Bible & Liberation Series. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Bibliography



Lavin, Talia. “The Decades-Long Quest to Find and Honor Edmonia Lewis’s Grave.” Hyperallergic (March , ). https://hyperallergic. com//edmonia-lewis-grave/. Leemans, Johan. “After Philo and Paul: Hagar in the Writings of the Church Fathers.” In Abraham, the Nations, and the Hagarites: Jewish, Christian, and Islamic Perspectives on Kinship with Abraham, edited by Martin Goodman, Geurt Hendrik van Kooten, and J. van Ruiten, –. Themes in Biblical Narrative . Boston: Brill, . Leneman, Helen. “Hagar: Music.” In Encyclopedia of the Bible and its Reception Online, edited by Dale C. Allison, Jr. et al Berlin: De Gruyter, . Leneman, Helen. Musical Illuminations of Genesis Narratives. T & T Clark Library of Biblical Studies . London: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, . Levenson, Jon D. Inheriting Abraham: The Legacy of the Patriarch in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, . Levine, Amy-Jill. “Settling at Beer-Lahai-Roi.” In Daughters of Abraham: Feminist Thought in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, edited by Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad and John L. Esposito, –. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, . Levine, Lawrence W. Black Culture and Black Consciousness: Afro-American Folk Thought from Slavery to Freedom. th anniversary ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, . Lewis, Bernard. Race and Slavery in the Middle East: An Historical Enquiry. New York: Oxford University Press, . Lewis, Enoch, ed. The African Observer: A Monthly Journal, Containing Essays and Documents Illustrative of the General Character, and Moral and Political Effects of Negro Slavery, –. Westport, CT: Negro Universities Press, . Lichtheim, Miriam. Ancient Egyptian Literature: A Book of Readings.  ed. Vol. : The New Kingdom. Berkeley: University of California Press, . Lovelace, Vanessa. “Hagar’s Racial Identity in Nineteenth-Century Southern Women’s Novels in the U.S.A.” In The Oxford Handbook of Feminist Approaches to the Hebrew Bible, edited by Suzanne Scholz. Oxford: Oxford University Press, forthcoming. Lovelace, Vanessa. “Hagar in Fiction.” Oxford Biblical Studies Online. www. oxfordbiblicalstudies.com/article/opr/t/e. Lovelace, Vanessa. “ ‘This Woman’s Son Shall Not Inherit with My Son’: Towards a Womanist Politics of Belonging in the Sarah-Hagar Narratives.” The Journal of the Interdenominational Theological Center  (Spring ): –. Lyons, William John, and Emma England, eds. Reception History and Biblical Studies: Theory and Practice. New York: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Bibliography

Marbury, Herbert Robinson. Pillars of Cloud and Fire: The Politics of Exodus in African American Biblical Interpretation. Religion and Social Transformation. New York: New York University Press, . Martyn, J. Louis. Galatians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. The Anchor Bible. Vol. A. New York: Doubleday, . Masenya, Mmadipoane Ngwana ‘Mphahlele. “A Bosadi (Womanhood) Reading of Genesis .” Old Testament Essays , no.  (): –. Mbuwayesango, Dora R. “Childlessness and Woman-to-Woman Relationships in Genesis and in African Patriarchal Society: Sarah and Hagar from a Zimbabwean Women’s Perspective (Genesis :–; :–).” Semeia  (): –. McCasland, S. Vernon. “Gabriel’s Trumpet.” Journal of Bible and Religion , no.  (): –. McInerney, Jeremy. A Companion to Ethnicity in the Ancient Mediterranean. Chichester, UK: Wiley Blackwell, . McInerney, Jeremy. “Ethnicity: An Introduction.” In A Companion to Ethnicity in the Ancient Mediterranean, –. Chichester, UK: Wiley Blackwell, . McKivigan, J. R., and M. Snay. Religion and the Antebellum Debate Over Slavery. Athens: University of Georgia Press, . Mendelsund, Peter. What We See When We Read: A Phenomenology with Illustrations. New York: Vintage Books, . Miller, Troy A. “Surrogate, Slave, and Deviant? ‘Hagar’ in Jewish Interpretive Traditions and Paul’s use of the Figure in Galatians :–.” In Early Christian Literature and Intertextuality, edited by Craig A. Evans and H. Daniel Zacharias, –. Library of New Testament Studies –. London: T & T Clark, . Mitchell, Robin. Vénus Noire: Black Women and Colonial Fantasies in Nineteenth-Century France. Race in the Atlantic World, –. Athens: University of Georgia Press, . Moore, George Henry. Notes on the History of Slavery in Massachusetts. New York: D. Appleton, . Morgan, Jennifer L. Laboring Women: Reproduction and Gender in New World Slavery. Early American Studies. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, . Morris, William. Ancient Slavery Disapproved by God. The Substance of a Lecture. Philadelphia: Scriptural Knowledge Society, . Morrison, Larry R. “The Religious Defense of American Slavery before .” Journal of Religious Thought , no.  (): –. Moss, Candida R., and Joel S. Baden. Reconceiving Infertility: Biblical Perspectives on Procreation and Childlessness. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Bibliography



Mueller, Max Perry. Race and the Making of the Mormon People. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, . Nelson, Charmaine. The Color of Stone: Sculpting the Black Female Subject in Nineteenth-Century America. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, . Nikaido, Scott. “Hagar and Ishmael as Literary Figures: An Intertextual Study.” Vetus Testamentum , no.  (): –. Noll, Mark A. In the Beginning Was the Word: The Bible in American Public Life, –. Oxford: Oxford University Press, . Nugent, Bruce, and Thomas H. Wirth. Gentleman Jigger: A Novel. Philadelphia: Da Capo, . O’Kane, Martin. Painting the Text: The Artist as Biblical Interpreter. The Bible in the Modern World . Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, . Omi, Michael, and Howard Winant. Racial Formation in the United States. rd ed. New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group, . Pabst, Irene. “The Interpretation of the Sarah-Hagar Stories in Rabbinic and Patristic Literature: Sarah and Hagar as Female Representations of Identity and Difference.” Lectio Difficilior  (). http://www.lectio.unibe. ch/_/pabst.htm Painter, Nell Irvin. Sojourner Truth: A Life, A Symbol. New York: W. W. Norton, . Painter, Nell Irvin. The History of White People. New York: W. W. Norton, . Perry, Imani. May We Forever Stand: A History of the Black National Anthem. The John Hope Franklin Series in African American History and Culture. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, . Perry, Regenia,. Free within Ourselves: African-American Artists in the Collection of the National Museum of American Art. Washington, DC: National Museum of American Art, Smithsonian Institution in association with Pomegranate Artbooks, San Francisco, . Perry, Seth. Bible Culture and Authority in the Early United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, . Pinn, Anthony B., and Allen Dwight Callahan. African American Religious Life and the Story of Nimrod. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, . Prothero, Stephen R. The American Bible: How Our Words Unite, Divide, and Define a Nation. New York: HarperOne, . Race, Ethnicity, and Genetics Working Group. “The Use of Racial, Ethnic, and Ancestral Categories in Human Genetics Research.” American Journal of Human Genetics , no.  (): –. Rae, Noel. The Great Stain: Witnessing American Slavery. New York: Overlook Press, .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Bibliography

Reed, Annette Y. “The Queen of Sheba in History and Legend.” https://bit. ly/GTfYsN. Reeves, John C., ed. Bible and Qurʼān: Essays in Scriptural Intertextuality. Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series, vol. , edited by Christopher R. Matthews. Boston: Brill, . Reynolds, Gabriel Said. The Qur’an and the Bible: Text and Commentary. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, . Rippin, Andrew. The Qur’an and Its Interpretive Tradition. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, . Robbins, Vernon K., Walter S. Melion, and Roy R. Jeal, eds. The Art of Visual Exegesis: Rhetoric, Texts, Images. Emory Studies in Early Christianity . Atlanta: SBL Press, . Roediger, David R. Working Toward Whiteness: How America’s Immigrants Became White: The Strange Journey from Ellis Island to the Suburbs. New York: Basic Books, . Sadler, Rodney S., Jr. “Genesis.” In The Africana Bible: Reading Israel’s Scriptures from Africa and the African Diaspora, edited by Hugh R. Page and Randall C. Bailey, –. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, . Sadler, Rodney S., Jr. Can a Cushite Change His Skin?: An Examination of Race, Ethnicity, and Othering in the Hebrew Bible. New York: T & T Clark International, . Sadler, Rodney S., Jr. “The Place and Role of Africa and African Imagery in the Bible.” In True to Our Native Land: An African American New Testament Commentary, edited by Brian K. Blount, Cain Hope Felder, Clarice Jannette Martin, and Emerson B. Powery, –. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, . Said, Edward W. Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books, . Sarna, Nahum M. The JPS Torah Commentary-Genesis: The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, . Savant, Sarah Bowen. “Isaac as the Persians’ Ishmael: Pride and the PreIslamic Past in Ninth and Tenth-Century Islam.” Comparative Islamic Studies , no.  (): –. doi:./CIS.vi.. Scarborough, William Sanders, and Michele V. Ronnick. The Works of William Sanders Scarborough: Black Classicist and Race Leader. The Collected Black Writings Series. New York: Oxford University Press, . Schipper, Jeremy. “Body: Hebrew Bible/Old Testament.” In Encyclopedia of the Bible and its Reception. Vol. , –. Boston: De Gruyter, . Schipper, Jeremy. “ ‘On Such Texts Comment is Unnecessary’: Biblical Interpretation in the Trial of Denmark Vesey.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion , no.  (): –.

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Bibliography



Schipper, Jeremy. Denmark Vesey’s Bible. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, forthcoming. Sechrest, Love L. A Former Jew: Paul and the Dialectics of Race. Library of New Testament Studies . London: T & T Clark, . Sewall, Samuel. The Selling of Joseph: A Memorial. Boston: Bartholomew Green and John Allen, . Shalev, Eran. American Zion: The Old Testament as a Political Text from the Revolution to the Civil War. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, . Shectman, Sarah. Women in the Pentateuch: A Feminist and Source-Critical Analysis. Hebrew Bible Monographs , edited by David J.A. Clines, J. Cheryl Exum, and Keith W. Whitelam. Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, . Silkenat, David. “ ‘A Typical Negro’: Gordon, Peter, Vincent Colyer, and the Story Behind Slavery’s Most Famous Photograph.” American Nineteenth Century History , no.  (): –. Skinner, John. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Genesis. The International Critical Commentary on the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. New York: Scribner, . Small, Jonathan. An Inquiry into the Nature and Character of Ancient and Modern Slavery. To which is Added a Brief Review of a Book Entitled, Testimony of God Against Slavery, by Rev. La Roy Sunderland, Maine: J. Small, M.D., . Smith, Andrew C. “Hagar in LDS Scripture and Thought.” Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture  (): –. Smithers, Gregory D. Slave Breeding: Sex, Violence, and Memory in African American History. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, . Snowden, Frank M. Blacks in Antiquity; Ethiopians in the Greco-Roman Experience. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, . Snowden, Frank M. Before Color Prejudice: The Ancient View of Blacks. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, . Sommer, Benjamin D. A Prophet Reads Scripture: Allusion in Isaiah –. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, . Southworth, E. D. E. N. The Deserted Wife: A Novel. Chicago: M.A. Donoghue, . Sozomen, The Ecclesiastical History of Sozomen: Comprising a History of the Church from A.D.  to A.D. ; Translated from the Greek, with a Memoir of the Author; Also, the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgious, as Epistomised by Photius. Translated by Edward Wolford. London: Henry G. Bohn, . Sparks, Kenton L. Ethnicity and Identity in Ancient Israel: Prolegomena to the Study of Ethnic Sentiments and Their Expression in the Hebrew Bible. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, . Speiser, E. A. Genesis. AB ; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Bibliography

Spicer, Joaneath A. Revealing the African Presence in Renaissance Europe. Baltimore: Walters Art Museum, . Standhartinger, Angela. “ ‘Zur Freiheit . . . Befreit’? Hagar im Galaterbrief.” Evang Theol  (): –. Stanton, Elizabeth Cady. The Woman’s Bible. New York: European Publishing, ; Reprinted with foreword by Maureen Fitzgerald Boston: Northeastern University Press, . Steinberg, Naomi. Kinship and Marriage in Genesis: A Household Economics Perspective. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, . Stowe, Harriet Beecher. Woman in Sacred History: A Series of Sketches Drawn from Scriptural, Historical, and Legendary Sources. New York: J. B. Ford, . Stowe, Harriet Beecher. Footsteps of the Master. New York: J. B. Ford, . Stowe, Harriet Beecher. The Key to Uncle Tom’s Cabin. The American Negro, His History and Literature. New York: Arno Press, . Stowe, Harriet Beecher, and Elizabeth Ammons. Uncle Tom’s Cabin: Authoritative Text, Backgrounds, and Contexts, Criticism. A Norton Critical Edition. New York: W. W. Norton, . Strider, Tom. “Hagar in the Wilderness: Visualizing Antebellum Politics and Changing Views of True Womanhood.” From Slave Mothers & Southern Belles to Radical Reformers and Lost Cause Ladies: Representing Women in the Civil War Era. . https://civilwarwomen.wp.tulane.edu/. Stringfellow, Thornton. A Brief Examination of Scripture Testimony on the Institution of Slavery, in an Essay, First Published in the Religious Herald and Republished by Request: With Remarks on a Review of the Essay. Richmond: Office of the Religious Herald, . Sublette, Ned, and Constance Sublette. The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry. Chicago: Lawrence Hill Books, . Sussman, Robert W. The Myth of Race: The Troubling Persistence of an Unscientific Idea. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, . Tamez, Elsa. “The Woman Who Complicated the History of Salvation.” In New Eyes for Reading: Biblical and Theological Reflections by Women from the Third World, edited by John S. Pobee and Barbel von Wartenberg-Potter, –. Geneva: World Council of Churches, . Taylor, Marion Ann and Heather E. Weir. Let Her Speak for Herself: Nineteenth-Century Women Writing on Women in Genesis. Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, . Thiessen, Matthew. Paul and the Gentile Problem. New York: Oxford University Press, . Thompson, John Lee. Writing the Wrongs: Women of the Old Testament among Biblical Commentators from Philo through the Reformation. Oxford Studies in Historical Theology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Bibliography



Thurman, Wallace, Amritjit Singh, and Daniel M. Scott. The Collected Writings of Wallace Thurman: A Harlem Renaissance Reader. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, . Torbett, David. Theology and Slavery: Charles Hodge and Horace Bushnell. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, . Towner, Lawrence W. “The Sewall-Saffin Dialogue on Slavery.” William and Mary Quarterly , no.  (): –. Tracy, Steven C. “Langston Hughes and Aunt Hager’s Children’s Blues Performance.” In Montage of a Dream: The Art and Life of Langston Hughes, edited by John Edgar Tidwell and Cheryl R. Ragar, –. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, . Trible, Phyllis. Texts of Terror: Literary-Feminist Readings of Biblical Narratives. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, . Tsang, Sam. From Slaves to Sons: A New Rhetoric Analysis on Paul’s Slave Metaphors in His Letter to the Galatians. Studies in Biblical Literature . New York: Peter Lang, . Turner, Nat, and Thomas R. Gray. The Confessions of Nat Turner, the Leader of the Late Insurrection in Southampton, Va. as Fully and Voluntarily made to Thomas R. Gray, in the Prison Where He was Confined, and Acknowledged by Him to be such when Read before the Court of Southampton: With the Certificate, Under Seal of the Court Convened at Jerusalem, Nov. , , for His Trial. also, an Authentic Account of the Whole Insurrection, with Lists of the Whites Who were Murdered, and of the Negroes Brought before the Court of Southampton, and there Sentenced, &c. Richmond: T. R. Gray, . Vollaro, Daniel R. “Lincoln, Stowe, and the ‘Little Woman/Great War’ Story: The Making, and Breaking, of a Great American Anecdote.” Journal of the Abraham Lincoln Association , no.  (): –. von Rad, Gerhard. Genesis: A Commentary. Rev. ed. Philadelphia: Westminster, . Walker, David. Walker’s Appeal, in Four Articles; Together with a Preamble, to the Coloured Citizens of the World, but in Particular, and very Expressly, to those of the United States of America, Written in Boston, State of Massachusetts, September , . rd ed. Boston: David Walker, . Walters, Tracey Lorraine. African American Literature and the Classicist Tradition: Black Women Writers from Wheatley to Morrison. New York: Palgrave MacMillan, . Waters, John W. “Who was Hagar?” In Stony the Road We Trod: African American Biblical Interpretation, edited by Cain Hope Felder, –. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, . Weems, Renita J. Just a Sister Away: A Womanist Vision of Women’s Relationships in the Bible. San Diego, CA: LuraMedia, .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Bibliography

Weems, Renita J. “Reading Her Way through the Struggle: African American Women and the Bible.” In Stony the Road We Trod: African American Biblical Interpretation, edited by Cain Hope Felder, –. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, . Weems, Renita J. Just a Sister Away: Understanding the Timeless Connection between Women of Today and Women in the Bible. New York: Warner Books, . Westbrook, Raymond. “The Female Slave.” In Gender and Law in the Hebrew Bible and the Ancient Near East, edited by Victor Harold Matthews, Bernard M. Levinson, and Tikva Frymer-Kensky, –. New York: T & T Clark, . Whitford, David M. The Curse of Ham in the Early Modern Era: The Bible and the Justifications for Slavery. St. Andrews Studies in Reformation History. Farnham, UK: Ashgate, . Wilkerson, Caroline. “Facial Reconstruction–Anatomical Art or Artistic Anatomy.” Journal of Anatomy , no.  (): –. Williams, Delores S. Sisters in the Wilderness: The Challenge of Womanist GodTalk. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, . Williams, Delores S. “Womanist/Feminist Dialogue: Problems and Possibilities.” Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion , no. / (Spring–Fall ): –. Williams, Delores S. “Hagar in African American Biblical Interpretation.” In Hagar, Sarah, and Their Children: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Perspectives, edited by Phyllis Trible and Letty M. Russell, -. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, . Willis, Deborah, and Barbara Krauthamer. Envisioning Emancipation: Black Americans and the End of Slavery. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, . Wimbush, Vincent L., ed. African Americans and the Bible: Sacred Texts and Social Textures. New York: Continuum, . Wimbush, Vincent L. The Bible and African Americans: A Brief History. Facets. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, . Winters, Lisa Ze. The Mulatta Concubine: Terror, Intimacy, Freedom, and Desire in the Black Transatlantic. Race in the Atlantic World, –. Athens: University of Georgia Press, . Yamauchi, Edwin M. Africa and Africans in Antiquity. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, .

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Index

Note: Tables and figures are indicated by an italic ‘t ’ and ‘f ’, following the page number. Abraham in the Hebrew Bible – in Islamic traditions – in the New Testament – slaveholding of –, –,  Abram. See Abraham Abu Nuwas  Africa Black Africa –,  geographic meaning of  and the Orient –,  as origin of some biblical characters  sub-Saharan –,  Africana Bible, The – Afrocentricity – Allen, Isaac – Angelou, Maya “Mothering Blackness, The”  Apocalypse of Daniel  Bailey, Randall , – Bailey, Wilma Ann  Bartholomew, Edward Sheffield Hagar and Ishmael –, f Baruch  Beecher Stowe, Harriet Footsteps of the Master  Key to Uncle Tom’s Cabin, The – Uncle Tom’s Cabin – Women in Sacred History – Bellis, Alice Helpmates, Harlots, and Heroes  Bennett, Robert A., Jr.  Bibb, Eloise Alberta “Expulsion of Hagar, The” – Bible. See also Apocalypse of Daniel, Baruch, biblical studies, Galatians, Genesis, Jubilees, Original African Heritage Bible, Woman’s Bible African presence in –,  in anti-slavery arguments –,  de-Africanization of –

ethnicity in  Hagar and family of Abraham in – in pro-slavery arguments  biblical studies African presence in Bible, arguments for –, – African-American , –, ,  Afrocentric – biblical commentaries of the twentieth-century  Eurocentrism of – feminist , –,  Orientalism in – reception history  womanist – Blackness  in the ancient world –, n. associated with enslavement  of biblical characters  blues (music genre) – Bonaparte, Napoleon –,  Book of Gates – Brymn, J. Tim  Butler, Octavia Kindred – Cain – Callahan, Allen Dwight Talking Book, The  Canaan (son of Ham)  Chambers Ketchum, Annie – Cheever, George B.  City Gazette (Charleston, SC)  color environmental theory of skin color  skin color in biblical texts  symbolism  Copher, Charles B. on Black African presence in Bible – on Hagar as Black 

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Index

Corot, Jean-Baptiste-Camille Hagar in the Wilderness –, f Crowder, Stephanie Buckhanon When Momma Speaks  Cyprian  De Bow’s Review – Dead Sea Scrolls  Devon, Vivant Travels in Upper and Lower Egypt – Driver, S. R. – Edwards, Jonathan – Egypt Africa, distinct from –,  Commission on the Sciences and Arts of Egypt – French invasion of – modern interest in – as Oriental society – as origin of Hagar  Egyptians Blackness of –, –, , – as “sons of Ham” – Elliot, Charles Bible and Slavery, The – enslavement abolitionism – and Blackness  curse of Ham and  in early Islamic and pre-Islamic societies – Exodus story and – of Hagar –, , –, – in Leviticus  mark of Cain and  naming of enslaved persons – runaway slave notices – U.S. debates over – ethnicity in the ancient world – definition of  in biblical texts  Exodus in abolitionist arguments  in Negro spirituals – Felder, Cain Hope Original African Heritage Study Bible, The (ed.) 

Stony the Road We Trod (ed.)  Troubling Biblical Waters  feminism and biblical interpretation – racial division in  folksongs. See spirituals Frazier, E. Franklin Negro Family in the United States, The  Gabler-Hover, Janet Dreaming Black/Writing White , – Galatians  Genesis  Gomes, Charles  “Great Hymn to the Aten” – Gunkel, Hermann Legends of Genesis, The – Gwalney, John Langston Drylongso – Hadith – Hagar – abused by Sarai – as African , –, , , –, –, – allegorical interpretations of –,  in ancient commentaries  in anti-slavery arguments – in the Apocalypse of Daniel  appropriation of , –,  in art –, f, f, f Aunt Hagar –, –, –, –, – in Baruch  in the Dead Sea Scrolls  as Egyptian , –, , –, ,  as enslaved woman –, , –, – feminist interpretations of –, – in the Hebrew Bible  in Islamic traditions , n. in Jubilees  as literary trope  in literature  in music  name for enslaved persons –

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi

Index name for literary characters – in the New Testament  as Oriental ,  Orientalist stereotypes of – parallels with contemporary women , –, , –, – as progenitor , – in pro-slavery arguments ,  as runaway slave – as servant or freed slave  symbolic importance of – womanist interpretations of  Hagarenes  Ham, curse of  Handy, W. C. “Aunt Hagar’s Blues” – Harrison, Renee K. – Hatch, Reuben Bible Servitude Re-Examined – Hayes, Diana Hagar’s Daughters  Herodotus – Hopkins, Pauline E. Hagar’s Daughter  Hughes, Langston Not without Laughter – Ibn Qutaybah  Isaac in the Hebrew Bible – in Islamic traditions ,  in the New Testament – Ishmael in the Dead Sea Scrolls  in the Hebrew Bible – and Ishmaelites  in Islamic traditions – in Jubilees  in the New Testament – Ishmaelites  Jerome  Jones, Alan  Jones, Edward Paul – All Aunt Hagar’s Children – Jordan, Kimberleigh  Josephus Flavius Antiquities of the Jews – Jubilees 



Junkin, George  Integrity of Our National Union, The – Kahf, Mohja Hagar Poems – Kwok Pui-Lan Discovering the Bible in the non-Biblical World – Levine, Amy Jill  Lewis, Mary Edmonia Hagar –, f,  Morning of Liberty, The – Lovelace, Vanessa – Lynch, Anne Charlotte “Hagar” – Moon Clark, Charlotte Modern Hagar, The  Morris, William Ancient Slavery Disapproved of by God  Morrison, Toni Song of Solomon  Muhammad –,  mulatta/o n. Hagar as – National Era (Washington, DC) – Noah  Nugent, Richard Bruce Gentleman Jigger – Orient –,  Original African Heritage Study Bible, The  Paul the Apostle Galatians  Hagar, allegorical interpretation of – Letter to Philemon – “Pauline Mandate” – Philadelphia Gazette  Philemon, Letter to – Philo – physiognomy  Pinckney, Charles Cotesworth 

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/5/2019, SPi



Index

Pliny the Elder  Plutarch  poetry –, – Pseudo-Aristotle Physiognomics – Pseudo-Philo  Qur’an – race  Rad, Gerhard von – reception history  Remarks on Weem’s Defense of Slavery  Rosetta Stone – Sadler, Rodney – Saffin, John – Saracens  Sarah allegorical interpretations of –, – in ancient commentaries – in the Hebrew Bible – in the New Testament – and Saracens  Sarai. See Sarah Sarna, Nahum Torah Commentary on Genesis  Scarlatti, Alessandro Agar et Ismaele Esiliati  Schubert, Franz Hagars Klage  Sewell, Samuel – Selling of Joseph, The – Sheba, Queen of  Shu’ubiyah controversy  Skinner, John  slavery. See enslavement Small, Jonathan Inquiry into the Nature and Character of Ancient and Modern Slavery, An – Southampton Insurrection  Southworth, E.D.E.N. Deserted Wife, The – Sozomen  Speiser, E. A. 

spirituals “Go Down, Moses” – Hagar in – “O Mary Don’t You Weep”  “Sweet Turtle Dove, or Jerusalem Mornin” – Stony the Road we Trod  Stringfellow, Thornton  Brief Examination of the Scripture Testimony on the Institution of Slavery, A – Tamez, Elsa –,  Teller Hirsch, Charlotte Hagar and Ishmael  Tertullian  theology, womanist , –,  Thurman, Wallace Aunt Hagar’s Children – Tiepolo, Giovanni Battista Hagar and the Angel –, f Trible, Phyllis Texts of Terror –,  Turner, Nat  United States of America debates over slavery in  Van Zandt, John – vernacular tradition  Vesey, Denmark  Walker, Alice – Walker, David Walker’s Appeal  Warner, Susan Walks from Eden  Waters, John – Weems, Renita Just a Sister Away , – in Stony the Road we Trod – Williams, Delores Sisters in the Wilderness , ,  Wimbush, Vincent African Americans and the Bible  Wiskonsan (Wisconsin) Freeman – Woman’s Bible, The –