The Ethics of Violence in the Story of Aqhat 9781593339753, 1593339755

Citation preview

The Ethics of Violence in the Story of Aqhat

Gorgias Ugaritic Studies

8

This series contains monographs and edited collections on the world of ancient Syria and its surrounding cultures, its language, society, religious beliefs, and ancient literary works fundamental to the contextualization of the Hebrew Bible and its interpretation.

The Ethics of Violence in the Story of Aqhat

Chloe Sun

9

34 2013

Gorgias Press LLC, 954 River Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA www.gorgiaspress.com Copyright © 2013 by Gorgias Press LLC

All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise without the prior written permission of Gorgias Press LLC. 2013

‫ܗ‬

9

ISBN 978-1-59333-975-3

ISSN 1935-388X Second Printing

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A Cataloging-in-Publication Record is Available from the Library of Congress. Printed in the United States of America

To Eddie and Jed

TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments .................................................................................................. ix Abbreviations .......................................................................................................... xi Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1 PART ONE: THEORY ........................................................................................ 5 1 Methodology ................................................................................................... 7 A Text-Oriented Approach .......................................................................... 7 A Behind-the-Text-Oriented Approach ................................................... 22 The Benefits of the Combination Approach ........................................... 25 2 Previous Interpretation................................................................................ 27 Previous Works on the Text-Oriented Approaches to the Story Of Aqhat ..................................................................................................... 27 Previous Interpretation of Anat’s Violence ............................................. 35 The Revelance of the Topic And Its Contribution to the Discipline .. 44 The Summary of the Story Of Aqhat........................................................ 45 Conclusion to Part One............................................................................... 50 PART TWO: IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................... 51 3 Divine Characters’ Points of View (I): El and Baal ................................ 53 El ..................................................................................................................... 54 Baal ................................................................................................................. 70 Summary And Conclusion .......................................................................... 89 4 Divine Characters’ Points of View (II) – Anat and Yatpan .................. 91 Anat ................................................................................................................ 91 Yatpan ..........................................................................................................110 Summary and Conclusion .........................................................................116 5 Human Characters’ Points of View: Dan’il, Pughat, Aqhat ................117 Dan’il ............................................................................................................117 Pughat...........................................................................................................134 Aqhat ............................................................................................................147 Summary and Conclusion .........................................................................151 Conclusion to Part Two ............................................................................152 PART THREE: RELIABILITY CHECK......................................................155 6 The Hypothetical Actual Audience’s Point of View .............................157 A Profile of the Hypothetical Actual Audience.....................................157 vii

viii

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

Summary of the Profile .............................................................................181 How Would the Hypothetical Actual Audience View the Two Acts of Violence in the Story of Aqhat? .................................................182 Conclusion to Part Three ..........................................................................185 Conclusion ............................................................................................................187 The Power of Characterization ................................................................188 The Dynamics of Point of View ..............................................................188 The Ethics of Violence ..............................................................................190 The Purpose of Ambiguity and Openness .............................................191 Conclusion ...................................................................................................192 Areas for Further Research ................................................................................192 The Ethics of Violence in the Other Ugaritic Texts.............................193 The Ethics of Violence in Other Ancient Near Eastern Texts...........193 The Ethics of Violence in the Hebrew Bible .........................................194 The Ethics of Violence in Modern Middle East ...................................197 Bibliography .........................................................................................................199 Primary Sources ..........................................................................................199 Secondary Literature ..................................................................................199 Index ......................................................................................................................213

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The whole dissertation process for me has been not only an academic quest but also an emotional and a spiritual journey. There were times when I could not foresee the end of it. There were also times when I was so excited by the new insights that I could not fall asleep. Many laments and thanksgivings characterize this period of my life. And it is indeed ending in praise. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Professor John Goldingay for “adopting” me as one of his students. His redirection of the focus of this dissertation turned the whole process around. In light of his busy teaching and writing schedule, his availability and promptness in reading the materials that I have sent him are incredible. I especially appreciate his integrity, humor, and intellectual creativeness. It is really a privilege to have him as my primary mentor. Special thanks go to Professor Tremper Longman III for his encouragement, helpful comments and prompt feedback. His training and experience in the disciplines of Ancient Near Eastern Studies and the Old Testament and his interest in theological and ethical issues made him an ideal person to guide this topic. I am truly honored to have him as my second reader. I am obliged to Dr. Joel Hunt for directing me to write this particular topic in the first phase of the writing. His many insights are still visible through the pages. I am indebted to Dr. Glen Stassen for discussing with me the various concepts involved in ethics and violence. Thanks also go to my fellow graduate student and friend, Athena Gorospe, for her offering of ideas and suggestions throughout the different stages of this dissertation. I would also like to thank the Dean of the School of Theology, Dr. Howard Loewen, the Associate Dean, Dr. David Scholer, and the then program director for the Center for Advanced Theological Studies, Dr. Robert Hurteau, for their support and commitment to help me through the difficult transition in the course of writing. I also want to thank Nancy Gower for proofreading the earlier draft of the dissertation and for my brother, Dr. Chun Tse, who proofread the later draft. Special thanks also go to my parix

x

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

ents who sacrificed much to make it possible for me to receive a higher education in the United States. This dissertation would not be complete without the editing work done by my fellow graduate student and friend, Deb Flagg. Her gentle and insightful comments saved me from many mistakes. I am truly thankful for her interest in this study from the very beginning and for her dedication to polish this work in the midst of her various challenges. Thanks also due to my collegue and friend Ekron Chen for his help in formatting the dissertation to be published. Without this part of the work, there will not be a book! I appreciate Gorgias Press for taking on this project. Dr. Steve Wiggins has shown tremendous patience in anwering my questions and helping me solve different technical issues. His help makes the whole project possible. Finally, I would like to thank my husband, Eddie, for his patience, loving support, encouragement, and prayer during the long years of my life as a graduate student. He gave me the space and time needed to complete this study. I would like to thank my son, Jedidiah, for constantly reminding me of the vitality, the joy, and the beauty of life. May my long years as a seminary student inspire him to persevere and to be faithful to the calling of God. To them I dedicate this work. All the acknowledgements cited above culminate in my thanks and praise to Jesus, my Lord and Savior, who is behind all the people I mentioned above, and who is the reason and motivation of my pursuit of theological education. I see the struggles and challenges that I encountered in the course of writing this book as a part of his plan to mold me into the person he wants me to be. To him be the glory.

ABBREVIATIONS ABD AOAT ARTU BA BASOR BDB BGUL CAD CANE CML COS CR CRAI DDD HALOT HR

Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by David Noel Freedman. 6 vols. New York: Doubleday, 1992 Alter Orient und Altes Testament An Anthology of Religious Texts from Ugarit by Johannes C. de Moor. Brill, 1987. Biblical Archaeologist Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament. Francis Brown, S. R. Driver and Charles A. Briggs. Oxford: 1907 A Basic Grammar of the Ugaritic Language by Stanislav Segert. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California, 1984 The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Chicago: 1956Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Edited by Jack M. Sasson. Massachusetts: Hendrickson, 1995 Canaanite Myths and Legends. J. C. L. Gibson. Edinburgh: 1977 Context of Scripture. Edited by W. W. Hallo. 3 vols. Leiden: 1997Canaanite Religion: According to the Liturgical Texts of Ugarit by G. del Olmo Lete. Translated by Wilfred G.E. Watson. Maryland, 1999. Comptes rendus de l’Acade mie des inscriptions et belles-lettres Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible. Edited by K. Van der Toorn, B. Becking and P.W. van der Horst. Leiden: 1995 The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner. Leiden, New York, Koln: 1994 History of Religions xi

xii

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

HSM HTR HUS IEJ JBL JJS JNES JNSL JSOTSup KTU OBO Or PRU PTMS RSO RTU SBLWAWS SEL TO I TO II TDOT TWOT UBC UBL UF Ug V UNP UPA UT

Harvard Semitic Monographs Harvard Theological Review Handbook of Ugaritic Studies. Edited by W.G.E. Watson and Nicolas Wyatt. Leiden-Boston-Koln: 1999. Israel Exploration Journal Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of Jewish Studies Journal of Near Eastern Studies Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series The Cuneiform Alphabetic Texts from Ugarit, Ras Ibn Hani and Other Places. Edited by M. Dietrich, O. Loreta and J. Sanmartin. Munster: 1995. Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis Orientalia Le Palais Royal D’Ugarit. Pittsburgh Theological Monograph Series Ras-Shamra - Ougarit Religious Texts from Ugarit by N. Wyatt. Sheffield, 2002. SBL Writings from the Ancient World Series Studi epigrafici e linguistici Textes Ougaritiques. Tome I. Edited by A. Caquot, M. Sznycer, and A. Herdner. Paris, 1974 Textes Ougaritiques: Textes Religieux Rituels Correspondance. Tome II. Edited by A Caquot, M. Sznycer, and Jesus-Luis Cunchillos. Paris, 1989 Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. Edited by G. Johannes Botterweck and Jelmer Ringgren. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1975 Theological Wordbooks of the Old Testament. Edited by R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer Jr. 2 vols. Chicago: 1980 The Ugaritic Baal Cycle, Vol. 1. Mark S. Smith. Leiden: 1994 Ugaritische-Biblische Literatur Ugarit-Forschungen Ugaritica V Ugaritic Narrative Poetry. Edited by Simon B. Parker. SBLWAW 9. Atlanta: 1997. The Ugaritic Poem of Aqht. Baruch Margalit. Walter de Gruyter: 1989 Ugaritic Textbook. C. H. Gordon. AnOr 38. Rome: 1969.

ABBREVIATIONS VT VTSup

Vetus Testamentum Vetus Testamentum, Supplements

xiii

INTRODUCTION The Story of Aqhat contains some of the most fascinating themes found in ancient literature. The themes of the need for a male heir, the conflict caused by the bow (a significant symbol in the story), the social roles of the human characters, the gender roles of male and female, the encounter between divine and human, the murder and the subsequent vengeance, the concept of immortality, and the dynamics of ritual in the story have all received attention. Among these themes, however, the violence of Anat has largely been treated one-dimensionally. In this story, Anat kills a human being for his bow and gets away with it. The story itself neither explicitly condemns her behavior nor justifies her violence. This reticence on the part of the author of the story opens up opportunities for modern interpreters to express their opinions regarding Anat’s violence against Aqhat. Yet, the opinions of these interpreters are often too simple, subjective, and one-dimensional, failing to provide any basis for their judgment.1 The goal of this dissertation is to discover the ethical understanding of violence implicit in the Story of Aqhat by attempting to answer two questions: (1) How did the author of the story use characterization and points of view to influence his implied audience regarding the two acts of violence in the story? (2) How would the hypothetical actual audience view the two acts of violence in the story? As this study will demonstrate, the reticence of the author concerning Anat’s violence does not mean that the audience is unable to discern his point of view through the hints and clues he provides in the story. We will devote our attention to the various points of view the author employs to influence the perception of his implied audience on Anat’s violence.

1 For example, Margalit describes Anat as a capricious, immoral, cunning and shrewd goddess. He sees her as the power of “Evil” in the Story of Aqhat, without providing any basis for his view. See Baruch Margalit, The Ugaritic Poem of AQHT (Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1989), 477.

1

2

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

Since there are two acts of violence in the story, Anat’s killing of Aqhat and Pughat’s vengeance for Aqhat, and since the latter has received a relatively uniform interpretation, we will direct our focus primarily on Anat’s violence and secondarily on Pughat’s vengeance. Understanding the nature of these two acts of violence will serve to provide a window into the ancient audience’s conception of violence in their world. We entitle this study “the ethics of violence,” drawing upon McClendon’s definition for ethics as “the systematic reflection of morals.” Here, “morals” refers to the actual conduct of deities and people viewed with concern for right and wrong, good and evil, virtue and vice.2 Additionally, we define violence as “the intentional use of physical force to cause harm, injury, suffering or death to persons against their will.”3 Combining these definitions, we define “the ethics of violence” as a systematic reflection with the primary concern for right and wrong in the concept of using physical force to harm another person against his or her will. As Girard indicates, “death is the ultimate violence that can be inflicted on a living being.”4 The ethics of violence explored in this study enhances this understanding of violence in its extreme form of causing another’s death. Part One deals with theory. Chapter one will set forth the methodology for this study, defining and offering the reasons for choosing a combination of both the text-oriented approach and the behind-the-text-oriented approach. This will illuminate the ways in which this combination approach helps us to discover the ethical understanding of violence implicit in the story. Chapter two will first critique the past text-oriented approaches to the Story of Aqhat, thereby justifying the need for using the current methodology for the present study. It will then survey the one-dimensional, or the bipolar interpretation of the violence of Anat in past scholarship in order to illustrate its lack of a foundation upon which the moral claims regarding her violence may be based. Lastly, in chapter two, we will establish the relevancy of the current study and provide a summary of the story. 2

47.

James Wm. McClendon, Systematic Theology: Ethics (Nashville: Abingdon, 1986),

3 Robert Audi et al., Violence: Award-Winning Essays in the Council for Philosophical Studies Competition (New York, David McKay, 1971), 109. This definition is in contrast to a broad definition of violence which includes all kinds of forceful coercion that cause psychological and physical injury. See John J. Collins, Does the Bible Justify Violence? (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2004), 2-3. 4 Rene Girard, Violence and the Sacred (trans. Patrick Gregory; Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1972), 255.

INTRODUCTION

3

Part Two is concerned with implementation. Chapters three to five will implement the methodology set forth in chapter one to elucidate the text’s understanding of violence. Chapter three demonstrates how the author of the story uses the characterization of El and Baal and their disparate points of view on Anat’s violence to influence the perception of his implied audience regarding her violence in the story. Chapter four illustrates how the author of the story uses the characterization of Anat and Yatpan and their respective points of view as the means to reflect the ethics of Anat’s violence. Chapter five turns the focus from the story’s divine to its human characters. It explores the characterization and the points of view of Dan’il and Pughat on the two acts of violence in the story and situates Aqhat in the context of these two acts. The conclusion to Part Two will draw upon the results from chapters three to five to present two ideologies inherent in the story and how the author employs these two ideologies to move his implied audience to respond. Part Three is completed with chapter six. In this chapter, we will compile a profile of the hypothetical actual audience and inquire into their conception of deities, death and afterlife, family values, and authority. We will use this information to investigate how the hypothetical actual audience would view the acts of violence in the story. In this section, we place the audience into three categories: an Ugaritic king, an ordinary Ugaritic man, and an ordinary Ugaritic woman. The conclusion to Part Three will summarize the various points of view of the hypothetical actual audiences and will compare and contrast the uniformity or disparity between the views of the implied audience and the hypothetical actual audience concerning the acts of violence in the story. The conclusion will draw upon the results of this study and assess how the goals of this dissertation have been accomplished through analysis of the author’s use of characterization and point of view as interpretive lenses to recover the text’s ethical understanding of violence in the story. We will see how, through characterization and point of view, the author influences the audience to identify with certain characters and their points of view over other characters. We will also see how the reticence on the part of the author leaves ambiguity and openness for the audience to resolve. Thus, based on the various points of view of the characters in the story, we will observe that the ethics of violence is largely a matter of point of view. Where one stands influences how one views the acts of violence in the story. As this study shows, one’s point of view is strongly influenced by one’s relationship with the perpetrator and with the victim of the violence,

4

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

one’s knowledge of the situation in which the act of violence takes place, and one’s self-interest factor. Therefore, the ethics of violence, or the right and wrong of violence is not an objective matter, but a personal, subjective and fluid enterprise contingent upon the aforementioned factors. Areas for further research will follow the conclusion.

PART ONE: THEORY

1 METHODOLOGY This chapter sets forth the methodology for the current topic. The three major methodologies in the interpretation of a text include those that focus on the text, those that go behind the text, and those that go in front of the text. First, we acknowledge that the question on ethics is one that arises out of our contemporary context. This places us in front of the text, though we do not intend to impose modern questions on an ancient text. Second, we will use the text-oriented approach to answer the first question pertaining to the goal of this study: How did the author of the Story of Aqhat use characterization and points of view to invite his implied audience to make ethical judgments on the two acts of violence in the story? Then we will use the behind-the-text-oriented approach to answer the second question: How would the hypothetical actual audience view the two acts of violence in the Story of Aqhat? Section one defines and explains the benefits of using a text-oriented approach for the present topic, states the reasons for choosing point of view as its focus, and nuances the terminologies involved in this approach. Section two defines the behind-the-text approach, states its presuppositions, method, and significance. Section three explains the benefits of using a combination of these two approaches to elucidate the author’s possible understanding of violence in the Story of Aqhat.

A TEXT-ORIENTED APPROACH Defining a Text-Oriented Approach Since many significant works have been devoted to a text-oriented approach to literary interpretation, this discussion does not repeat all that they have discovered but simply presents what we understand as a text-oriented approach and why we choose this approach as one of the methods for the current topic.1 To avoid confusion, we use the term “the text-oriented ap1 For example, Leland Ryken, How to Read the Bible as Literature (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1984); Meir Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative: Ideological Literature and the Drama of Reading (Bloomington: Indiana University, 1985); Tremper Longman III, Literary Approaches to Biblical Interpretation (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zon-

7

8

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

proach” rather than “literary approach” to differentiate it from “source criticism,” also known as a literary approach. Our approach is a synchronic method; the older literary approach is diachronic.2 The essence of a text-oriented approach to interpretation is its focus on the text itself – on its genre identification, and on the literary conventions and techniques of the text such as its structure and language, its theme and plot development, its characters and their characterization, its uses of repetition, irony and points of view – in order to determine how and what the text communicates to its reader or audience. By focusing on the text, we do not mean that the text has its meaning apart from its author and reader or audience. The author seeks to communicate something through a text. In this sense, meaning resides in the author. The author creates the story in order to “do something to some people and the story is told in such a way as to work for an audience.”3 We will differentiate the four types of audience in the section on “Types of the Audience.” As Longman maintains, “Literature is an act of communication between author and reader through a text.” These three aspects are closely connected and one aspect cannot be understood apart from the other two.4 The text-oriented approach considers the author as the maker of meaning because the text cannot bring itself into existence. Its author is the “historical cause of a textual effect.”5 Yet, the reader or audience also plays a role in determining the meaning of a text, perceiving aspects of the text not even intended or seen by the author. Additionally, by focusing on the text, we do not mean that the text itself is self-contained and that we have no need to consider aspects from outside such as its linguistic aspect, the social and historical background presupposed by the author and the original historical audience.6 In summary, the text-oriented approach focuses on the text. The two crucial questions inherent in the text-oriented approach are: How does the dervan, 1987); John Goldingay, Models for Interpretation of Scripture (Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans, 1995); Kevin J. Vanhoozer, Is There a Meaning in This Text? (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1998). For a brief but close examination of a literary approach, see Anthony C. Thiselton, New Horizons in Hermeneutics: The Theory and Practice of Transforming Biblical Reading (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1992), 479-486. 2 Longman, Literary Approaches, 13-35. 3 Goldingay, Models for Interpretation, 37. 4 Longman, Literary Approaches, 67-68. 5 Vanhoozer, Is There a Meaning, 44-46, 75. 6 Goldingay, Models for Interpretation, 22.

METHODOLOGY

9

author use a literary text to communicate to its reader or audience? And what does the author intend to communicate to them? The Benefits of the Text-Oriented Approach The interest in the text-oriented approach arose in the middle of the twentieth century, especially since Robert Alter’s work, The Art of Biblical Narrative, published in 1981.7 It was after this book that various fruitful works have been produced using this paricular approach by focusing on the text and on its literary conventions. 8 Most recently, in the twenty-first century, the dominant approaches include deconstruction, feminism, and readerresponse. Although the text-oriented approach is not the most popular approach in the twentieth-first century, it is still a valuable one as we will explain shortly. Like other approaches in interpretation, adopting a text-oriented approach has both advantages and disadvantages. According to Longman, the text-oriented approach, or what he calls “the literary approach,” suffers from contradictory schools of thought. These schools of thought originate from a diverse understanding of literary theory and the related discipline of linguistics. Each school of thought develops its own “insider” language and terminology which may cause confusion and misunderstanding. Using modern literary theory also runs the risk of imposing western concepts on an ancient text and eliminates the authorial intention by focusing strictly on the text.9 In order to avoid these disadvantages, we will take great precaution in defining the terminologies in our adoption of the text-oriented approach. By focusing on the text, we do not intend to separate it from the authorial intention and the reader or audience’s interpretation. While there are disadvantages of the text-oriented approach, there are also advantages. A literary text serves multiple functions. Ryken lays out several of the most significant:10 1. It appeals to the reader’s imagination: Literature presents an experience and invites the reader to participate in the image-making process. Robert Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative (New York: Basic Books, 1981). For examples of these works, see T. Longman III, “Literary Approaches to Old Testament Study” in The Face of Old Testament Studies (Edited by David W. Baker and Bill T. Arnold (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 1999), 97. 9 Longman, Literary Approaches, 47-58. 10 Ryken, How To Read the Bible, 14, 21-24, 58. 7 8

10

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

2. It expresses truthfulness to life and reality: Literature can be true to reality and human experience. 3. It conveys ethical messages: It asks the question: “What constitutes good and bad behavior?” 4. It communicates values: It is concerned with “What really matters?” 5. It is affective: Literature influences the reader or the audience’s responses to events and situations. Thus, the text-oriented approach aids the reader or the audience in unlocking the meanings and the significant aspects of a literary text. In addition to Ryken’s insights, Longman points out three benefits in using the text-oriented approach:11 1. It reveals literary conventions in the text: The text-oriented approach makes explicit the conventions of the text to aid the reader’s understanding of the message it intends to convey. 2. It stresses whole texts: The text-oriented approach sees the text as a coherent whole which prevents atomizing the text as separate parts. 3. It makes the reading process more enjoyable: The text-oriented approach forces the readers to focus on the text and to make their own applications. Since the text-oriented approach originates from non-biblical literature and although different cultures and time periods may have different literary conventions, the value and impact of the text-oriented approach remain the same across cultures and time. Therefore, when we adopt the text-oriented approach to an ancient work like the Story of Aqhat, the same benefits listed above apply. Because of these benefits, the text-oriented approach is valuable and appropriate to serve the purpose of recovering the text’s ethical understanding of violence in the Story of Aqhat. Discovering the Narrative Poetics in the Story of Aqhat Since the author, the text, and the readers are inseparable in the reading and in the interpretation process, the text-oriented approach to the Story of Aqhat must include all three aspects in order to do justice to the text’s understanding of violence. By “narrative poetics,” we mean those literary conventions, techniques, and devices such as the text’s structure, language, plot development and the like. In the following section, we single out four liter-

11

Longman, Literary Approaches, 59-62.

METHODOLOGY

11

ary aspects: point of view, character and characterization, author, and reader as the focus of our discussion. Point of View Narrative is a form of representation.12 The characters and the plot in a text come from a deliberate representation by the author of the text. Point of view is one of the literary techniques used in the field of narrative poetics. Definition and Nature. What is “point of view” in the text-oriented approach? The term “point of view” is used to designate the position or perspective from which a story is told.13 Lotman describes “point of view” as “an element of literary structure which we become aware of as soon as there is a possibility of switching it in the course of the narrative.”14 Point of view is not limited to literature but also used in various art forms including painting, film, and theater.15 The analogy with film serves as an apt illustration of understanding point of view in a literary text. The choice of background, of the foreshortening of the visual field, and of the various types of camera movements such as a close up shot or a long shot are dependent on point of view. The camera controls the audience’s insight and perception.16 Point of view in a literary text is closely connected with the author. A literary text not only offers a perspective view of the world of the author but also provides access to what the reader or audience is meant to visualize.17 The author mediates perspective on the characters and events of the story and leads the reader or the audience to share with his or her point of view. Thus, the function of point of view serves as a “connecting medium between representation and evaluation.”18 Sternberg observes that “point of view has emerged as an ideological crux and force.” He sees point of view as a system of perspectival relations Adele Berlin, Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative (Sheffield: Almond, 1983), 13. 13 Berlin, Poetics and Interpretation, 46. 14 J. M. Lotman, “Point of View in a Text,” New Literary History 6 (1975), 339. 15 For a description of the use of point of view in these art forms, see Boris Uspensky, A Poetics of Composition: The Structure of the Artistic Text and Typology of a Compositional Form (trans. Valentina Zavarin and Susan Wittig; Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California, 1973), 2-5. 16 Uspensky, A Poetics of Composition, 3; Longman, Literary Approaches, 87. 17 Wolfgang Iser, The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response (trans. Der Akt des Lesens; Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978), 35. 18 Robert Weimann, Structure and Society in Literary History: Studies in the History and Theory of Historical Criticism (Charlottesville: University of Virginia, 1976), 236. 12

12

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

that involves four basic perspectives: the author who fashions the story, the narrator who tells the story, the audience or reader who receives the story, and the characters who enact the story.19 By questioning the point of view in the story, we can get a better sense of what the story is trying to communicate. There are multiple ways in which an author expresses his or her point of view. He or she can accomplish this by using explicit statement or evaluative comments, by using “asides,” 20 by withholding and preserving information, through the portrayals of the characters, through their speeches and emotions, and through the ending of the story as ways to influence the responses of his or her reader or audience.21 Often times, the author’s point of view is expressed through the characters in the story. Ryken thinks that normative characters within stories tend to utter what the story as a whole is asserting, such as in the case of Joseph who tells his brothers, “You meant evil against me, but God meant it for good” (Gen 50:20).22 This statement summarizes the point of view of the story. However, it is sometimes difficult to discern which character is the object through whom the author identifies, especially when there is more than one normative character in the story. This is the case in the Story of Aqhat, where we have more than one normative character and all the major characters do not share the same point of view on the violence in the story. As Lotman maintains, “Point of view introduces a dynamic element into a text: every one of the points of view in a text makes claims to be the truth and struggles to assert itself in the conflict with the opposing ones.”23 Thus, the multiplicity of points of view in the Story of Aqhat requires the reader or audience’s close attention to details in order to discern the author’s point of view and participate in the interpretation process of Anat’s violence. Point of View in the Story of Aqhat. In the Story of Aqhat, the author employs several points of view to portray the violence of Anat in the story. He uses El and Baal’s varied points of view, Anat’s point of view before and after her act of violence, Yatpan’s point of view, and Dan’il and Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative, 129-130. i.e. the phrase and comments which do not figure as part of the events themselves and which involve information which the characters in the story are unaware of. See David Rhoads and Donald Michie, Mark as Story: An Introduction to the Narrative of a Gospel (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1982), 38. 21 Cf. Ryken, How To Read the Bible, 62-66. 22 Ryken, How To Read the Bible, 62. 23 Lotman, “Point of View,” 352. 19 20

METHODOLOGY

13

Pughat’s points of view to present Anat’s violence. The author uses several techniques in portraying these points of view. He uses direct speech and action of the characters to reflect their respective points of view. For instance, he uses El’s comment to Anat to reveal El’s thoughts on the interaction between Anat and Aqhat.24 He uses Baal’s actions and reactions after Anat’s violence to throw light on Baal’s point of view regarding Anat’s violence. Since the author is reticent regarding Baal’s perception of Anat’s violence, we can only infer that perception through his actions.25 The author also employs the emotions of the characters to reflect on Anat’s violence. By controlling the information and by withholding information from certain characters, the author influences the response of the audience. For example, he gives inside views of the emotional state of the human characters, Dan’il and Pughat, but withholds the inside view of the emotional state of El and Baal from the audience, thereby drawing the audience closer to Dan’il and Pughat but creating an emotional distance in the audience’s perception of El and Baal.26 Since each major character in the story has an opinion or reaction regarding Anat’s violence, this study will focus on the various points of view as possible reflections of the author’s intention concerning Anat’s violence. The author’s employment of the multi-level points of view prevents any reductionistic approach to Anat’s violence in the story. The narrator of the Book of Job serves as an example of using multiple points of view to reflect on Job’s suffering. For instance, the narrator uses the varied points of view of God, the adversary in the divine realm, and the different points of view of the three friends of Job regarding the cause of his suffering to create a narrative that has depth. At the same time, he creates an “open-endedness” for the reader to ponder on multiple levels. Past scholarship has produced several works on the literary and contextual analysis of the Story of Aqhat, yet none has devoted much attention to the aspect of point of view in the story. Here we mention two examples. Parker has done an extensive analysis on the literary aspect of Ugaritic narrative poetry.27 He pays attention to the conventional patterns of parallelism KTU 1.18 I:19. Alter states that character revealed through actions leaves us substantially in the realm of inference. See Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative, 117. 26 This concept of emotional distancing is drawn from R. Allen Culpepper, Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel: A Study in Literary Design (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983), 20. 27 Simon B. Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative Tradition: Essays on the Ugaritic Poems of Keret and Aqhat (Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1989). 24 25

14

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

and versification, poetic formulae, epic repetition and the non-conventional patterns of social speech, including the birth announcement, the vow, and the marriage blessing in those texts. Then he directs the focus to the literary analysis and the interpretation of the Story of Aqhat. He emphasizes the discrete units of the narrative and demonstrates how these units combine to produce a coherent whole. Yet, given these valuable insights, point of view does not receive proper attention in his study. Aitken has also produced several works on literary analysis in the Story of Aqhat. He studies the formulaic languages and word-pairs in the story.28 In his monograph, he focuses on the structural analysis, theme levels, plot development, and some characterization of the Aqhat story,29 yet point of view is not one of his foci. Besides these two examples, past scholarship tends to portray Anat’s violence in a one-dimensional fashion without recognizing or acknowledging its multiple dimension through point of view. We will critique these works in the next chapter. In light of the significance of point of view in the portrayal of violence in the Story of Aqhat and the neglect of this aspect in the narrative poetics of the Story of Aqhat in past scholarship, this study is an attempt to discover the text’s implicit ethical understanding of violence through a focus on the points of view inherent in the story. Part Two (chapters three to five) will address the varied points of view of the characters in the Story of Aqhat regarding the two acts of violence in the story as means to elucidate the author’s possible understanding of violence. Levels of Point of View. Point of view can be distinguished at different levels, and every point of view is carefully designed and intended by the author. For this study, we choose to combine the categories of Chapman and Uspensky’s works acknowledging their usefulness and fruitfulness in application in the past.30 We add an additional category (contextualization) to complete the list. Each level contributes to the story’s understanding of violence.

28 Kenneth T. Aitken, “Formulaic Patterns for the Passing of Time in Ugaritic Narrative.” UF 19 (1987): 1-10; “Oral Formulaic Composition and Theme in the Aqhat Narrative,” UF 21 (1989a): 1-16; “Word Pairs and Tradition in an Ugaritic Tale.” UF 21 (1989b): 17-38. 29 Kenneth T. Aitken, The Aqhat Narrative (Manchester: University of Manchester, 1990). 30 See for instance, Berlin, Poetics and Biblical Interpretation, 83-110. Seymour Chatman, Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film (Ithaca and London: Cornell University, 1978); Uspensky, A Poetics of Composition, 8-119.

METHODOLOGY

15

1. Perception: how the character perceives the events such as Anat’s killing of Aqhat. Does the character approve or disapprove of Anat’s violence? 2. Conception: what constitutes the character’s worldview, attitudes, or ideology regarding the events. For example, what is the character’s concept of the divine-human relationship? 3. Interest: From the point of view of the audience, the outcome of the characters’ actions, such as their well-being, profit and loss reflect the story’s evaluation of their actions. For example, the fact that Anat loses the bow at the end of her violence does not reflect well on her act. 4. Emotion: the characters’ emotions and attitudes such as distress, grief, and arrogance reflect the story’s portrayal of them. 5. Contextualization: the characters’ behavior in other contexts. For the Story of Aqhat, we will assess the characters’ view of violence in the light of their association with violence in other Ugaritic texts. The purpose of adding the contextualization level is to determine whether the character’s point of view in the Story of Aqhat is an exception to the norm or whether it conforms to his or her view of violence elsewhere in the Ugaritic texts. We will employ all five levels of points of view in Part Two whenever they are relevant to the context of the story. For instance, since other Ugaritic texts do not include information concerning Dan’il and Pughat’s association with violence, we will skip level five in our analysis of their points of view. The Benefits of Point of View. Using point of view to elucidate the story’s understanding of violence yields many benefits. These benefits, at the same time, coalesence with the advantage of using a text-oriented approach. 1. It is inherent in the story.31 2. It reveals the author’s intention and ideology. 3. It helps to safeguard the modern reader from making subjective interpretation. 4. It helps the readers to be aware of the complexity and ambiguity in the story’s portrayal of violence. 5. It intensifies the impact of the message.32 6. It enhances pleasure in reading.33 31 32

Chatman, Story and Discourse, 154. Ryken, How To Read the Bible, 24.

16

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

7. It gives the reader the advantage over the characters in the story who are often unaware of what other characters are thinking and doing.34 The basic advantage that undergirds all the above benefits is its objectivity. Point of view cannot be imposed from outside of the text. Character and Characterization Point of view is closely bound up with the characters in the story. Thus, we cannot speak of point of view apart from the characters and their characterization. Berlin’s work makes a helpful distinction between three character types: the full-fledged character, the type, and the agent. A full-fledged character (also known as a “round character”) is one who has a broad range of traits, and about whom the audience knows more than is necessary for the plot. A type (also known as a “flat character”) has some limited and stereotyped traits, and who is representative of a group of people with the same traits. An agent (also known as a “functionary”) is one about whom nothing is known except what is necessary for the plot.35 We will make use of these three character types in our analysis of the characters in the Story of Aqhat. Characterization refers to the way an author brings characters to life in a story.36 An author can use a variety of ways to achieve this purpose including outward appearance, inner personality or feelings, direct speech, action, and comparison or contrast with other characters. The author can also give comments and evaluations of the characters and characterize them by the way he or she introduces them in a narrative. Characterization in the Story of Aqhat. In the Story of Aqhat, the method that the author employs in forming a character is through both “telling” and “showing.” “Telling” is a direct, concrete description of a character such as “this person is a good king” whereas “showing” is an indirect way of pointing to a character and invites the audience to make their own judgments about that character. Because of this involvement on the part of the audience, there is room for ambiguity.37 In the Story of Aqhat, the author “tells” the audience about the characters through the description Ryken, How To Read the Bible, 24. Rhoads and Michie, Mark as Story, 38. Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative, 163. 35 Berlin, Poetics and Biblical Interpreation, 23, 32. 36 Rhoads and Michie, Mark as Story, 101. 37 Goldingay, verbal communication. 33 34

METHODOLOGY

17

of their epithets, but most frequently, he “shows” the characters by presenting them through speech, emotions, and actions. In the “telling” part, the author uses the epithets of the characters to describe their respective status and roles. For example, El’s epithets include “Bull” (l¨r), “my father” (’aby), “Creator of Creatures” (bny bnwt), “The King” (mlk), “The Father of Years” (’ab šnm), and “The Kind One, El the Good-Natured” (lṭpn ’il dpid).38 These epithets reflect El’s supreme position in the pantheon and his nature as a benevolent god. Baal’s epithet is “The Rider of the Clouds” (rkb ‘rpt). 39 It points to Baal’s association with rain and the fertility of the land. Anat’s epithets include “Maiden Anat” (btlt ‘nt) and “Sister of Limm” (ybmt limm).40 The first epithet points to her relative age whereas the second epithet points to her relationship with Baal. Yatpan’s epithet is “Soldier of the Lady” (mhr št), which reflects his role as the henchman of Anat.41 Dan’il’s epithets “Man of Rapiu” (Man of Healing), “The Hero” (Çzr), and “Man of the Harnemite” (mt hrnmy) are frequently attached to his name.42 The first epithet “Man of Healing” forms an irony to the actual situation unfolded in the story, as we shall explore in chapter five. “The Hero” is a standard term addressed to a man or a young man in the ancient world. The term “Man of the Harnemite” probably indicates Dan’il’s geographical or ethnic association with the Harnemite. Aqhat’s epithet is “The Hero” (Çzr), which is a standard term referring to him as a young man. Pughat’s threefold epithet “Bearer of Water” ¨kmmym), “Collector of Dew from the Fleece” (ḥspt lš‘r tl), and “Who Knows the Course of the Stars” (yd ‘t hlk kbkbm) all point to her role as a dutiful house girl.43 In the “showing” part, the author uses dominant character traits to depict the characters.44 For instance, Dan’il’s activity “Taking care of the case of the widow, defending the need of the orphan” (ydn dn ’almnt y¨pṭ ¨pṭ ytm) is his dominant trait, reflecting his role as a good king. The author KTU 1.17 I:23; VI:49; 1.18 I:15. KTU 1.19 I:43-44. 40 KTU 1.17 VI:18-19, 25-26, 53; 1.18 I:6, 19-20, 22; IV:6, 12, 16; 1.19 I:5; II:43. 41 We will explain the meaning of št as Anat’s epithet in chapter 4. 42 KTU 1.17 I:1-2, 16-18, 36-37; II:27-29; V:4-5, 13-15, 33-35; 1.19 I:19-21, 3637, 38-39, 46-48; II:41; IV:17, 18-19, 35. 43 KTU 1.19 II:1-3, 5-7; IV:36-38. 44 A character trait expresses a personal quality of a character which persists over the whole or part of the story. Rhoads and Michie, Mark as Story, 102. 38 39

18

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

uses repetitions of the epithets and the dominant traits to impress upon the audience of the characters. Additionally, he uses direct speech to reveal the characters’ thoughts and feelings. Therefore, we will cite and translate many of these direct speeches in our analysis of the portrayal of her violence. The author also uses the characters’ emotions, attitudes, actions, and responses to the events to “show” them. Additionally, he uses the performance of rituals to describe the characters’ thoughts and their interactions with the divine world. He uses the consequences upon nature to reflect Baal’s point of view regarding Anat’s violence. In addition, the author also uses the development of characters to add depth, realism, and sophistication to their characterization. For instance, Baal appears first to be a type and then moves to become a more fullfledged character. Yatpan first appears as an agent and then develops into a type with his own distinctiveness. Last but not least, the author compares and contrasts the characters as a way to make the “normative” characters stand out. For example, he contrasts Anat’s violence with Pughat’s and Yatpan’s villain image with Pughat’s heroic image. The characterization of the characters greatly influences the audience’s perception of them. We will explore the author’s use of characterization in Part Two (chapters three – five) of this study. Author, Implied Author, and Narrator The text-oriented approach often distinguishes between the author, the implied author, and the narrator. The author is the person who actually composes the text whereas the implied author is the textual manifestation of the real author. The narrator is a rhetorical device or a creation of the author.45 All three can share the same point of view. Who is the author of the Story of Aqhat? At the end of the Story of Aqhat (KTU 1.17 VI), about twenty lines are missing. On the left edge of the tablet is the remains of a colophon: [spr ’ilmlk šbn lmd ’atn p]rln “[Scribe: Ilimilku, Shubanite, student of Attenu,] the diviner.” 46 This points to Ilimilku as the author, or perhaps the copier of the story. Longman, Literary Approaches, 83-84. Wayne Booth proposes the idea of “the implied author.” He notes that “the implied author chooses, consciously or unconsciously, what we read; we infer him as an ideal, literary, created version of the real man; he is the sum of his own choices.” See Wayne Booth, The Rhetoric of Fiction (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1961), 74-75. 46 This colophon appears the same as in KTU 1.4 VIII lower edge, 1.6 VI: 54-8 and 1.16 VI: 59 lower edge. See Nicolas Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” in Handbook 45

METHODOLOGY

19

Who is Ilimilku? In the colophon of the Baal Cycle (KTU 1.4 VIII), we have [¨]‘y. nqmd . mlk “[sac]rificer of king Niqmaddu.”47 The exact nature of Ilimilku’s identity remains uncertain, yet based on the information provided above, he is a scribe and is closely associated with the royal house of Ugarit, with considerable power and authority.48 The major myths at Ugarit might have circulated for a long period of time in an oral tradition before they appeared in written form.49 If this is the case, Ilimilku could have been the final redactor who put the myths into writing. In any case, for the purpose of this dissertation, we consider Ilimilku as the author of the Story of Aqhat. What Kind of Author Do We Have in the Story of Aqhat? First, the author of the Story of Aqhat knows more than the characters in the story. 50 He speaks from a third-person perspective and refers to all the characters impersonally without stating “I” or “we.” He has a seemingly unlimited knowledge of all the events in the story. For instance, he knows the motive of Dan’il when he presents an offering to the gods at the outset of the story; he knows what El’s view is regarding his conception of divinehuman relationship; he knows what Aqhat’s value is concerning gender differentiation and human mortality; he knows what Pughat thinks regarding Anat’s violence. All this knowledge is not shared among the characters in the story. As Rhoads and Michie note,“no character has enough knowledge of other characters or events to be able to tell the whole story as the narrator has told it.”51 Second, the author of the Story of Aqhat is omnipresent and is not bound by space and time. He jumps from scene to scene, both in public arena and in private quarters. He is present in Dan’il’s various ritual performances; he is present in the encounter between Anat and Aqhat and of Ugaritic Studies (HUS) (ed. Wilfred G. E. Watson and Nicolas Wyatt; LeidenBoston-Koln: Brill, 1999a), 234. 47 For the possible meaning of this title, see M. Dietrich and O. Loretz, “Amter und Titel des Schreibers Ilmlk von Ugarit,” UF 12 (1980b): 387-9. 48 Cf. N. Wyatt, “Ilimilku’s Ideological Programme,” UF 29 (1997): 777-78. 49 For an overview of how the literature of Canaan (an imprecise name for Ugarit) develop through time, see Parker, “The Literature of Canaan, Ancient Israel, and Phoenicia: An Overview,” in vol. 4 of Civilizations of Ancient Near East (CANE) (ed. Jack M. Sasson; Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1995), 2399-2410. 50 Goldingay points out that to say “the author is an omniscient one” is exaggerating since the author may not know everything. Goldingay, verbal communication. 51 Rhoads and Michie, Mark as Story, 36.

20

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

hears their conversations; he is there when Anat appeals to El at his abode; he is the eyewitness of Anat’s killing of Aqhat in the town of Abiluma; he is with Dan’il and Pughat when they note the diminishing of nature; he also accompanies Pughat to enter into the tent of Yatpan and is present at the wine feast when the former attempts to take vengeance against the latter. Because of the author’s omnipresence, the reader and audience also experience the same sense of being invisibly present to witness the events as the story unfolds. 52 This advantage of the reader is what Sternberg calls “reader-elevating” in which the reader knows better than the characters.53 By inviting the audience to witness the events along with the author, the author establishes a reliable relationship with the audience and gains his or her trust, thereby moving the audience to share his point of view. Third, the author of the story is reticent. He narrates what happens, but remains silent in giving evaluations of the events. However, his point of view is revealed through other means such as the portrayal of the characters, the point of view of these characters, and from “asides.” Thus, the reticent author leads his implied audience to make judgment and evaluation based on the hints and clues he provides in the story. At the same time, he opens the opportunity for his audience to apply elements in the story in a personal way. Fourth, the author of the story speaks from an ideological point of view. There is a message in the story. Meaning resides in the author’s intention to convey a particular message through “signals” or “signs” or through different literary devices.54 Although the author reserves making evaluations of the events and characters in the story, he presents the whole story in a way that shapes the responses of his audience. The violence of Anat serves as an example. The different points of view of the divine characters and the human characters of the story suggest that the author intends to present her violence in a complex and multi-perspectival fashion. The fact that he favors certain characters in the story over others also points to his ideological point of view. This nature of the author as both a reticent and an ideological author adds to the depth of the story’s presentation of its message and invites the reader and audience to participate in the interpretation process.

Rhoads and Michie, Mark as Story, 37. Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative, 163. 54 Vanhoozer, Is There a Meaning, 43. 52 53

METHODOLOGY

21

Reader, Audience The difference between reader and audience is: the former reads the story whereas the latter hears the story. For this study, we choose the term “the audience” rather than “the reader” because in the ancient world, the usual way to attend to myths and epics would be through hearing rather than through reading.55 In ancient times, only a minority of the elite group such as the scribes and the priests would have the access and competency reading the written texts.56 Types of the Audience. Stories presuppose certain sorts of audience.57 Four types of audience can be identified: (1) the modern audience; (2) the historical audience; (3) the implied audience; (4) the hypothetical actual audience. The “modern audience” refers to those who read the story in the twenty-first century or in recent centuries or decades. The “historical audience” is the original audience who actually heard the story in the second millennium BCE and made the documented reactions towards the story.58 The “implied audience” is the audience presupposed by the story itself. This type of audience is not the real audience but is imagined in the mind of the author as he narrates the story. In some cases, the historical audience and the implied audience are the same and in other cases, they are not. The “hypothetical actual audience” is the reconstructed historical audience based on what the modern reader knows about them.59 In determining the responses of the audience toward the violence in the Story of Aqhat, we are not speaking about the modern audience. We are not going in front of the text to ask for the modern reader’s imaginative reflection. Nor are we speaking about the historical audience since we have no way of knowing who the historical audience is and no documented account of his or her view on the acts of violence in the story. When we speak of the audience in Part Two of this study, we are referring to the implied audience, i.e. the audience presupposed by the author, Ilimilku, and how he employs characterization and point of view to shape the responses of his implied audience toward the perception of violence in the story. Drawing upon Goldingay, Models for Interpretation, 37. W. H. van Soldt, “Ugarit: A Second-Millennium Kingdom on the Mediterranean Coast,” in vol. 2 of CANE, 1263-64. 57 Goldingay, Models for Interpretation, 36. 58 For a discussion about the historical and the implied audience, see Iser, The Act of Reading, 20-50. 59 I borrowed the term “the hypothetical actual audience” from Goldingay. For more information about this kind of audience, see Iser, The Act of Reading, 28. 55 56

22

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

However, in Part Three, we will speak of the hypothetical actual audience in the behind-the-text-oriented approach.

A BEHIND-THE-TEXT-ORIENTED APPROACH Defining the Behind-the-Text-Oriented Approach As its name suggests, a behind-the-text-oriented approach goes behind the text to investigate its historical settings and realities. This approach is often contrasted with the text-oriented approach. The text-oriented approach is synchronic in nature whereas the behind-the-text-oriented approach is diachronic in nature. The former focuses on the final form and the latter focuses on the historical development of a particular text. 60 The two approaches need not be seen as mutually exclusive and can be complementary to one another.61 For present purposes, this study does not intend to trace the historical development of how the Story of Aqhat ended up in its final form nor to investigate the story’s historical setting, but to place the focus on the world and values of the hypothetical actual audience. By using the term “hypothetical,” we do not mean “fictional” but more in the sense of “reconstructed historical audience.” Due to the fact that it is impossible to determine who the actual historical audience of the Story of Aqhat is, we reconstruct the identity of the historical audience based on the evidence known to us. Therefore, there exists a historical link between the hypothetical actual audience and the text itself. By this reconstruction, we attempt to use our imagination supported by the known facts about the audience to see how the audience would view the violence in the story so as to illuminate our understanding of the ancients’ view on violence. Their point of view may differ from our modern understanding of violence in the story. Presuppositions The behind-the-text-oriented approach presupposes who the historical audiences (our hypothetical actual audiences) are and what they value, determine how they view the violence in the Story of Aqhat.62 Like the characters in the Story of Aqhat, each character views the violence in the story from his or her vantage point. Similarly, the hypothetical actual audience Longman, Literary Approaches, 22. Longman, Literary Approaches, 151. 62 Goldingay, Models for Interpretation, 42-50. 60 61

METHODOLOGY

23

also views the story from his or her vantage point. Therefore, where the historical audience stands determines and influences his or her perception of violence in the story.63 Another presupposition is that the story’s historical audience (our hypothetical actual audience) must share common or similar experience with the human characters in the story. 64 The audiences must understand and share the struggle with the same or similar events experienced by the human characters in the story in order for the story to have an effect and impact upon them. Thus, the themes of the need for a son, especially a king’s or a leader’s need for a son, the death or murder of a family member, the interactions with the divine world, and the act of blood-vengeance are all relevant and familiar to the story’s historical audience. Finally, we presume that the structure and values of the divine family correspond to the structure and values of the human families. The mythmakers constructed the world of the gods based on human experience because they could not construct something that was outside of their experience in this world.65 It is interesting to note that as a construct of the human mind, the divine world is bound in some way to reflect the workings of the human world. The interaction between the divine and human sphere is complex, “for while the human originated the divine world, the human world in turn models itself on its own construct. As a result, the two worlds reflect and interact with each other.”66 The representation of Ugaritic deities in anthropomorphic images discloses the fact that the Ugaritians conceived their deities in human terms.67 The gods have gender, male and female, just like human beings. They engage in human activities such as walking, talking, eating, drinking, and in63 Iser points out that the reader’s role is prestructured by three basic components: the different perspectives represented in the text, the vantage point from which he joins them together, and the meeting place where they converge. See Iser, The Act of Reading, 36. 64 Goldingay, Models for Interpretation, 218. 65 For the projection of the earthly realities into the heavenly realm, see Thorkild Jacobsen, “Primitive Democracy in Ancient Mesopotamia,” in Toward the Image of Tammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture (ed. William L. Moran; Canbridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1970), 164. 66 Gay Robins, Women in Ancient Egypt (Cambridge: Harvard University, 1993), 17. 67 Marjo Christina Annette Korpel, A Rift in the Clouds (Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1990), 88; Mark S. Smith, The Origin of Biblical Monotheism: Israel’s Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts (Oxford: Oxford University, 2001), 87.

24

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

volved in marriage relationships.68 The divine family shares similar family structure and relationship. For instance, the divine family is patrilineal in nature, parallel to human families. The assumption that the divine world is a projection of the human world, and the assumption that the mythmakers cannot imagine the former out of a vacuum are plausible ones. We will test the validity of this hypothesis in chapter six, Part Three. Method of Reconstructing the Hypothetical Actual Audience In the light of the above presuppositions, we will use texts apart from the Story of Aqhat to investigate the identity of the historical audiences and their values in the second millennium BCE regarding the following concepts: 1. The conception of deities 2. The conception of death and afterlife 3. The conception of family and its values 4. The conception of authority We choose these concepts because of their relevance to the major themes in the story since the major themes of the story include deities causing trouble to human beings, death and mortality, roles of sons and daughters in the family, and obedience and disobedience to authority. The reconstruction of these concepts of the ancient historical audiences also serves to establish some kind of objectivity in our understanding of the audiences’ status and mental world, and thus avoid reading an alien insight or imposing modern or western insights into the ancient people and into an ancient text.69 The evidence for these concepts appears primarily in the religious texts from Ugarit (KTU 1.1-1.169) since it is in these texts that human experience finds its full gamut of expression. However, other texts such as letters, legal texts, and administrative texts also provide evidence to the understanding of these concepts. Rather than considering the historical audiences as a collective whole, we choose three categories of people to reflect their respective readings of the story. These three categories of people occupy different tiers in a society and their readings of the story may likely vary. These categories include: 1. An Ugaritic king 2. An ordinary male Ugaritian 3. An ordinary female Ugaritian 68 69

Smith, The Origin of Biblical Monotheism, 86-7. Goldingay, Models for Interpretation, 23.

METHODOLOGY

25

The Significance of Determining the View of the Hypothetical Actual Audience The significance of this is threefold. First of all, an understanding of how the hypothetical actual audiences view the violence in the Story of Aqhat provides a window into the ancient people’s conception of violence. Secondly, this understanding prevents the modern readers from making any simple, subjective, or one-dimensional interpretation of the violence in the story without providing any basis for it. Thirdly, this understanding offers an interpretive lens to the conception of violence in other ancient literature such as the Hebrew Bible. We will address this concern in “Areas for Further Research” at the end of this study.

THE BENEFITS OF THE COMBINATION APPROACH Since no single approach is sufficient in itself to accomplish the purpose of understanding a text in its full significance and vitality, a combination approach helps to illuminate the meaning of the text in a more diverse manner. The text-oriented approach aids in our appreciation of the author’s artistry in presenting the message of the story. The behind-the-text-oriented approach provides a check on the reliability of the author’s intended message by investigating the worldview and values of the hypothetical actual audience to see how they might view the violence in the story. This combination approach enables us to see whether the hypothetical actual audiences have indeed received the intended message or whether there is a discrepancy in their understanding of violence compared to the author’s portrayal of violence in the story.70

I owe this concept of “a check on reliability” to Marsman’s work. In this work, Marsman uses the evidence provided by the Ugaritic letters, seals, legal documents, and administrative records to check on the reliability of the status of Ugaritic women depicted in the mythological texts. See Hennie J. Marsman, Women in Ugarit and Israel: Their Social and Religious Position in the Context of the Ancient Near East (Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2003), 627. 70

2 PREVIOUS INTERPRETATION The purpose of this chapter is first to give a critique on the previous textoriented approaches to the Story of Aqhat and the past one-dimensional, bipolar interpretation of Anat’s violence in the story, therefore justifying the present approach to the Story of Aqhat. Then we will establish the relevancy of the present topic. Lastly, we will provide a summary of the story.

PREVIOUS WORKS ON THE TEXT-ORIENTED APPROACHES TO THE STORY OF AQHAT Numerous works have been devoted to the general interpretation of the Story of Aqhat1 and the particular themes in the story including the identity of Dan’il,2 the list of Ideal Sonship,3 the symbolism of the bow, 4and Anat, 1 The first publication of the Story of Aqhat is by Ch. Virolleaud, La Legende Phenicienne de Danel: texte cuneiforme alphabetique avec transcription et commentaire... (MRS I; Paris, 1936). For the survey of interpretation of the Aqhat text, see A. Caquot et al, Textes Ougaritiques. Tome I (TO I). Litteratures Anciennes du Proche-Orient 7 (Paris: Les Editions du Cerf, 1974), 401-15; G. G. Del Olmo Lete, Mitos y Leyendas de Canaan Segun la Tradicion de Ugarit (Madrid: Edicioues Christiandad, 1981), 327-401; Margalit, UPA, 3-92; Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” 238-247. 2 Past scholarship debates whether Dan’il is a king or a village chief. The status of Dan’il as a king is reflected through his title “king” (KTU 1.19 III:46) and through the description of his dispensing justice at the gate and taking care the case of widows and orphans. This expression is used to describe kings in the ancient Near East. See H. L. Ginsberg, “The North-Canaanite Myth of Anath and Aqhat, I” BASOR 97 (1945): 4, n. 6; John Gray, The Legacy of Canaan (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1957), 74; and Ivan Engnell, Studies in Divine Kingship in the Ancient Near East (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1967), 134-142. Others argue against this view and see Dan’il as a village chief because the description of his environment, including his house and his agricultural rites reflect this latter status. See John C. L. Gibson, “Myth, Legend and Folk-Lore in the Ugaritic Keret and Aqhat Texts,” VTSup (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1975), 66-67. Margalit argues against seeing Dan’il as a king because Dan’il is only once addressed as “king.” For Margalit, once does not seem enough. See Margalit, UPA, 44-46, 60.

27

28

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

the goddess. 5 For the purpose of this study, we do not intend to give a comprehensive survey on these works, but we acknowledge that the present Barton calls Dan’il a “demi-god,” and a “deified human being.” See G. A. Barton, “Danel, A Pre-Israelite Hero of Galilee,” JBL 60 (1941), 221-222. 3 For literature regarding the list of Ideal Sonship, see Otto Eissfeldt, “Sohnespflichen im Alten Orient,” in Kleine Schriften (Edited by Otto Eissfeldt; Tubingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1968), 268-9; J. Healey, “The Pietas of an Ideal Son in Ugarit,” UF 11 (1979): 353-6; Yitzhak Avishur, “The ‘Duties of the Son’ in the ‘Story of Aqhat’ and Ezekiel’s Prophecy on Idolatry (Ch. 8),” UF 17 (1985): 49-60; M. J. Boda, “Ideal Sonship in Ugarit,” UF 25 (1993): 9-24; and Eugene Clifford McAfee, “The Patriarch’s Longed-for Son: Biological and Social Reproduction in Ugaritic and Hebrew Epic,” (Ph.D. diss. Harvard: Harvard University, 1996, 67-74. 4 Many scholars have discussed the significance of the bow in the Story of Aqhat. D. Hillers (1973), drawing upon Harry Hoffner’s article, suggests that the bow connotes sexual symbolism and meaning. By taking away the bow, a symbol of masculinity, Anat reverses the traditional roles of men and women. Hillers sees the confrontation between Anat and Aqhat as a symbol of emasculation. See Harry Hoffner, “Symbols for Masculinity and Femininity,” JBL 85 (1966): 326-334; Delbert R. Hillers, “The Bow of Aqhat: The Meaning of a Mythological Theme,” AOAT 22 (1973): 71-80. H. Dressler (1975) challenges Hillers’ idea. Dressler thinks that the bow is the symbol of masculinity, but this does not necessarily make it a symbol of virility because masculinity and sexual prowess are two different things. Dressler thinks that Hillers equates masculinity with virility and confuses the issue. Parker (1989) thinks that the most important thing about the bow is that it is a composite bow – a new piece of technology which allows Aqhat to display his modern analytic knowledge. The bow is significant to the plot of the story, yet its symbolism remains a conjecture. See Harold H. P. Dressler, “Is the Bow of Aqhat a Symbol of Virility?” UF 7 (1975): 217-20. Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 136. See also, W. F. Albright and George E. Mendenhall, “The Creation of the Composite Bow in Canaanite Mythology,” JNES 1 (1942): 27-9; Yigael Sukenik, “The Composite Bow of the Canaanite Goddess Anath,” BASOR 107 (1947): 1115. Wyatt also summarizes the debate between Hillers and Dressler in regard to the bow. See Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” 251. 5 Literature regarding Anat’s gender and sexuality include: Alfred Wade Eaton, “The Goddess Anat: The History of Her Cult, Her Mythology and Her Iconography,” (Ph. D. diss. Yale University, 1964), 53, 64-74; A. S. Kapelrud, The Violent Goddess Anat in the Ras Shamra Texts (Copenhagen: Universitets-Forlaget, 1969), 48109. U. Cassuto, The Goddess Anath: Canaanite Epics of the Patriarchal Age. Text, Hebrew Translation, Commentary and Introduction (Jerusalem: Magnes; ET of Hebrew Edition, 1971). Although Cassutto’s work has “Anat” as part of its title, his discussions focus primarily on the philology of the Baal Cycle, and not on the character of Anat nor the Story of Aqhat. E. Ashley, “The ‘Epic of Aqht’ and the ‘Rpum Texts’: A

PREVIOUS INTERPRETATION

29

study is built on this previous scholarship and makes use of their fruit. Since this present study uses the text-oriented approach to the theme of violence in the story, here we single out four works pertaining to the literary analysis of the story as our focus of discussion. Simon B. Parker. Building on his earlier work, “Death and Devotion: The Composition and Theme of AQHT,”6 Parker’s The Pre-Biblical Narrative Tradition provides a detailed analysis of the literary composition of the story.7 He focuses on the discrete units of the narrative and demonstrates how these units combine to produce a coherent whole. He adopts his methods through identifying the story’s own internal evidence of literary form and through the comparative evidence with the other ancient Near Eastern literature. In addition, for each discrete unit of the narrative, Parker raises the question of function, purpose, and effects. Parker divides the story into five literary units based on the internal indicators and comparative evidence: 1. The birth of Aqhat 2. The bow of Aqhat 3. The murder of Aqhat 4. Mourning - The acts of Aqhat’s father 5. Revenge - The acts of Aqhat’s sister Taking the first unit as an example, Parker notes that there is a movement from Dan’il’s need for a son to Baal’s intercession to El and to El’s response back to Dan’il to relieve Dan’il’s need for a son. He thinks that this section of the story shares its structural elements with other ancient Near Eastern literature such as the Egyptian tale of The Doomed Prince and Critical Interpretation,” (Ph. D. diss. New York University, 1977); C. H. Bowman, “The Goddess ‘Anatu in the Ancient Near East,” (Ph. D. diss. Graduate Theological Union, 1978); Loewenstamm, S. E. “Did the Goddess Anat Wear Side-Whiskers and a Beard? A Reconsideration,” UF 14 (1982): 119-22; Peggy L. Day, “Why is Anat a Warrior and Hunter? in The Bible and the Politics of Exegesis: Essays in Honor of Norman K. Gottward on His Sixty-Fifth Birthday. Edited by D. Jobling et al (Ohio: Pilgrim Press, 1991), 141-6; Peggy L. Day, “Anat: Ugarit’s ‘Mistress of Animals,’” JNES 51 (1992), 181-90; and N. H. Walls, The Goddess Anat in Ugaritic Myth (Ga.: Scholars Press, 1992), originally a dissertation. 6 The article appears in Love and Death in the Ancient Near East: Essays on Honor of Marvin H. Pope (Edited by John H. Marks and Robert M. Good; Connecticut: Four Quarters, 1987), 71-83. This article is a condensed version of his later work, The Pre-Biblical Narrative Tradition. 7 Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative. His latest understanding of the story is reflected in “Aqhat” in Ugaritic Narrative Poetry (Edited by Simon B. Parker; SBLWAW, Atlanta: Scholars, 1997), 49-80.

30

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

the Hurrian tale of Appu. Their common structures include: (1) the introduction of the hero as childless; (2) the appeal to the god; (3) the god’s favorable response; and the (4) conception and birth.8 Parker also takes the story of Hannah in 1 Samuel as belonging to the same basic narrative structure and points out the difference between the biblical account from the other ancient parallels: The biblical account focuses on Hannah as the barren woman whereas the other ancient Near Eastern parallels focus on the childlessness of a man.9 By comparing and contrasting each discrete unit of the Aqhat narrative with their ancient Near Eastern parallels, Parker helps the reader to situate the Story of Aqhat in the larger ancient Near Eastern narrative structures, and at the same time, to accentuate its uniqueness. The drawback of this comparative approach is that it allows little room for the narrative unit to deviate from the conventional pattern. For example, because the ending of the Story of Aqhat is broken, Parker assumes that Pughat succeeds in her vengeance since other ancient literature, when speaking of a woman taking vengeance against a male, always succeeds in doing so.10 However, it is possible that Pughat’s vengeance can be an exception to the general pattern. Parker demonstrates how the narrator employs various literary techniques such as repetition, speeches, ritual acts, and balances of theme and motif to compose a unified literature. His efforts are commendable. However, the two literary devices “characterization” and “point of view” which are inherent in the story are not Parker’s focus. From the functional point of view, Parker is able to note the dominance of the social roles in the story such as the dutiful son, the host and the hostess, and the responsible father and daughter.11 However, he fails to relate these social roles to the function of the story, and only leaves the readers with questions and possibilities for the story’s various purposes.12 Last but not least, Parker interprets the death of Aqhat as a case of murder.13 By choosing the word “murder,” Parker already betrays his point of view regarding Anat’s violence as an unjust murder. This view obscures the multi-faceted portrayal of Anat’s violence in the story. In summary, Parker contributes to our understanding of the aesthetic value of the story and helps us to see the literary coherence of the story as a Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 102-04. Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 105. 10 Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 131-33. 11 Parker, “Death and Devotion,” 83; The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 142-3; UNP, 51. 12 Parker, The Pre-Bibical Narrative, 143. 13 Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 112, 118. 8 9

PREVIOUS INTERPRETATION

31

whole. His study makes way for the reader to appreciate the ancient writer’s artistry in composing this narrative poetry and in identifying those common narrative themes such as the birth narrative, the marriage institution, and the situation of desperation that the Story of Aqhat shares with the other ancient Near Eastern literature. Kenneth T. Aitken. Aitken’s study focuses on the structural analysis of the story. He identifies three levels of themes in the story: ground theme level, theme level, and theme texture level. According to Aitken, “Ground theme level” is composed of the sum of the plot themes (i.e., themes which are essential to the plot), but abstracted from their specific thematic content and defined in terms of their function in the plot. “Theme level” is composed of the entire sum of the actions and descriptions contained in the narrative, but abstracted from their specific verbal expression. “Theme textual level” is composed of the entire sum of the poetic lines given by and in the object language of the story itself, i.e., the text itself.14 Based on his analysis, “Lack” dominates the ground theme level, such as the hero (Dan’il) lacks an object (a son), the villain (Anat) lacks an object (the bow). The theme level is made up of both plot and non-plot themes. The plot-themes include the fact that Dan’il has no son, and Aqhat has no bow. Anat covets the bow, Pughat notices the withered crops, Dan’il desires to bury Aqhat, and Pughat desires to avenge Aqhat. The non-plot themes include repetition of the plot themes such as Aqhat’s twice refusal of Anat’s offer and Dan’il’s twice failure to console the ear of corn.15 Aitken argues that the theme texture level contains the particular verbal textures which the themes have acquired in the course of telling the story. For instance, the text verbalizes “Baal reveals himself to Dan’il” as “Baal took pity and appeared to him” (KTU 1.17 I: 15-33).16 Aitken demonstrates the significance of the units of content as compositional units within the narrative itself. His multilayered structural analysis of the story demonstrates the complexity of the story in its form and theme. His structural analysis is indeed a much more elaborate and a much more sophisticated work than Parker’s structural analysis, which remains on the surface level of the major plot themes of the story. However, the complex nature of Aitken’s multilayered structural analysis is also its drawback, as it easily causes confusion. For instance, he subdivides the three levels of themes into other sub-levels: initial, medial, and terminal levels. He also Aitken, The Aqhat Narrative, 21-22. Aitken, The Aqhat Narrative, 108-125, 142. 16 Aitken, The Aqhat Narrative, 21, 172. 14 15

32

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

employs many technical terms such as “the plot themes,” “the theme kernel,” and “the theme links.” Aside from focusing on the structures of the story, Aitken notes the presentation of the characters in the story. He compares and contrasts various characters in each unit of the story and observes the pattern of “hero(ine) and villain.” For example, in the encounter between Anat and Aqhat, Aitken describes Anat as the villain and Aqhat as the hero. In the unit of Pughat’s vengeance, Pughat functions as the heroine whereas Yatpan acts as a villain.17 However, this clear categorization of the characters obscures the ambiguity involved in the author’s portrayal of them. Eugene C. McAfee. In his Harvard dissertation, McAfee adopts the methodology of Claude Lévi-Strauss to interpreting mythology, by using the structural analysis exhibited in ancient myths to determine their respective meanings and functions. Thus, McAfee compares three ancient narratives, the Abrahamic narrative, the Story of Kirtu, and the Story of Aqhat, and discovers their common structure and theme. He observes that these three narratives share one significant theme in common: the son does not fulfill the expectations placed upon him by the narrative, but someone else does.18 He pays particular attention to issues of power, gender, and ethnicity in these narratives. In the stories of Dan’il and Kirtu, McAfee notes that their problem of sonlessness is resolved through a transformation of gender roles: the daughter replaces the son. In the cases of Dan’il and Kirtu, Pughat replaces Aqhat, and Kirtu’s youngest daughter replaces his sons. In the case of Abraham, the problem of Ishmael’s ethnic and social status is resolved through the birth of the promised son, Isaac, as a result of Abraham’s union with Sarah.19 In his conclusion, McAfee raises the question of motive in composing stories of ineffectual longed-for sons. Adopting Lévi-Strauss’ observation of the purpose of all true myths – to provide a logical model capable of overcoming a contradiction, McAfee proposes that, “the fundamental contradiction in mythology in which the procurement of a son by a sonless patriarch plays a central role is the contradiction of reproduction itself.” Therefore, he concludes that the point of these stories is not about biological reproduction but social reproduction. 20 By “social reproduction,” he

Aitken, The Aqhat Narrative, 95, 107. McAfee, “The Patriarch’s Longed-for Son,” 53. 19 McAfee, “The Patriarch’s Longed-for Son,” 52-53. 20 McAfee, “The Patriarch’s Longed-for Son,” 54-55, 121. 17 18

PREVIOUS INTERPRETATION

33

means “the maintenance of social fabric through the innovative actions of a dutiful daughter.”21 By comparing the thematic structures of these narratives, McAfee employs a text-oriented methodology. The identification of the common elements in the three stories aids the reader in understanding the major issue raised by these stories and their possible meaning to the ancient societies. Yet, for our purpose, the drawback of this seeking of common structure undermines the uniqueness of each narrative and obscures the specific messages that each individual story intends to convey. David P. Wright. Wright’s Ritual in Narrative, as its title suggests, studies ritual in the narrative of Aqhat. The contextual analysis of ritual not only gives this study a literary orientation but also goes beyond the literary level to the ideas of the history of religion and the practices of ritual in the ancient Near East.22 The focus on ritual as the overarching theme in the story deserves our attention, particularly because our study also uses one single theme, the acts of violence in the story, as the focus. Wright attempts to see how ritual serves the need of the larger narratives and to observe how different rituals interact with one another. The previous studies on ritual have been externally oriented. They tend to connect a particular ritual to an existing ritual in history. Wright’s approach, on the contrary, is internally oriented. He looks at ritual within a story’s context to see how it contributes to the “development of the story, advances the plot, forges major and minor climaxes, structures and periodicizes the story, and operates to enhance the portrayal of characters.”23 His approach is indeed groundbreaking and provides many insights into the function of ritual within a narrative context. Of particular interest to us is his argument that rituals in the story convey much about “the relationships of the characters, their emotions and ethics, their love and hatred, their frustration and piety, and their sense of duty and honor.”24 All of the portrayals of characters are viewed through their performances of rituals in the story, a truly innovative perspective. Wright sorts the rituals into four categories: feasts, blessings, mourning rites, and retaliation rites. He organizes his topics around these four categories, comparing and contrasting the various ritual scenes and their elements, and distinguishing two broad types of rituals: the felicitous and the infelici21 22

17. 23 24

McAfee, “The Patriarch’s Longed-for Son,” 121. David P. Wright, Ritual in Narrative (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2001), Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 6. Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 227.

34

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

tous rites (successful and unsuccessful rites). Wright inquires into the causes for the infelicitous rites – that they are caused by the competing and contrary desires of the gods, by the ignorance of humans performing the rites, or by the need to assert and acquire power.25 His observations concerning infelicitous rites add understanding to the story as a reflection of “real-life” experience, and not merely a literary construct. For instance, Wright, from the ritual point of view, interprets the banquet scene where Anat spots the bow, covets it, and negotiates with Aqhat as a ritual infelicity because both Anat and Aqhat fail to reach a compromise and establish a relationship during the process. Anat’s reaction of mourning after she kills Aqhat also serves as an indication of the unsuccessful feast. For the audience of the story, Wright notes that this infelicity comes not as a surprise since they must have encountered this kind of ritual infelicity in their real life experience.26 In regard to El and Baal’s points of view of Anat’s violence, Wright thinks that El merely concedes to Anat’s plan to kill Aqhat and then leaves El out of the picture.27 This view seems to make El exempt from the violence done to Aqhat. Wright notes the “theological cause” of the drought: the absence of Baal.28 However, he fails to make the connection between the drought and Baal’s disapproval of Anat’s violence and simply treats the death of Aqhat as a case of murder.29 In regard to Anat’s violence, Wright identifies with the point of view of the human characters of the story, Dan’il and Pughat, but downplays the points of view of El and Baal. Despite these caveats, Wright offers an interesting and stimulating study on ritual within the Story of Aqhat. His study enhances our comprehension of the functions and dynamics of the rituals in the story, which in turn deepens our understanding of the text and the interactions of various characters as a whole. These four works all contribute to the understanding of the Story of Aqhat through different aspects of narrative poetics. This study intends to develop further the employment of characterization and point of view as a means to illuminate the author’s possible ethical understanding of violence in the story.

Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 228. Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 133-35. 27 Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 187. 28 Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 166. 29 Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 187. 25 26

PREVIOUS INTERPRETATION

35

PREVIOUS INTERPRETATION OF ANAT’S VIOLENCE Modern interpreters tend to understand Anat’s violence in the Story of Aqhat in two extremes or in a bipolar manner. On one end of the continuum stand those who consider Anat’s violence against Aqhat as an evil act.30 On the other end of the continuum stand those who regard Anat’s violence as a positive act.31 These bipolar interpretations of Anat’s violence obscure the text’s presentation of her violence in a multi-perspectival fashion. Anat’s Violence Is Negative Dijkstra thinks that the Story of Aqhat is a tale not only of tender love, blood-shed and blood vengeance, but also of a disturbed social order with its concomitant effects on vegetation and fertility. Dijkstra maintains that the root of all trouble lies in “Aqhat’s conflict with the goddess who is uncommitted to ethical norms.” 32 This interpretation reads the subjective standard of “ethics” or the modern conception of “ethics” into the ancient text. What were the ethical norms at Ugarit? The Baal Cycle, for example, depicts the major gods as warriors who frequently have violent confrontations with other deities. The ethical norm at Ugarit could be violence. Dijkstra’s view of “Anat not committed to ethical norms” needs more justification from a study in the ethical norms of the ancient Near East in general and Ugarit in particular. Ashley considers the Rapiuma texts (KTU 1.20-22) as the sequel to the Story of Aqhat. Thus, in the Story of Aqhat, she thinks that Anat is associated with death whereas in the Rapiuma texts, Anat is associated with life 30 The proponents for this view include A. Kapelrud, M. Dijkstra, E. Ashley, R. Bowman, G. Del Olmo Lete, B. Margalit, S. B. Parker, N. Walls, and L. Handy. See Kapelrud, The Violent Goddess, 82; Meindert Dijkstra, “Some Reflections on the Legend of Aqhat,” UF 11 (1979): 199-210; Ashley, “The ‘Epic of Aqhat,’” ; Bowman, “The Goddess Anat,” 199, 263, Del Olmo Lete, Mitos, 354-64; idem., Canaanite Religion (Maryland: CDL, 1999), 331; Margalit, UPA, 477; Parker, “Death and Devotion,” 77; Walls, The Goddess Anat, 161-210; Lowell K. Handy, Among the Host of Heaven: The Syro-Palestinian Pantheon as Bureaucracy (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1994), 122. 31 The advocates for this latter view include H. L. Ginsberg, E. Amico, N. Wyatt, M. S. Smith. See Ginsberg, “The North-Canaanite,” 15-23; E. A. Amico, “The Status of Women at Ugarit,” (Ph. D diss. University of Michigan: 1989), 49091; Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” 234-258; Smith, The Origin of Biblical Monotheism, 31. 32 Dijkstra, “Some Reflections,” 208.

36

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

since in the latter texts, Anat and Baal work together to restore Aqhat to life.33 However, the fragmentary nature of the Rapiuma texts does not support the notion of Aqhat’s resurrection. Ashley’s assumption that the Rapiuma texts are a part of the original Story of Aqhat is based on insufficient evidence. The appearance of the name Dan’il in both texts does not provide sufficient evidence to justify the connection of the texts. In addition, her statement that “Anat is associated with death” seems to render her act of violence negative without acknowledging other competing points of view. Dijkstra and de Moor contend for the inclusion of the Rapiuma texts because of the mention of Dan’il in both texts and the assumption that Aqhat is restored to life, but this interpretation is not conclusive.34 Other scholars are skeptical about the connection between the two texts. 35 For example, both Parker and Wyatt think that the mention of Dan’il in KTU 1.20 may only mean that Dan’il was a well-known figure and a number of stories may have used his name but it does not prove a link among those stories. 36 The fragmentary nature of the Rapiuma texts prevents us from making any definite conclusion regarding the relationship between the two texts. For the present study, we think that the evidence justifies the exclusion of the Rapiuma texts as part of the story. Bowman interprets Anat’s violence in the Baal Cycle as a means of advancing Baal’s supremacy in the pantheon and his fertility on earth.37 Thus, he maintains that Anat’s violence in Aqhat is out of her character. Bowman downplays Anat’s violence in the Story of Aqhat and states that “we should not take too seriously the inconsistency between Anat’s characterization in Ashley, “The ‘Epic of Aqhat,’” 309. See Meindert Dijkstra and Johannes C. de Moor, “Problematic Passages in the Legend of Aqhatu,” UF 7 (1975): 171-2. Johannes C. de Moor, An Anthology of Religious Texts from Ugarit (Nisaba 16, Leiden: Brill, 1987), 224. 35 John C. L. Gibson, Canaanite Myth and Legends (CML) (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1977), 27, n. 2; Parker, “Aqhat,” 49; idem., The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 134-5. Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” 237; David P. Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 6. 36 Parker, “Aqhat,” 197. Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” 237. One other example where the name of Dan’il appears is in the biblical book, Daniel. Dressler is doubtful whether Dan’il is the same Daniel in Ezekiel. See Harold H. P. Dressler,’s refutation, “The Identification of the Ugaritic Dnil with the Daniel of Ezekiel,” VT 29 (1979b): 152-61. Day thinks that the evidence still favors the identification of the Ezekielian Daniel with the Dan’il in the Story of Aqhat. See John Day, “Daniel of Ugarit and Ezekiel and the Hero of the Book of Daniel,” VT 30 (1980): 174-84. 37 Bowman, “The Goddess Anat,” 51, 182, 195. 33 34

PREVIOUS INTERPRETATION

37

Aqhat and the Baal Cycle.” Bowman also states that the Baal Cycle offers a more accurate picture of Anat’s character and purposes in the Ugaritic cult. He adjudicates between the conflicting portrayals of Anat, that Anat’s image in the Baal Cycle is primary and her image in Aqhat is secondary.38 This view is puzzling because it is precisely because of the inconsistency of Anat’s character in Aqhat and in the Baal Cycle that we should take her violence in Aqhat seriously. Del Olmo Lete thinks that the function of the goddess Anat is special and that her behavior provides the theme of the story. Later, Del Olmo Lete specifies this “special” function as Anat’s “immoral behavior.” For Del Olmo Lete, the encounter between Anat and Aqhat is not just a case of divine punishment; it also describes a “typical situation” where male human beings are exposed to “the whim of the gods and their amoral behavior.”39 Thus, Del Olmo Lete interprets Anat’s violence against Aqhat as a “common theology” in the ancient Near East and considers Aqhat as a Prometheus-like figure, thus embracing the “heroic” character and destiny. In this sense, he thinks that the Story of Aqhat is related to similar accounts in Greek literature and in the Israelite patriarchal tradition. Del Olmo Lete, however, does not cite the Greek version of the Prometheus text nor any Israelite patriarchal examples to demonstrate his point.40 His description of the “typical situation” is based on a few out of thousands of ancient texts. By perceiving Anat as an “immoral” goddess, Del Olmo Lete suppresses other alternative points of view including El’s. Margalit advocates the idea of morality and ethics in the story, especially on Anat’s killing of Aqhat. Margalit addresses the issue of right and wrong, good and evil. He sees Anat as the evil goddess. He thinks that the author, by portraying Anat in such violent ways, intends to give a “wakeup” call to the “Raphaite” people not to be blindly devoted to this goddess.41 He pays attention to the characters and their antitheses: for instance, he contrasts Anat and Pughat’s characters and describes them as the “polaropposite.” Moreover, Margalit adds: Man’s existential Life-or-Death choices depend on a critical discernment of Good and Bad, and on the selection of proper divine models of ethical and religious behavior; Raphaite society, by choosing Anat, has cho-

Bowman, “The Goddess Anat,” 199, 263, 265. Del Olmo Lete, CR, 331. 40 Del Olmo Lete, CR, 332-333. 41 Margalit, UPA, 280 n. 49, 333, 347, 321, 347, 477, 491. 38 39

38

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT sen Evil. Sister though she be to Baal, Anat is actually more akin to Mot, the god of Death.42

Margalit focuses on the moral aspect of the text far more than any of his predecessors. His analysis of the various characters in the text provides insight into their moral aspects. The major drawback of Margalit’s approach lies in the lack of a basis for his judgment on Anat’s moral behavior.43 For instance, he deliberately describes Anat as the immoral and wicked deity, yet does not provide any rationale for his descriptions.44 Margalit also ignores questions such as whether Anat only behaves according to her character as a warrior and whether El is responsible for Aqhat’s death. Apart from his interest in the literary analysis of the story mentioned earlier, Parker also draws attention to the theme of social roles in the story. For instance, he points out that the story is concerned with the dutiful son in the refrain of the first two columns, the host and hostess in column five, men and hunter as against gods and women, in the encounter between Aqhat and Anat in column six, and the responsible father and daughter in the last tablet.45 Parker thinks that the purpose of the story is to warn males against “male pride and female treachery.” According to him, this “female treachery” refers to someone “who knows no bounds, even in the divine sphere.”46 By emphasizing various social roles in the story, especially Pughat’s role as a dutiful daughter who avenges the death of her brother, Parker puts Anat’s murder in a negative light, although he hesitates to mention this explicitly. This hesitation may be due to the fact that Parker considers the character of Anat a “literary construct” and that her behavior and character do not reflect any value of the people or the society in which the story is situated.47 By separating literature or myths from their corresponding social environment, Parker denies the social function of myths in ancient human

Margalit, UPA, 363, 479, 485. Margalit remarks that Anat’s near-total eclipse in the first millennium BCE suggests that the poem of Aqht may have played a part in this beneficent development. This is the closest rationale given by Margalit in regard to Anat’s negative behavior in the Aqhat story. However, this observation or conjecture is not based on the text of Aqhat. See Margalit, UPA, 485. 44 For example, Margalit describes Anat as a wicked goddess in pages 49, 89, 280, 333, and 347 of UPA without giving any basis for his judgment. 45 Parker, UNP, 51. Cf. Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 142-3. 46 Parker, “Death and Devotion,” 77; Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 114. 47 Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 217-220. 42 43

PREVIOUS INTERPRETATION

39

communities. This denial seems to contradict his earlier remark on the possible functions of the story to its society.48 In The Rise of Yahwism, de Moor mentions Anat’s violence in the Story of Aqhat. He sees that Anat’s violence represents the conflicting powers of the pantheon. He therefore concludes that the pantheon of Ugarit is a “pantheon of disillusion.” By that he means that the Ugaritic world of the gods is “full of hate, violence, treason, weakness, greed, partiality, rashness, blunders, drinking-bouts and orgies.”49 Thus, de Moor indirectly evaluates Anat’s violence in Aqhat as a negative act. De Moor’s view of Anat’s violence is based on the modern conception that killing is wrong, but he fails to assess Anat’s character in the world in which she lives. Does the author of the story explicitly indicate his evaluation of Anat’s violence? What in the Story of Aqhat informs us of her violence as a negative act? The term “a pantheon of disillusion” seems to reflect a subjective interpretation. Walls, like Margalit, contrasts Anat with Pughat, maintaining that “Anat mediates the bipolar opposites of life and death, male and female, social continuity and social disintegration.” He describes Anat’s character as an untamed goddess who threatens the basic social fabric and the life of Aqhat. He thinks that Anat is a symbol of ambiguity; she serves as a negative force in the Story of Aqhat, but a positive one in the Baal Cycle. Walls attributes this ambiguity to Anat’s ambiguous gender, a maiden goddess who rejects the traditional feminine categories of mother, wife, or dependent daughter.50 Walls’ analysis of Anat’s character comes from a socio-scientific point of view, which relates her gender and sexuality to the patriarchal society in which she lives. The socio-scientific point of view illuminates our understanding of Anat’s gender dynamic within her world, yet it comprises some subjectivity and uncertainty, running the risk of imposing modern concepts into the ancient character and the ancient world. Both Walls and Day state that the reason for Anat’s being a warrior and a hunter lies in her status as a maiden (btlt).51 This interpretation poses Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 143. De Moor, The Rise of Yahwism: The Roots of Israelite Monotheism (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1990), 81, 97, 50 Walls, The Goddess Anat, 209, 218. 51 Cf. Ackerman thinks that the warrior image of Deborah and Jael is influenced by the Anat tradition in the Ugaritic texts. See Susan Ackerman, Warrior, Dancer, Seductress, Queen (New York, London, Toronto, Sydney, Auckland: Doubleday), 5673. 48 49

40

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

several problems. Day explains that Anat is in the stage of puberty, she never crosses the threshold between puberty and the exclusively female sphere of motherhood. She is caught in the liminality of adolescence, where male and female are not yet fully distinct. Day, therefore, concludes that as a btlt, there is no gender boundary to impede Anat, and so Anat can move freely into what is normally defined as the male sphere.52 In Ugarit, the exact meaning of btlt is uncertain.53 We can be certain that the word does not mean “virgin” in the strict sense since Anat has sexual intercourse with Baal in KTU 1.10-12.54 Day assumes that marriage and motherhood happened after the teenage years and that they cannot happen at the same time. Yet, in ancient cultures, the distinction between these two stages of life often coalesces. A btlt can be a young married woman as well as a young mother. Moreover, women who are beyond adolescence can hunt and fight. These activities are not limited to teenagers only. In the Story of Aqhat itself, besides Anat we have another example of a woman warrior – Pughat, the family girl. When Pughat asks for Dan’il to bless her to take revenge against the slayer of her brother, Dan’il gladly grants his permission.55 As Amico points out, there is no hint in the story suggesting that it would be surprising for a woman to undertake such a task.56 In his monograph, Among the Host of Heaven, Handy singles out Anat as the deity who represents the “malfunctioning” of the divine bureaucracy. Handy writes that “The most blatant example of abusive behavior accepted by the highest authority without punishment was displayed by the goddess Anat.” Handy thinks that Anat is “violent, vindictive, vengeful, selfabsorbed, insolent, and spoiled.” Handy interprets El’s indulging attitude towards Anat’s offensive and threatening manner as a form of “nepotism at its worst.”57 Handy’s interpretation and assessment of Anat’s character is rather one dimensional because he singles out Anat’s behavior in Aqhat with the assumption that killing human beings is wrong and ignores her role in the Baal Cycle where she appears to be the heroine who takes vengeance Day, “Why is Anat,” 145-6. Tsevat, “‫ ”בתולה‬TDOT 2:339-340. 54 A. Van Selms, Marriage and Family Life in Ugaritic Literature (London: Luzac & Co., 1954), 69, 109; TWOT, 295. The interpretation of “btlt” as “grown up girl without sexual experience with men” does not fit the person of Anat in the Ugaritic texts. See the entry in HALOT, 166-167. 55 KTU 1.19 IV: 28-40. 56 Amico, “The Status of Women,” 155. 57 Handy, Among the Host, 122-25. 52 53

PREVIOUS INTERPRETATION

41

against Mot to bring her brother Baal back to the throne. Wyatt’s criticism of Handy’s treatment of Anat as coming from a modern and Christian theology rather than thinking of Anat in terms of ancient Ugaritic tradition is warranted.58 The interpretation of Anat’s act of violence against Aqhat as an evil behavior is a subjective and one-dimensional view. It imposes personal ethics and the Hebrew Bible’s concept “Thou shall not kill” into the ancient Ugaritic world. It is not certain that divine killing in ancient Ugarit was seen as negative as it is in the modern world. As the social critic Walzer observes that some things that we consider oppressive are not so perceived everywhere.59 This view presumes that killing is wrong regardless of its context, culture, and time. Anat’s Violence Is Positive On the contrary, those who stand at the positive end of the continuum consider Anat’s violence as an act that befits her character or role as the war goddess. They view her power, courage, and strength as positive qualities. Again, this view is one dimensional. Although the Ugaritic texts depict Anat’s violence as positive in texts other than the Story of Aqhat, the Story of Aqhat seems to give us a more complex side of her violence, involving more than just one point of view. Ginsberg attributes Anat’s killing of Aqhat to her character as a ferocious warrior. Her warlike character is evident in the two accounts (KTU 1.3 V: 19-25 and 1.18 I: 1-14) where Anat threatens El to achieve her ends. Therefore, Ginsberg maintains that Anat’s dealing with Aqhat is quite in line with her character.60 Ginsberg views the encounter between Anat and Aqhat as a case of a goddess humbling a male’s pride. He thinks that since Anat weeps after her killing of Aqhat, she regrets her action and intends to restore Aqhat to life.61 However, the text does not explicitly indicate that Anat regrets her act of violence. The text seems to use her weeping as a way to cast doubt on her ability to get what she wants through violence. Additionally, the idea of Nicoles Wyatt, Myths of Power: A Study of Royal Myth and Ideology in Ugaritic and Biblical Tradition (UBL 13; Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996), 329, n. 184. 59 Michael Walzer, Thick and Thin: Moral Argument at Home and Abroad (Notre Dame and London: University of Notre Dame, 1994), 16. 60 Ginsberg, “The North-Canaanite,” 3-10 and idem., “The North-Canaanite Myth of Anath and Aqhat, II” BASOR 98 (1945): 15-23. 61 Ginsberg, “The North-Canaanite, I,” 7. 58

42

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

the restoration of Aqhat’s life cannot be certain due to the fragmentary nature of the text. Kapelrud thinks that since the Story of Aqhat has no moral condemnation against Anat’s violence, it was seen as “quite natural for the gods to take whatever they wanted.”62 The fact that we have a reticent author does not mean that he makes no moral condemnation against Anat’s violence. As the text-oriented approach demonstrates, the author uses the portrayals of various characters, their speech, action, and emotion to express his point of view regarding Anat’s violence. Kapelrud also thinks that Anat represents “the will of the gods and that in her killing of Aqhat, she serves as an advocate and executioner for the gods.”63 Kapelrud’s understanding of Anat’s violence contains two fallacies. For one, he assumes that since the text has no condemnation of Anat’s violence, Anat’s violence is an acceptable act. This assumption, however, does not take into account the fact that 51% of the text is missing. The explicit or implicit condemnation may be in the gaps, though we cannot know this. The other fallacy is that he assumes that Anat is the representative of the gods. The story clearly notes that Anat’s violence against Aqhat is contrary to Baal’s intention for Dan’il to have a son and in El’s granting of a son. It is interesting that El later revokes his original intent by permitting Anat to kill Aqhat. Baal, after the death of Aqhat, helps Dan’il recover the remains of Aqhat.64 In this case, Baal acts contrary to both Anat and El. Anat may represent El in killing Aqhat, but not Baal. We have another incident in the Story of Kirtu concerning a goddess doing something in apparent conflict with the gods. In this story, the gods El and Baal help king Kirtu to acquire a wife in order to ensure Kirtu’s progeny. The goddess Athirat, however, punishes king Kirtu for not fulfilling his vows to her and inflicts upon him a fatal illness. In this case, Athirat acts against the will of Baal, El, and the entire council who bring forth the birth of Kirtu’s children.65 Kapelrud’s study is one dimensional and does not provide any basis for his assessment of Anat’s violence in Aqhat. Landy views Aqhat’s death as a result of his irreverence towards the goddess, Anat.66 He thinks that “Aqhat’s fatalistic dignity is mingled with all-too-human fallibility and youthful intemperance.” Anat, as a deity, canKapelrud, The Violent Goddess, 71. Kapelrud, The Violent Goddess, 70-71. 64 KTU 1.19 III: 138. 65 KTU 1.14 IV: 32-43; 1.15 III: 25-30. 66 Francis Landy, The Tale of Aqhat (London: The Menard Press, 1981), 11. 62 63

PREVIOUS INTERPRETATION

43

not stand being thwarted. Although this is true, it neglects Baal’s reaction after the death of Aqhat and the human characters’ reactions toward Anat’s violence. Amico sees Anat’s role in the Story of Aqhat as that of a “self-centered spoiled brat.” Similar to Ginsberg and Landy, Amico takes the episode of Anat’s killing of Aqhat as a punishment for the latter’s arrogant attitude towards Anat.67 This view is warranted on the basis that El does give Anat the permission to kill. However, this view is only one among many perspectives.68 Wyatt strongly rejects the idea of treating the Story of Aqhat as conveying moral values.69 He thinks that Anat’s behavior is “predictable and in no way a reflection of inadequate or immoral theology.”70 Like Ginsberg and Amico, he sees Anat as behaving according to her role as a hunter and a war goddess. Wyatt asserts that there are no moral implications in Anat’s violence. In speaking about Anat’s behavior as acting according to her character, Wyatt considers Anat’s violence as a reflection of her honesty and being true to herself. He also sees her violence as a way to punish Aqhat’s impiety. Wyatt defends Anat’s honor against those who perceive her as an evil goddess by saying that her character represents the vitality of realism. For Wyatt, “realism” means that the “deities act out a drama in the myths which involve the tensions and problems intrinsic to any society facing the stark facts of history and environment.”71 In attributing Anat’s act as a reflection of reality in human life, Wyatt downplays other evidence that points to the negative portrayal of Anat’s violence such as the negative outcome of her violence upon the earthly realm – human beings and nature. Wyatt’s sensitivity and understanding of the ancient mentality, however, is commendable. He frequently speaks about the flaw of reading an ancient text with a modern mindset.72 However, this position of defending Anat’s honor, on the other hand, may create blind-spots and cause him to lapse from his goal of being faithful to the ancient mindset. Smith realizes Anat’s complexity. Like Ginsberg, Landy, and Amico, Smith construes Anat’s violence in the Story of Aqhat as a case of human Amico, “The Status of Women,” 465-66. For a human perspective of Anat’s violence against Aqhat, see chapter five. 69 Wyatt, Myths of Power, 329, n.184; Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” in HUS, 237, 242, 254; Wyatt, RTU, 276, n. 117, n. 118. 70 Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” 254. 71 Wyatt, Myths of Power, 329, n. 184. 72 Wyatt, Myths of Power, 329, n. 184. 67 68

44

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

disobedience and divine punishment. He acknowledges that this case counters the generally benevolent nature of the gods and is a rare exception to the rule in Ugaritic mythic narratives.73 Smith, however, does not develop further the argument regarding Anat’s violence in Aqhat as a case of divine punishment. If Anat’s act toward Aqhat is an exception, then we have another exception in the Ugaritic text: Athirat’s punishment of king Kirtu for his failure to pay his vow to her.74 The view of divine punishment does not take into account the role of human vengeance in the story. It is again one of many points of view to assess Anat’s violence. As this study will demonstrate, there is a high degree of complexity in the portrayal of Anat’s violence in the Story of Aqhat that goes beyond either negative or positive views. The various points of view regarding Anat’s violence not only illuminate our understanding of the complexity and ambiguity of her violence but also force the ancient (and modern) audiences to wrestle to establish their own ethical assessment of Anat’s violence in the story. The reticence embedded in the story leaves the audiences to fill in the blanks with regard to the understanding and implications of her violence.75

THE REVELANCE OF THE TOPIC AND ITS CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCIPLINE In the first chapter of his book Engaging the Powers, Wink states at the outset that “violence is the ethos of our times.”76 As true as this may be, however, it is also true that violence is not just a modern phenomenon, but has its roots in ancient civilizations, including Ugarit, Mesopotamia, and Palestine. The violence expressed in the ancient literature such as in the Baal Cycle, Enuma Elish, and the Hebrew Bible reflect the prevalence of violence in the ancient world. In fact, Girard states that “every god or myth involves violence.”77 Past scholarship tends to reduce the violence in the Story of Aqhat to a one-dimensional picture, thus obscuring its complexity, ambiguity, and sophistication. Since discovering the text’s ethical understanding of violence in the story serves as a window into the ancient Ugaritians’ conception of Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism, 31. KTU 1.15 III: 25-30. 75 Goldingay, Models for Interpretation, 40. 76 Walter Wink, Engaging the Powers: Discernment and Resistance in a World of Domination (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992). 77 Girard, Violence and the Sacred, 250. This statement may be exaggerating. Yet it does reflect the prevalence and preoccupation of violence in ancient myths. 73 74

PREVIOUS INTERPRETATION

45

violence, this study attempts to recover this conception by investigating the text through the method of characterization and point of view and through the reconstruction of the hypothetical actual audiences to see how they would view the acts of violence in the story.

THE SUMMARY OF THE STORY OF AQHAT78 The Story of Aqhat was preserved on three tablets (KTU 1.17-19) discovered at ancient Ugarit (Ras Shamra) in 1930-31. It was stored along with all the surviving myths from Ugarit in the High Priest’s House.79 The Story of Aqhat is partially preserved. Approximately 430 lines from the original 840 lines (51%) are missing.80 This summary serves to provide a general idea on the plot of the story and its gaps.81 We will provide a personal translation of the important passages of the story in Part Two of this study. The Story of Aqhat (KTU 1.17-1.19) KTU 1.17 I Ten lines missing.

78 For translations of the story, see H. L. Ginsberg, “The Tale of Aqhat,” in The Ancient Near East: An Anthology of Texts and Pictures (ed. James B. Pritchard; Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1958), 118-132; Th. Gaster, Thespis,Ritual, Myth and Drama in the Ancient Near East (New York: Henry Schuman, 1950), 270-313; A. Caquot et al, TO I, 419-458; Gibson, CML, 103-122; Michael D. Coogan, Stories from Ancient Canaan (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978), 32-47; De Moor, ARTU, 224-266; Margalit, UPA, 143-166; Dennis Pardee, “The ’Aqhatu Legend,” COS 1.103: 343-356; Parker, UNP, 51-78; and N. Wyatt, Religious Texts from Ugarit (2nd ed.; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002), 250-312. 79 Wyatt, “Ilimilku’s Ideological Programmes,” 779. 80 This estimation is based on the assumption that the text contains fourteen columns of sixty lines each. See Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” 235. 81 The missing portions include the beginning of 1.17 column 1, columns 3 and 4, the beginning and the ending portion of column 6, the beginning lines of 1.18 column 1, 1.18 columns 2 and 3, some lines of 1.19 column 1, and the ending of 1.19 column 4. See Parker, “Aqhat,” 47-78; Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” 235-6.

46

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT The extant text begins with Dan’il performing a ritual 82 to the gods. For six days, Dan’il repeats the same ritual. On the seventh day, Baal draws near in compassion and discloses Dan’il’s desire for a son. Then Baal intercedes El to grant Dan’il a son who would fulfill a list of filial duties for his father. Baal voices the list of filial duties. El then responds and promises to bless Dan’il with a son. El repeats the list of filial duties. Twenty lines missing.83

82 Gaster suggests the opening scene of the text as an incubation scene. i.e. The supplicant lodges for a few days in the precincts of the sanctuary in order to entreat the god and obtain the divine oracle in a dream or by some other manner. See Gaster, Thespis, 270. Gray, Coogan, Aitken, and Parker also support this view. See Gray, The Legacy of Canaan, 75; Coogan, Stories from Ancient Canaan, 28; Aitken, The Aqhat Narrative, 81; Parker, “Death and Devotion,” 72. Margalit disagrees with them. He sees no common points between the text of Aqhat and the incubation theory which emerges from the Greco-Roman sources. See Margalit, UPA, 260266. Wyatt has a summarization of this debate. See Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” 247-8. 83 These missing lines would contain the birth announcement delivered to Dan’il on the basis of comparative evidence. The structure of birth narratives usually starts with a messenger’s pronouncement of the birth news, followed by the joyful response of the father, then the spread of the news to the larger family or community. This same structure appears in KTU 10 III: 36-8; Jer 20:15; Isa 9:5; and Ruth 4:13-15. See Simon B. Parker, “The Birth Announcement” pages 133-149 in Ascribe to the Lord: Biblical and Other Essays in Memory of Peter C. Craigie (Edited by Lyle Eslinger and Glen Taylor: JSOTSup 67; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1988). Husser also devotes an article on birth narratives. He cites examples from the OT such as the birth of Ishmael (Gen 16), of Isaac (Gen 18:1-15; 21:1-2, 7), of Jacob and Esau (Gen 25:21-26), of Samson (Judg 13:2-24) and of Samuel (1 Sam 12). Husser states that the following motif characterize these birth narrative: (1) the child is born to a sterile couple; (2) an “initial prophecy” indicating the destiny of the child is the key to reading the story which follows; (3) the naming of the new born is endowed with particular importance such as define the mission of the child. The extant text of Aqhat fits the first two motifs in the OT. See Jean-M. Husser, “The Birth of a Hero: Form and Meaning of KTU 1.17 I-II,” in Ugarit, Religion and Culture: Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Ugarit, Religion and Culture, Edinburgh, July 1994, Essays Presented in Honour of Professor John C.L. Gibson (Edited by N. Wyatt, W.G.E. Watson and J.B. Lloyd; UBL 12; Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996), 8598.

PREVIOUS INTERPRETATION

47

1.17 II A messenger of El sends the birth news to Dan’il and repeats the list of filial duties for the third time. Upon hearing the news, Dan’il’s face beams and he reiterates the list of filial duties for the fourth time. Then Dan’il comes back to his house and dines with the birth goddess Katharat for six days. On the seventh day, Katharat

leaves his house. Dan’il begins to count the months of his wife’s pregnancy.

Ten lines missing.84 1.17 III Missing 1.17 IV Missing 1.17 V When the text resumes, Dan’il sees the coming of the craftsman god, Kothar-wa-Khasis. Dan’il calls his wife Danatiya to prepare a feast for the gods. Kothar-wa-Khasis presents the bow to Dan’il who in turn presents it to his son, Aqhat. Twenty lines missing 1.17 VI The Goddess Anat sees the bow and longs for it. She first offers Aqhat silver and gold in exchange for the bow. Then she offers Aqhat immortality in exchange for the bow. Aqhat refuses both and charges Anat with deceit. Then he asserts his own mortality and adds that bows are for warriors, not for women. Outwardly, Anat laughs out loud at Aqhat’s response. Inwardly, she begins to plot evil against Aqhat. She rushes to the abode of El and vilifies Aqhat. Twenty lines missing.

84 The missing lines and the next two missing columns would have included the account of Aqhat’s birth and the origin of the bow because both Aqhat and the bow appear in the subsequent columns.

48

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

1.18 I When the text resumes, Anat is threatening El to not rejoice because she would make his head run with blood and his old gray beard with gore. El responds that he knows Anat, his daughter. He gives Anat the permission to do what she desires and says, “To resist you is surely to be crushed.” Upon obtaining the divine permission, Anat sets her face to Aqhat and invites Aqhat to hunt with her.85 Twenty lines missing. 1.18 II Missing 1.18 III Missing 1.18 IV After the lacuna, Anat sets her face towards Yatpan, 86 the henchman of Anat. She instructs Yatpan to kill Aqhat: She would put Yatpan like a bird87 in her belt and they would circle above Aqhat in the town of Abiluma (ABLM). Then Anat would aim at 85 In KTU 1.18 I: 24, Ginsberg translates: you are (my) brother and I am (your) sister. Ginsberg, “The North-Canaanite,” 125. So do Gaster, Thespis, 290; Caquot, TO I, 436; Gibson, CML, 111; Dijkstra and de Moor, “Problematic Passages,” 194; Dijkstra, “Some Problems,” 207; de Moor, ARTU, 242; and Pardee, “The ’Aqhatu Legend,” in COS, 348. This translation suggests the formal proposal of marriage in the ancient Near East. Gordon adds that couples who were legally brother and sister did not smack of incest in the ancient Near East as it would to us today. See Cyrus H. Gordon, “Marriage in the Guise of Siblingship,” UF 20 (1988): 54. Parker (1997, 64) and Wyatt refute the above translation. Wyatt suggests the reading: “Come, brother, and I shall [ ].” See Wyatt, RTU, 279, n.132. 86 Watson suggests that the name Yatpan is associated with a trained bird of prey. His name could be applied to a falcon, hawk or the like. See W.G.E. Watson, “Puzzling Passages in the Tale of Aqhat,” UF 8 (1976): 371-8. 87 Parker remarks that the vultures are another prominent objects in the poem. They consume Aqhat’s corpse, and later serve as one of the indicators of drought and starvation for Dan’il and Aqhat. After the burial, they are the objects of curse. Parker also notes that even though the vultures are a prominent theme, their appearance is limited in two (C and D) of the five sections of the poem as preserved. See Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 136.

PREVIOUS INTERPRETATION

49

Aqhat and let Yatpan strike Aqhat twice on the head, three times over the ear. Anat executes her plan and as a result, Aqhat’s breath “goes off like a breath.” After her killing, Anat weeps. 1.19 I The bow falls into the water and is broken. The text is unclear about Anat’s reaction. She admits that she kills for the bow. Meanwhile, Dan’il is doing his business as usual. Then he sees that the barley on the threshing floor dries up. His daughter, Pughat, perceives the ominous birds of prey circle over their house. Then Pughat weeps in her heart. Dan’il tears his clothes and adjures the cloud to send rain. Then he calls Pughat to lead a donkey. 1.19 II Pughat ropes up the donkey and lifts Dan’il up to the back of the donkey. Dan’il then goes around to inspect the cracked earth. He embraces and kisses the stalks. Then Pughat sees two messengers coming.88 The messengers announce the news of Aqhat’s death. At once, Dan’il’s body shakes and trembles. 1.19 III Dan’il then imprecates the birds and asks Baal to break their wings so that he can inspect their bellies to see whether there is any remains of Aqhat. He repeats this act two times without success. On the third time, Dan’il asks Baal to break ṣamal’s (the mother of the birds) wings and finds Aqhat’s remains in her belly. Dan’il weeps and buries Aqhat in MDGT. Dan’il then curses the birds to not fly over the grave of Aqhat and deprive of his sleep. 1.19 IV Dan’il curses the three towns near the site of Aqhat’s death including the town of ABLM where Anat kills Aqhat. Then for seven years, Dan’il performs the mourning rite for Aqhat. He calls the mourners into his house. In the seventh year, he calls the mourners away from his house. At this time, Pughat asks Dan’ilto 88 The manner of their walking is described in 1.19 II: 27-34. Gibson interprets this manner as mime of Aqhat’s death by the two young messengers. See Gibson, CML, 116, n. 3. So does de Moor, ARTU, 253; Margalit, UPA, 159; Pardee, “The ‘Aqhatu,” 352; and Wyatt, RTU, 300, n. 222.

50

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT bless her mission to slay the slayer of her brother. Dan’il gives his blessing. Pughat then washes herself, puts on a hero’s outfit on the inside, places a knife in her belt, and wears a woman’s outfit on the outside. She then approaches the camp of Yatpan to avenge her brother’s death. Yatpan’s servants perceive her as the “woman we hired.” The text then tells us that Pughat drinks and pours drinks to Yatpan. Under the influence of the alcohol, Yatpan boasts of his prowess in killing Aqhat. Then Pughat continues to give him drinks ... the text breaks off at this point.

CONCLUSION TO PART ONE The goal of this study is to discover the ethical understanding of violence implicit in the Story of Aqhat. To accomplish this, we adopt the combination approach: the text-oriented approach and the behind-the-text-oriented approach. In addition, we place the focus on the aspects of characterization and point of view within the text-oriented approach. The reasons for choosing these two aspects are because of their significance and relevance in the Story of Aqhat and the neglect of these aspects in past scholarship. Past scholarship tends to view Anat’s violence in the Story of Aqhat as a one-dimensional view without acknowledging the multiple points of view which appear in the story. Since the author of the Story of Aqhat uses characterization and point of view to influence the perception of his implied audience concerning the violence in the story, we will explore the author’s possible ethical understanding of violence through analyzing and questioning these two aspects. Chapters 3 to 5 will present the characterization and the point of view of the major characters in the story including El, Baal, Anat, Yatpan, Dan’il, Pughat, and Aqhat. Chapter 6 will inquire into the perception of the hypothetical actual audience about the violence in the story. We intend to determine whether the author’s employment of the two literary techniques has its ethical influence upon the hypothetical actual audience’s perception of violence.

PART TWO: IMPLEMENTATION

3 DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I): EL AND BAAL El occupies the highest tier in the Ugaritic pantheon. He is the Creator of Creatures (bny bnwt) and the Father of Years (’ab šnm). Baal is the storm god, the cloud rider (rkb ‘rpt), and the patron god of Ugarit. Both characters play significant roles in the Ugaritic mythological texts. The tension and intrigue between them has been a debated matter in past decades of scholarship.1 This tension is also reflected in their varied points of view concerning Anat’s violence in the Story of Aqhat. It is the purpose of this chapter to demonstrate how the author of the Story of Aqhat uses El and Baal’s characterization and points of view regarding Anat’s violence to invite his implied audience to make ethical judgments of her violence in the story. We will first investigate the author’s characterization of El, El’s point of view concerning Anat’s violence, and 1 For instance, Marvin H. Pope maintains that El is the nominal head of the patheon and his position is gradually replaced by Baal. See Pope, El in the Ugaritic Texts (Leiden: Brill, 1955). The opposite view holds that El remains the supreme head of the pantheon and Baal is subordinate to him. Those who share the view of Pope include A. Kapelrud, Baal in the Ras Shamra Texts (Copenhagen: G. E. C. Gad, 1952), 64-93; Kapelrud, “The Relationship between El and Baal in the Ras Shamra Texts,” in The Bible World: Essays in Honor of Cyrus H. Gordon (Edited by Gary A. Rendsburg et al. New York: Ktav, 1980), 79-85; Cassuto, The Goddess Anat, 55-57; U. Oldenburg, The Conflict between El and Ba‘al in Canaanite Religion (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1969), 101-163; Ashley, The “Epic of Aqht,” 291; Patrick D. Miller, The Divine Warrior in Early Israel (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973), 48; Margalit, UPA, 320-321; M. C. A. Korpel, “Exegesis in the Work of Ilimilku of Ugarit,” in Intertextuality in Ugarit and Israel (ed. J. C. de Moor; Leiden: Brill, 1998), 108-110. Those who take the second view include C. E. L ’Heureux, Rank Among the Canaanite Gods (HSM 21, Missoula, Mo.: Scholars Press, 1979), 4, 5, 12; Frank M. Cross, “The ‘Olden Gods’ in Ancient Myths,” in Magnalia Dei: The Mighty Acts of God: Essays on the Bible and Archaeology in Memory of G. Earnest Wright (ed. F. M. Cross, W. E. Lemke, P. D. Miller; Garden City New York: Doubleday, 1976), 331; Theodore E. Mullen, The Assembly of the Gods: The Divine Council in Canaanite and Early Hebrew Literature (HSM 24; Calif.: Scholars Press, 1980), 45, 84; J. C. L. Gibson, “The Theology of the Ugaritic Baal Cycle,” Or 53 (1984), 207, 209.

53

54

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

El’s association with violence elsewhere in the Ugaritic texts. Then we will investigate the author’s characterization of Baal, how he uses Baal’s reactions after Anat’s violence to portray the latter’s violence, and then we will explore Baal’s association with violence in other Ugaritic texts. The conclusion will compare and contrast El and Baal’s points of view and their effect upon the implied audience of the story.2

EL The Characterization of El in the Story of Aqhat The author’s point of view is bound up with the characters in the story. How he portrays the characters influences his implied audience’s perception of the story. Using Berlin’s character types, El is a type who displays limited and stereotyped traits. He does not show a broad range of character traits or a full spectrum of emotions and attitudes. El first appears in the story as someone who responds to Baal’s intercession for Dan’il to have a son.3 Then he appears in the scene when Anat appeals to him to grant her wishes.4 In both accounts, El is not an initiator of action but a responder. He does not show emotion and remains aloof and passive. His dominant character trait is his father-like calmness. He responds to his children’s needs, both in granting life and taking it away. The author presents El as a deity of authority but also casts doubt on his authority. On the one hand, El holds the ultimate authority. For example, Baal needs to ask El to grant Dan’il a son.5 Anat needs to obtain El’s permission in order to exact vengeance on Aqhat.6 In these two texts, El appears to be both the life-giver and the life-taker. El’s authority is also reflected by his epithets. His epithet “Creator of Creatures” (bny bnwt) (KTU 1.17 I: 23) points to El’s creatorship. The epithet the “King” (mlk) (KTU 1.17 VI:49) reflects his kingship. The epithet “The Kind One, El the GoodNatured” (lṭpn ’il dpid) (KTU 1.18 I:15) characterizes the attitude and the experience of humankind in its relation to El. He seems to be in control of 2

A shorter version of this chapter entitled “Ethical Disparity of El and Baal in the Story of Aqhat” in the Ugaritic Studies and Northwest Semitic Epigraphy section, Annual Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature, Philadelphia, Penn., November, 21st, 2005. 3 KTU 1.17 I:34-48. 4 KTU 1.18 I:15-19. 5 KTU 1.17 I:15-33. 6 KTU 1.17 VI:46-55.

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I)

55

the game and reserves the right to have the final say. In this respect, El’s point of view seems to serve as the normative point of view of the story. On the other hand, the author presents El’s authority in an ambiguous manner. This is reflected in Anat’s appeal to El. As a subordinate deity to El, Anat uses violent threats to exact the latter’s permission and suceeds.7 Her attitude toward El seems to raise questions about the nature of El’s authority. When El gives in to Anat’s threat, is it calmness or rather impotence? This ambiguity in the characterization of El’s authority reveals the author’s ideological point of view: El’s authority is questionable. This ambiguity leaves his audience with a sense of perplexity about whether or not to take El’s point of view as the normative point of view of the story. In investigating El’s point of view of Anat’s violence, we will apply the five levels of point of view set forth in our methodology section whenever possible: perception, conception, interest, emotion, and contextualization. The Perceptual Point of View The author reveals El’s perception of Anat’s violence through his direct speech to Anat. Below is the encounter between El and Anat. The Encounter Between El and Anat. After Anat offers Aqhat riches and immortality in order to possess the bow, Aqhat bluntly refuses. He then adds a statement of afterthought insulting Anat for her gender.8 At this point, the text tells us that Anat begins to plot evil against Aqhat. 9 However, she does not kill Aqhat immediately. Instead, Anat sets her face toward El’s abode to obtain his permission to kill. Below is Anat’s speech to El. Anat Went to El (KTU 1.17 VI: 46-54)10 (46)’idk (47) [l ttn . p]nm . ‘m .’il

.mbr11

. nhrm

(46) Then (47) [she set her f]ace toward El at the source of rivers,

KTU 1.18 I:1-14. KTU 1.17 VI: 16-41. 9 KTU 1.17 VI: 41-42 10 Unless otherwise indicated, the transcriptions in this study are taken from Manfried Dietrich, et al, The Cuneiform Alphabetic Texts from Ugarit, Ras Ibn Hani and Other Places (KTU) (Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1995), 47-62. Unless otherwise indicated, the English translation in this study is my own. 11 KTU reads mbr. Based on the parallel passage in KTU 1.4 IV:20, I take the word as mbk. Parker and Wyatt also correct to mbk. See Parker, UNP, 62; Wyatt, RTU, 277, n. 122. 7 8

56

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

(48) [qrb . ’ap]q .

(48) [in the midst of the strea]ms of the

thmtm . tgly . Äd ’il

two deeps. She went in to the territory of El,

(49) [w tbu . q]rš .

(49) [and she came to the d]welling of

mlk . ’ab šnm

the King, the Father of Years.

(50) [l p‘n . ’il . t]hbr . w tql .

(50) [At the feet of El she]bowed and fell.

tštḥ (51) [wy . w tkbd]nh .

She prostrated her (51)[self and honored] him.

tlšn . ’aqht . Çzr

She denounced Aqhat the hero,

(52) [tqll . kdd . dn]’il . mt . rp’i .

52) [Cursed(?)the child of Dan]’il, man of Rapi’u.

w t‘n (53) [btlt . ‘nt .

And (53) [Maiden Anat] spoke,

tšu . ]gh . w tṣḥ . hwt

[she lifted up] her voice and she cried: “

(54) [xxxxxxxxxxxx] .

(54) [

’aqht . yšm[Æ]

Aqhat rejoi[ced]

]

Anat, being a goddess herself, has the divine power to harm Aqhat, a human being. Yet, she first seeks the permission of El, before taking her vengeance. This fact suggests El’s supremacy in the Ugaritic pantheon. Anat would not have killed Aqhat without El’s consent. Her gesture of bowing down and prostrating herself to El further reinforces El’s exalted position and reveals the fact that Anat is subservient to El in status. The gap, unfortunately, interrupts the content of Anat’s speech. Based on the context of the story, it is highly probable that the gap contains Anat’s report of Aqhat’s offense and El’s first response to Anat since El’s second response comes later in KTU 1.18 I: 15-19. El’s first response may have included his reaction to Anat’s speech. This may have been of amusement at Anat’s speech since when the text resumes, it describes Anat’s response to El’s (first) speech, “do not rejoice...” Anat Replied to El (KTU 1.18 I: 6-14)

(6) [xxxxxx] .w t‘n . [xxxxxxxx]

And (16) [maiden Anat] replied:

(7)[xxxxxx]tk.y’ilm[. xxxxxxxx]

“(17) [ ] your [ ], El (or gods),

(8)[xxxxxx] ’al .tš[mÆ.xxxxxxx]

(8) [ ] do not re[joice ]

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I)

57

(9)[xxxxx]’aÆdm .[xxxxxxxxxx]

(9) [ ]

(10)[xxxx. b] gdlt . ’ar[kty . xxxxx]

(10) [ by] the strength of [my long arm],

(11)[xl qdq]dk . ’ašhlk [. šbtk .dmm]

(11) Your [skull], I shall make run [with blood]

(12) šb[t . dq]nk . mm‘m .

(12) The gr[ey hair of] your [be]ard with gore. 12

w[ xxxxxxx] (13)’aqht.w yplṭk .

And (13) let Aqhat [ ],

bn[ dn’il . xxxx]

son of [Dan’il] to deliver you,

(14) w y‘Ärk .

(14) And let him help you from the

b yd .btlt . [‘nt . xxx]

] I shall seize them [

hand of maiden [Anat].”

Due to the damaged condition of the tablet, it is impossible to restore every single letter in Anat’s speech to El. We, however, can infer the main idea of Anat’s speech in this text based on the parallel speech in the Baal Cycle (KTU 1.3 V:19-25) where Anat threatens El with violence unless he builds a house for Baal. We can observe the similarity of the language by the juxtaposition of the two texts.13 The only major difference between the two texts is in 1.18 I:13-14 where Anat asks El to seek help from Aqhat, a human being. The Baal Cycle (KTU 1.3 V:19-25)

(19) w t‘n . btlt . ‘n[t . bnt .]

Aqhat (KTU 1.18 I:6-14)

(6) [xxxxxx]. w t‘n . [xxxxxxxx]

bht (20) k . y’ilm . bnt [.] bh[t]k .

(7)[xxxxxx]tk. y ’ilm [. xxxxxxxx]

’a[l . t]šmÆ

(8) [xxxxxx]’al . tš[mÆ .

(21) ’al . tšmÆ . b rm [. h]kl[k]

xxxxxxxxx]

(22) ’al . ’aÆdhm . b ymny .

(9) [xxxxx]’aÆdhm.[xxxxxxxxxx]

x[xx]xx (23) b gdlt . ’arkty .

(10) [xxxx . b] gdlt . ’ar[kty .

12 The commentators restore these opening lines of the column on the basis of KTU 1.3 V: 20-25. For example, Gibson, CML, 110; de Moor, ARTU, 241; Parker, UNP, 63, and Wyatt, RTU, 278. 13 Silimar languages are in bold print.

58

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

’amÆ [ṣ xxx] (24) qdqdk .

xxxxx] (11) [x l qdq]dk .

’ašhlk . šbtk [. dmm]

’ašhlk [. šbtk . dmm]

(25) šbt . dqnk . mm‘m [.]

(12) šb[t . dq]nk . mm‘m . w[ xxxxxxx] (13) ’aqht . w yplṭk . bn[ dn’il . xxxx] (14) w y‘drk . byd . btlt . [‘nt .xxx]

In both incidents, Anat threatens to attack El with violence if El does not comply with her requests. In both speeches, Anat employs violent words to El - “I shall seize...” (’aÆd...), “I shall smash ... your skull” (’amÆṣ... qdqdk), “I shall make your beard run with blood” (’ašhlk šbtk dmm). Being a goddess of war, Anat means what she says and El knows that very well. El’s refrain from confronting Anat with violence or punishing her for her irreverence shows that he is either afraid to do so or incapable of doing so. In speaking of using actions as an indirect way to shape a literary character, Bar-Efrat indicates that, “the failure to act sometimes results from a deliberate decision to refrain from action and sometimes from weakness and passivity.”14 In either case, the audience finds room to question El’s authority as the supreme god of the pantheon.15 El’s reply to Anat does not draw attention to Anat’s violent words but acknowledges that he knows her character. Then El gives Anat permission to do what she wishes. El Replied to Anat (KTU 1.18 I: 15-19)

(15) w y‘n . l¨pn .

(15) Then the Kind One,

’il d p[id]

El the Good-Natured, replied,

(16) yd‘tk . bt .

(16) “I know you, daughter,

k ’anšt16 .w i[n . b ’ilht

that you are like a man, and [among goddesses]

14

82.

Shimon Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art in the Bible (Sheffield: Almond Press, 1989),

Longman, written communication. Other translations include Coogan, “gentle,” in Stories from Ancient Canaan, 38; Walls, “impetuous,” in The Goddess Anat, 192; Parker “desperate,” in UNP, 63; Wyatt “pitiless,” in RTU, 278; Daniel Sivan, “meek,” in A Grammar of the Ugaritic Language (Leiden, New York, Koln: Brill, 1997), 114. These renderings seem to contradict Anat’s nature as a violent goddess. The word in the G stem means “to 15 16

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I)

59

(17) qlṣk .

there is no (17) contempt like yours.

tb‘ . bt . Ænp . lb[k .

Go, daughter, haughty of your [heart.

’aši . ’a] (18) Æd . d ’i¨ . b kbdk .

(18) Sei]ze what is in your liver,

tšt . d[ i¨ b] (19) ’irtk .

take w[hat is in] (19) your breast.

d¨ . yd¨ . m‘qbk

Whoever resists you will surely be crushed.”

In both accounts, El claims that he knows his daughter, that she is like a man and that no contempt is like hers.17 The apparent difference between the two accounts is in El’s decision. In the Baal Cycle, El refuses to grant Anat’s desire to have a house built for Baal. In the Story of Aqhat, El gives Anat complete freedom to do what is in her heart. El’s responses to Anat in both texts point to his absolute freedom in exercising his authority. In this sense, the decision of El in the Baal Cycle supports the notion of El’s supremacy and the refrain from action in the Story of Aqhat suggests El’s questionable authority.18 El’s Permission. El’s permission to Anat serves as a window into his perception of Anat’s violence. In El’s speech to Anat, the word “go (tb‘)” (line 17) is in the imperative form. The verbs “seize and take (tÆd and tšt)” also carry the same imperatival force since they follow after the initial be like a man.” In the D stem, the word means “to be familiar” or “to be meek.” The Akkadian equivalence is enēšu “to become weak,” in the context of physical weakness, CAD, E, 166. The Hebrew cognate is ‫”אנוּשׁ‬unhealthy” or “weak,” BDB, 60. The word occurs 6 times in the Ugaritic texts. Only in one occurrence (KTU 1.169:15) does the word mean “man.” In other occurrences (KTU 1.6 V:21; 1.15 V:27; 1.16 VI:36, 51), the word connotes different meanings including “furious” (KTU 1.6 V:21) and “company” (KTU 1.16 VI:36, 51). If El intended the meaning to be “you are like a man,” this may indicate Anat’s warrior-like nature. See Manfried Dietrich and Osward Loretz, Word-List of the Cuneiform Alphabetic Texts from Ugarit, Ras Ibn Hani and Other Places (KTU: Second, enlarged edition) (Munster: UgaritVerlag, 1996), 10. For a survey of the uses of ’anšt, see M. Dietrich and O. Loretz, “ANŠ(T) Und (MIN¤T) im Ugaritischen,” UF 9 (1977): 47-50. 17 For the ambiguity in Anat’s gender, see Walls, The Goddess, 112-15159; Day, “Why is Anat,” 141-146. 18 Korpel’s study shows that Ilimilku wrote the Baal Cycle before he wrote the Story of Aqhat. Based on the internal evidence provided in these texts, El’s supremacy goes downhill in the Story of Aqhat. His refrain from action serves as one of the indications of El’s decline in authority. See Korpel, “Exegesis in the Work,” 103-109.

60

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

imperative. The context suggests that El’s use of the imperatives expresses permission.19 As Wyatt maintains, El merely concedes Anat’s autonomy.20 This is not exactly the same as giving Anat the specific order to kill.21 Indeed, there is a fine distinction between El’s command and El’s permission. If El commands Anat to kill, then he is the one who initiates the thought of killing. On the contrary, if El permits Anat to kill, Anat is the one who initiates the thought and El merely plays the role of giving consent. On the one hand, El’s permission for Anat to kill softens the image of El as a violent god more than effectively in the case of El commanding Anat to kill. On the other hand, the difference between El’s permission and El’s command is marginal because their results are the same – the death of Aqhat. As the supreme god in the pantheon, El’s permission equals to his command. Like a king, “to speak is to command.” 22 Though technically speaking, El does not issue a specific command, in essence, he does. His permission equals his authorization. By his consent, Anat obtains the license to kill. Thus, El’s permission provides a legitimate framework for Anat’s violence. Anat’s threats force El to give in to her. Thus, both Anat and El are responsible for the death of Aqhat. We may compare El’s permission for Anat to kill with king Ahasuerus’s permission for Haman to kill (Esther 3:11). After Haman proposes to king Ahasuerus to exterminate the Jewish race, king Ahasuerus gives Haman the permission to do what he sees fit. Though Ahasuerus is not directly involved in the annihilation of the Jews, his permission makes him culpable for the violence done to the Jews.

19 E. Kautzsch ed. Gesenuis’ Hebrew Grammar (2nd ed; trans. A .E. Cowley; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910), 324b; Bruce K. Waltke and M. O’Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1990), 571-573. This use of the imperative also appears in 2 Sam 18:23, 2 Kgs 2:17, and Isa 21:12. In 2 Sam 18:23, Ahimaaz said to Joab, “I am going to run anyway.” Joab replied, “Then run (impv.).” In 2 Kgs 2:17, the disciples of the prophets at Jericho pressed Elisha for a long time until he said, “’Send them’ (impv.), so they sent ...” In Isa 21:12, the watchman replied, “Morning came, and so did night. If you would inquire, inquire (impv.). Come back again.” 20 Wyatt, RTU, 279, n. 129. 21 Compare this non-specific “instruction” with El’s specific instruction to king Kirtu about how to acquire a wife and El’s instruction to Yamm to attack Baal. 22 George E. Mendenhall, Law and Covenant in Israel and the Ancient Near East (Pittsburgh: The Presbyterian Board of Colportage of Western Pennsylvania, 1955), 31.

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I)

61

Understanding the nature of El’s permission is the key to understand his perception of Anat’s violence against Aqhat. By granting Anat his permission, El takes Anat’s point of view regarding the encounter with Aqhat since he is unable to perceive the event from Aqhat’s point of view. Inferring from the context, El perceives Anat’s request as a case of an offended deity seeking vengeance from a human offender. El’s granting of permission is also directly linked to El’s concept of divine-human order. The Conceptual Point of View A concept is the character’s worldview, attitudes, or ideology regarding an event. The author reveals El’s concept of divine-human order through his speech. After El’s permission, Anat is free to do good to Aqhat or to harm him. Knowing Anat’s character, El apparently anticipates the latter. At the end of his speech, El declares: “To resist you is surely to be crushed” (d¨ . yd¨ . m‘qbk).23 The personal pronoun “you” is in the second person feminine singular form (“k”) indicating the intended referent is Anat. 24 This phrase occurs only here among all the surviving Ugaritic texts. 25 El’s point of view on Anat’s violence hinges on the meaning of this phrase. The word “crush” (d¨) comes from the root d¨¨. 26 The word d¨, “thresh,” or “crush,” or “trample,” functions as an agricultural metaphor of total annihilation.27 The Akkadian writers also use the word “dâšu” (trample) in the same sense as the Akkadian literature.28 The Hebrew uses the word “‫( ”דושׁ‬thresh) to denote acts of destruction and annihilation. 29 We KTU 1.18 I: 19, emphasis mine. The “k” cannot refer to the second person masculine singular form since the context indicates Anat as the reference of the personal pronoun. The second person feminine plural form is “kn” and the second person masculine plural form is “km.” 25 See Richard E. Whitaker, A Concordance of the Ugaritic Literature (Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1972), 190; Dietrich and Loretz, Word-List, 64. 26 Sivan, A Grammar of the Ugaritic, 174. 27 CAD, D, 121. 28 E.g. māssu kīma rīmi adiš, “I trampled down his country like a wild bull;” daiš muštarÆī, “he who crushes the haughty.” CAD, D, 121. Caquot and Sznycer think that this word corresponds to Arabic da¨¨a “to crush.” See TO I, 436, n. f. Margalit adds that the infinitive absolute is not by chance. The author intends to invoke an association with mtm ’amt, “the death of all I shall die” in KTU 1.17 VI: 38. See Margalit, UPA, 322, n. 6. 29 E.g. “I will thresh your bodies upon desert thorns and briers,” (Judg 8:7), 23 24

62

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

may paraphrase El’s statement this way: “to resist you (Anat) is surely to die a violent death.” Since the phrase “to resist you is surely to be crushed” occurs only once in the Ugaritic texts, its precise meaning is obscure to us. The phrase may carry at least three levels of meanings: 1. El refers to Aqhat’s rebellion against Anat. Since Aqhat resists Anat, he is surely to die a violent death; 2. The phrase refers to El’s response to Anat. If El resists Anat’s request, El will be crushed; 3. The phrase refers to both of the above. It is a general reference to anyone who resists Anat including both Aqhat and El: whoever resists Anat will die, both human and divine. The phrase itself indicates El’s comment on Anat’s nature. It not only reflects El’s perception of Anat’s violence and his concept of the divinehuman order but also offers the reason why El permits Anat to do violence. If the first meaning is what El intended, then El thinks that Aqhat deserves to die because he rebels against Anat. For El, a human being like Aqhat cannot challenge a deity. The statement “to resist you is surely to be crushed” therefore reflects El’s perception of the divine-human order in the universe.30 The statement points to the place of Aqhat in the larger drama of the world. Humanity is vulnerable and in subjection to the gods. In this sense, by putting Aqhat’s life at Anat’s disposal, El decrees Aqhat’s death. If this is the case, this decree seems to counter El’s initial decree for Aqhat’s birth. It also seems to contradict Baal’s intercession and the birth goddess Katharat’s work in bringing about the birth of Aqhat. El’s relationship to human beings reveals that El is a benevolent god.31 Why would El want to “undo” his decree? “Up and thresh, Fair Zion!” (Mic 4:13), “You tread the earth in rage, you trample nations in fury,” (Hab 3:12). 30 This is not the same as saying that El allowed basic rules of morality to be suspended in order to fulfill Anat’s whims as Handy maintains. For El, the basic rule of morality is, “to resist Anat is to die,” not, “you shall not kill.” See Handy, Among the Host, 125. 31 Three epithets of El bear witness of El’s relationship with human beings. The first one is “Father of Humankind (’ab ’adm) (KTU 1.14 I: 37, 43; III: 32, 47; V: 43; VI: 13, 32). This epithet reveals that El is the creator of human beings. The second epithet “Creator of Creatures (bny bnwt) (KTU 1.17 I: 23) also points to El’s creatorship. The third epithet “The Kind One, El the Good-Natured (lṭpn ’il dpid) (KTU 1.4 IV: 58; 1.6 III: 4; 1.15 II: 14; V: 26; 1.16 IV: 9; V: 10, 23; 1.18 I: 15)” characterizes the attitude and the experience of humankind in its relation to El.

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I)

63

This seeming contradiction between divine favor and divine retribution reveals El’s supremacy in the Ugaritic pantheon. El has the power to decide on birth, so too he has the power to decree death.32 El indeed is the one who controls the game board of the divine and human realms. Other examples of deity as a giver and taker of life include Genesis 22 and Job 1:21. In Gen 14:4, Yahweh promises Abraham a son. However, in Gen 22, Yahweh asks Abraham to offer this very son, Isaac, as a burnt offering. Yahweh has the power to grant life and so he has the power to take it away. Abraham’s role is to obey. Job knows this concept quite well. When Yahweh causes Job to lose all his children and wealth, Job responds in worship and said:

‫ויּאמר ערם יצתי מבשטן אמי וערם אשׁוב שׁמה‬ ‫יהוה נתן ויהוה לקח יהי שׁם יהוה מברך׃‬ And he said, “Naked I came out from my mother’s womb, and naked shall I return there; YHWH has given, and YHWH has taken away; May the name of YHWH be blessed (Job 1:21).33

In his response, Job acknowledges Yahweh as the one who gives life. Because of that, Yahweh also has the right to take everything back. And the job of Job is to obey. If the second meaning is what El intended, then if El refuses Anat’s request, he will suffer the consequences. In this case, making peace with Anat takes precedence over preserving the life of Aqhat. At this juncture, Aqhat and El stand at opposite ends of the hierarchy. El is the supreme god Regarding El as the creator of mankind, see De Moor, “El, the Creator” in The Bible World: Essays in Honor of Cyrus H. Gordon (ed. G. Rendsburg et al; New York: KTAV Publishing House, 1980), 171-187; W. Herrmann, “El” in DDD, 524-525; Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism, 137. 32 Ackerman thinks that Baal is the one responsible for Aqhat’s birth. The gods have a claim on one’s birth and death. Since Anat and Baal are closely related, Anat has the right to take what Baal has granted. Ackerman’s argument assumes that Baal and Anat’s relationship in the Story of Aqhat is the same as that in the Baal Cycle. Also, she downplays the role of El in the birth episode of Aqhat. Baal serves as the intercessor, but El is the actual life-giver. See Ackerman, Warrior, 197. 33 The Hebrew text is taken from K. Elliger and W. Rudolpg, Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, 5th ed. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1997). Unless otherwise indicated, the English translations of the Hebrew text in this study are my own.

64

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

and Aqhat is a mere mortal.34 Again, the supreme god holds the destiny of the mortal. From El’s point of view, asserting the gods’ superior position is far more important than preserving the lives of human beings, especially a disobedient human being. For El, it is not worth his effort to offend Anat over a human rebel. This also reflects El’s non-omnipotent nature and Anat’s exaltation. He has to weigh the options before he gives permission to Anat. If El was omnipotent, he could have saved Aqhat’s life and at the same time not worried about Anat’s threats. Wyatt thinks that El’s concession to Anat’s autonomy does not reflect a “morally bankrupt theology, but a realistic theology constructed on human experience.”35 This is a valid argument because such a judgment imposes one’s subjective point of view into an ancient mindset. Aqhat himself is well aware of the reality of human life, particularly his mortality, and that he will never become like one of the gods, possessing immortality.36 What Aqhat does not realize is that his death will come the moment he challenges the divine authority. This, too, is an unquestionable reality in the ancient world. In the Gilgamesh Epic, Gilgamesh, along with his friend, Enkidu, challenges the authority of Ishtar by killing the Bull of Heaven. Later, Gilgamesh realizes the deadly consequences of such an act when Enkidu pays with his life.37 Parker summarizes it well “it is the rules of the gods’ world by which the game of life is played.”38 It is by the rule of El that Aqhat pays the price of resistance against Anat. In fact, all of the human players in the mythological texts need to obey the same rules or suffer the deadly consequences. It is possible that El intends the third meaning: whoever resists Anat will surely be crushed including both divine and human beings. Since Anat’s request is to crush Aqhat, it is logical to assume that El permits her to crush Aqhat with violence. However, we cannot exclude the second meaning regarding El himself. El does take Anat seriously by granting her wishes. This may indicate that El does not want to offend Anat over a human being. When taking El’s concept of the divine-human order into consideration, his permission for Anat to kill serves as a means to punish Aqhat and to assert

Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 126. Wyatt, RTU, 279, n. 129; 409, n. 30. 36 KTU 1.17 VI: 34-38. 37 “The Epic of Gilgamesh” (Stephanie Dalley, Myths from Mesopotamia [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991], 77-90. 38 Parker, UNP, 11. 34 35

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I)

65

her authority as a goddess who is intolerable to rebellion in any way or form. El’s view of Aqhat as someone who resists Anat justifies an otherwise questionable act of killing. Anat’s killing becomes an “authorized punishment” in light of El’s proverbial view of the divine-human order in the universe. The pattern of a male human beings’ refusal to show proper respect to a goddess and the goddess’ subsequent punishment of him appears in several ancient Near Eastern texts.39 For instance, in the Gilgamesh Epic, Gilgamesh refuses Ishtar’s proposal and the latter punishes him with the Bull of Heaven. In the Story of Kirtu, king Kirtu fails to fulfill his vow made to Athirat and Athirat causes him to contract a fatal illness. In the Story of Attis, the goddess Cybele kills Attis for his unfaithfulness to her. In light of El’s phrase “To resist Anat is surely to be crushed,” his permission for Anat to kill is consistent with the broader ancient Near Eastern perception of the divine-human relationship.40 This hierarchal relationship between divine and human beings is also reflected in the creation accounts of ancient Mesopotamia.41 In Atrahasis, the gods create human beings to work for them. When the human beings become overpopulated, the gods solve the problem by killing them with a flood.42 In Enuma Elish, the gods create human beings in order to lessen their burdens. The purpose of human lives is to serve the gods’ agenda. In both accounts, human beings are subordinate to the gods since their existence and are disposable. This divine-human order gives no room for human beings to question the deeds of their gods. In the Story of Aqhat, El justifies Anat’s violence against Aqhat because, from his point of view, violence serves as a means to punish a disobedient human being and at the same time to elevate Anat’s authority as a goddess to be feared, including El himself. The Interest Point of View The interest vantage of the characters such as their well-being, profit and loss, and the positive and negative outcomes of their actions reflects the Amico, “The Status of Women,” 466. Morton Smith, “The Common Theology of the Ancient Near East,” JBL 71 (1952): 144. 41 See S.G.F. Brandon, Creation Legends of the Ancient Near East (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1963), 104-8. 42 Tablet VI: 5-8. See “Epic of Creation,” translated by Benjamin R. Foster (COS 1.111:400). 39 40

66

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

story’s evaluation of their actions. From this point of view, El saves himself from Anat’s violent threats by permitting her to do what she desires. El does not suffer from a broken skull by giving in to Anat’s threats. There is an element of self-interest involved in El’s permission. Because of this selfinterest, it undermines the objectivity of El’s permission and raises the question on the mind of the audience: “Does El’s decision really represent the normative point of view of the story?” The Emotional Point of View Since the author portrays El as a type with limited character traits, there is a lack of emotion attributed to him. Based on his conversation with Anat in the story, we do not know whether El is furious or sad or feeling powerless or simply indifferent. This lack of El’s emotional state creates a distance between him and the audience of the story. As we shall observe in chapter six, this emotional distance is associated with El’s status in the Ugaritic mythological texts and the Ugaritians’ general perception of him as a remote and inactive god. The Contextual Point of View: El And Violence in Other Ugaritic Texts The contextual point of view investigates El’s view on violence in texts other than the Story of Aqhat. As we see in the Story of Aqhat, El does not oppose violence. He allows a third party to punish a human rebel through an act of violence. This pattern of El using a third party to do violence also occurs in other Ugaritic texts. For instance, in the Story of Kirtu, El instructs king Kirtu to use force in order to acquire a wife.43 First, king Kirtu has to prepare sufficient food for the army, then they are to march for six days.44 On the seventh day, when they arrive at the kingdom of Udum, king Kirtu is to ask the army to attack (gr) its outlying towns and assault (šrn) the surrounding villages, and to sweep away (š‘t) the men and women who are working in the towns. They are then to stay silent for six days. On the seventh day, king Pabuli will not be able to sleep and he will send messengers to king Kirtu to tell them not to harass the Udumites. Then, king Kirtu will ask for Lady Huraya, the daughter of king Udum, to be his wife.45

KTU 1.14 II:6-50-III:49. KTU 1.14 II:30-III:1-3. 45 KTU 1.14 III:6-49. 43 44

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I)

67

The verbs “to attack” (root gry),46 “to assault” (root šr), and “to sweep” (root š‘t), all connote the idea of force and violence. For El, it is totally acceptable and reasonable to use force or violence as a means to an end. In other words, in his instructions to king Kirtu, El legitimizes the use of force and violence. It is worth noting that in all his instructions to king Kirtu, El himself never directly engages and participates in violence. He leaves this to the other gods and human beings, yet we can still trace the source of this legitimization of violence back to El. In the Baal Cycle, El instructs Yamm to attack Baal.47 El also decrees that Baal will be the slave of Yamm.48 Due to the fragmentary nature of the tablet, we do not have an exact picture of the first conflict between Yamm and Baal. 49 Their battle for supremacy, however, does break out when Kothar wa-Khasis fashions two weapons for Baal to use against Yamm. At the end of their battle, Baal emerges as the victor. Two deities then proclaim Baal’s kingship.50 Here in the battle between Yamm and Baal, El obviously prefers Yamm to Baal, yet El himself never becomes a direct participant in the combat between the two gods, which may show his ineffectiveness as a supreme head of the pantheon. Although not a direct participant, El is one step removed from the conflict between the cosmogonic deities. Two incidents, however, may show El’s non-violent side. They both also appear in the Baal Cycle. When Baal and Mot battle for supremacy, their fighting is fiercely intense. At the point where the battle reaches a stalemate, El intervenes on Baal’s behalf through Shapshu. El declares that Baal is the winner. Baal will remove the throne of Mot and overturn Mot’s kingship. Mot is afraid of the verdict issued by El and then acknowledges Baal as the king and recedes to the background.51 Again, in the battle of

The root for (w)gr is gry meaning “attack.” Wyatt takes the root as gry based on the Akkadian (gerû) and Hebrew (‫ )גרה‬cognates. See Wyatt, RTU, 193, n. 81. In Akkadian, gerû means “to be hostile,” “to make war,” which occurs in the context of hostility and fighting between two parties. See CAD, G, 61. In Hebrew, ‫גרה‬means “to engage in strife,” “wage war.” See BDB, 173. 47 KTU 1.1 III: 24-5. 48 KTU 1.2 II: 36-38. 49 Mark S. Smith, Ugaritic Baal Cycle (UBL), vol 1 (Leiden, New York, Koln: E. J. Brill, 1994), 117-18. 50 KTU 1.2 IV: 7-40. Since other gods assist Baal in attaining supremacy, Baal’s kingship is a limited one. See Smith, UBL, 361. 51 KTU 1.6 VI: 9-32. 46

68

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

supremacy, El is not directly involved in any form of fighting or violence. He even intervenes to stop the battle from going further. Another incident appears when Anat approaches El to grant Baal a palace. She uses violent words “I will seize you, I will smash your crown, I will make your beard run with blood” to threaten El.52 The text reveals that El does not become infuriated nor intimidated by Anat’s violence. 53 El could have responded with violence or at least used violent words to curse or scold Anat. Instead, El responds in calmness and acknowledges that he knows his daughter. Through all her violent threats, El remains non-violent in refusing Anat’s request. This method of dealing with Anat reflects El’s reluctance to do violence.54 This reluctance may be also due to the fact that he is too weak to use violence to respond to Anat’s threats. However, we may not construe El’s reluctance to do violence as reflecting El as a non-violent deity. Although El is seldom a direct participant in violence, at least in two incidents, he directs others to do so. This indirect involvement in violence suggests that El does not want to “get his hands dirty.” He uses intermediaries such as other gods to achieve his ends. This use of a third party to do violence is not uncommon in ancient literature. In the Gilgamesh Epic, neither Anu nor Ishtar fights against Gilgamesh and Enkidu directly. Instead, the Bull of Heaven plays the role of the intermediary. It kills several hundred people before Gilgamesh and Enkidu subdue it.55 In The Descent of Ishtar to the Underworld, Ereshkigal uses her vizier, Namtar as the intermediary to send Ishtar sixty diseases.56 In the Hebrew Bible, David orders his general Joab to put Uriah in the front line of the battle so that Uriah may be struck down and die. 57 Although David is not the direct killer of Uriah, Yahweh and the prophet Nathan think that he is. Therefore when Nathan later confronts David, he specifically points to David as the murderer, “You are the man!” (‫)אתה האישׁ‬.58 In-

KTU 1.3 V: 22-25. KTU 1.3 V: 25-29. 54 El’s consort, Athirat, in the same way, never engages herself in violence directly. She does it with subtlety. Therefore, when king Kirtu fails to pay his vow, Athirat inflicts him with a fatal disease. See KTU 1.15 III: 25-30. 55 See Gilgamesh Epic, Tablet VI: 117-156. 56 “The Descent of Ishtar to the Underworld,” translated by Stephanie Dalley (COS 1.108: 382). 57 2 Sam 11:14-15. 58 2 Sam 12:7. 52 53

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I)

69

terestingly, when Anat attempts to kill Aqhat, she uses an intermediary, Yatpan, to do the work.59 Pope thinks that El is peaceful and non-violent like the Mesopotamian Enki/Ea.60 However, Ea is violent when he kills Apsu in Enuma Elish.61 This view is not tenable in light of the material concerning El we have adduced above. Gibson describes El in this way: El is still very much active, but active in diplomacy rather than in war, in settling disputes rather than in welcoming conflict.62 Such interpretation, however, dissociates the source of violence from the actual act of violence. The epithets of El such as his own name “El” and “Bull” also reflect him as a warrior associated with violence.63 Albright asserts that the name “El” is an adjectival formation from the stem ’wl meaning “the strong powerful one.” The substantive denotes “strength, force, power, might, mana.” If so, this would parallel the meaning of “Bull.”64 The name “Bull” has the meaning of strength, might, and fighting prowess.65 The later identification of El with Yahweh also suggests El’s warrior nature.66 One cannot separate the warrior image from acts of violence. An apparent example occurs in Exodus 15 where Moses and the Israelites praise Yahweh’s military might against the Egyptian army. They praise Yahweh as “Yahweh, man of war” (‫)יהוה איש מלחמה‬. Though El seldom directly engages in violence, he is only one step removed from it like a military general calling shots from safety while the solKTU 1.18 IV: 27-37. Pope, El in the Ugaritic Text, 45. 61 “Epic of Creation,” translated by Benjamin R. Foster (COS 1.111:391). Longman, written communication. 62 Gibson, “The Theology of the Ugaritic Baal Cycle,” 210. Also Caquot and Sznycer, Ugaritic Religion (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1980), 12. 63 Patrick D. Miller, Jr., “El the Warrior,” HTR 60 (1967): 418. Pope has suggested the connotation of “fertility” or “the procreative power” of this word. See Pope, El in the Ugaritic Text, 35-42. As Miller indicates, the word “Bull” has a dual symbolism: fertility and strength, but primarily a symbol of strength since Baal, not El, is the “fertility” god at Ugarit. See Miller, The Divine Warrior, 55. For other epithets of El that reflect his nature as a warrior, see Miller, The Divine Warrior, 54-58. 64 The word can also be an original Semitic noun meaning “chief, god.” See W Herrmann, “El,” in DDD, 274. 65 Miller, “El the Warrior,” 418-9. 66 For instance, the epithets of Yahweh “‫ ”יהוה צבאות‬and “‫ ”אל גבור‬may be El’s epithets that reflect him as a warrior. See Miller, “El,” 425. For a historical study of the theme “Divine Warrior” in the Bible, see Tremper Longman III and Daniel G. Reid, God is a Warrior (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1995). 59 60

70

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

diers engaged in actual combat. Therefore, El is closely associated with violence elsewhere in the Ugaritic text. His permission for Anat to kill is not out of his character.

BAAL The Characterization of Baal in the Story of Aqhat The author’s characterization of Baal is fraught with ambiguity because he describes Baal primarily through “showing” – through indirect shaping of his character, rather than through his direct speech or through his inner thoughts and feelings or through the author’s evaluation of him. This indirect shaping of the character requires a mental effort on the part of the audiences (both the implied audience and the historical audience), thus increasing the active participation in the unfolding events.67 At the beginning of the story, Baal draws near to El in compassion (ḥnt) and intercedes for Dan’il to have a son.68 This is the only explicit revelation of Baal’s emotion or attitude in the extant text. Then he disappears from the scene. When he reappears, it is after the death of Aqhat. At this point of the story, the author records no speech or word nor any emotion or inner thoughts of Baal. Instead, the author describes the diminished condition of nature and the absence of rain.69 Since Baal is the storm god who exercises power over vegetation and rain, the author attributes the effects of Anat’s violence upon nature directly to Baal through his aside given in KTU 1.19 I:46, “no goodness of the voice of Baal” (ṭbn ql b‘l). This absence of direct speech could be a purposeful device of the author to express Baal’s silent protestation against Anat’s violence. The author uses the actions of Baal after the death of Aqhat to present the point of view of Baal regarding Anat’s violence. After Dan’il realizes the death of his son, he asks Baal to break the wings of the birds that have swallowed his son’s remains. Baal does accordingly in silence.70 Although little is revealed concerning Baal’s perception of Anat’s violence, his action after the death of Aqhat speaks directly to the audience of the story. Ryken notes that whenever a storyteller decides to let a character’s action do the talking, he places the burden of interpretation on the audience.71 Because of this room Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art, 64. KTU 1.17 I:15-33. 69 KTU 1.19 I:28-33, 38-46. 70 KTU 1.19 III:1-38. 71 Ryken, How To Read the Bible, 39. 67 68

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I)

71

for interpretation, there leaves room for ambiguity. Is Baal sad? Is he angry with Anat? What does he think of Aqhat’s death? In these portrayals of Baal, there is a development in his characterization. Before Anat’s violence, Baal appears to be a type with limited or stereotypical traits. After Anat’s violence, Baal’s manifold actions make him a full-fledged character. In the following section, we explore Baal’s perception and conception of Anat’s violence through the story’s description of his actions. The Perceptual Point of View72 The author spends one column describing the consequences of Anat’s violence upon nature (KTU 1.19 I:28-46). Since there is no direct speech of Baal about his thoughts and inner feelings of Anat’s violence, these consequences upon nature serve as an indirect reflection of Baal’s perception of Anat’s violence. The author leaves room for the audience to build his or her hypothesis about Baal’s perception of Anat’s violence. Baal Causes Nature to Diminish. Upon perceiving the failure of vegetation and the birds of prey hovering over her father’s house,73 Pughat, the daughter of Dan’il, observes several phenomena occurring in the land. Vegetation Diminished (KTU 1.19 I: 28-37) (28) [bn]ši (29)‘nh .

(28) Upon lifting up (29) her eyes,

w tphn74 [. š‘rm]

and she saw [the barley]

(30) b grn . yÆrb

(30) on (the) threshing floor dried up,

[ . xxxx]75 (31) yÇly .

[

yÆsp . ’ib76 . krmm

shriveled is the fruit of the vine.

] (31) drooped,

An earlier version of this section entitled “How Ethical is Anat and How Do We Know It? A Teleological View at Anat’s Violence in the Story of Aqhat” was presented at the Pacific Coast Region of the SBL. Whittier, Calif., March 22, 2004. 73 KTU 1.19 I: 29-33. 74 From the root PHY, means “to see.” Sivan, A Grammar of the Ugaritic, 99. 75 Margalit (UPA, 132, 158) reconstructs the missing word as “gb‘l” which means “fleece,” followed by Wyatt, RTU, 294. Dijkstra and de Moor think that the “barley” [š‘rm] on the threshing floor dried up. They reason that at the time of the year, when there is still grain on the field, the only crop which could be on the threshing floor is the barley. They also note that a more general term “mrm” (sheaves) is equally possible. See Dijkstra and de Moor, “Problematical Passages,” 200; de Moor, ARTU, 249, n. 170. 72

72

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

In a series of parallel statements, the narrator describes the effects of Anat’s violence upon the land. First of all, the barley on the threshing floor dries up (KTU 1.19 I: 29).77 Then vegetation droops (KTU 1.19 I: 30) and the fruit of the vine shrivels (KTU 1.19 I: 31). In this passage, the three subjects (š‘rm “barley”, [xxxx] on line 30, and yÆsp . ’ib . krmm, “the fruit of the vine”) are synonymously referring to vegetation. The three verbs (yÆrb “dried up,” yÇly “drooped,” and yÆsp “shriveled”) convey the idea that Anat’s violence causes a progressive degradation in the condition of the vegetation. These three verbs form a semantic and conceptual link to the Hebrew word ‫“ אבל‬withered.” In Akkadian, the word “abālu” means “to dry up.” It appears in the context of the drying up of canals, water, fields and vegetation.78 Since ‫ אבל‬is sometimes paired up with ‫“ יבש‬dried up” in the Hebrew Bible, their meanings coalesce. 79 In Hebrew, the words ‫אבל‬, ‫נבל‬, and ‫בלה‬ originate from one common root ‫ בל‬meaning “to diminish.” 80 Thus, nature diminishes as a result of a misdeed. In the Hebrew Bible, the word ‫ אבל‬often occurs in the context of the withering of nature due to the wickedness of the inhabitants of the land such as someone’s commitments of a murder or adultery.81 Rarely does the 76 Gordon thinks that the word ’ib perhaps is derived from the common noun ’ibb- “fruit.” See Cyrus Gordon, Ugaritic Textbook (Analecta Orientalia 38; Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1965) (UT), 348. 77 The descriptions in this passage seem to take place around May, when the rains have ended and dew becomes a source of water for certain plants. The cool nights and moist air lead to the deposit of dew on the threshing floor. See J. C. De Moor, The Seasonal Pattern in the Ugaritic Myth of Ba‘lu According to the Version of Ilimilku (AOAT 16; Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1971), 99. See also Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 160, where he compares this incident with that of Judg 6: 36-40. 78 CAD A, 29-30. 79 G. R. Driver, “Confused Hebrew Roots,” in Occident and Orient: Being Studies in Semitic Philology and Literature, Jewish History and Philosophy and Folklore in the Widest Sense in Honour of Haham De. M. Gaster’s 80th Birthday (Edted by Bruno Schindler and A. Marmorstein; London: W. C. L., 1936), 73, 75. 80 Ernst Kutsch, “‘Trauerbrauche’ und ‘Selbstminderungsriten’ im Alten Testament,” in Drei Wiener Antrittsreden (Edited by Kurt Luthi et al; ThSt 78, Zuruch: EVZ-Verlag, 1965), 36. The German word for “to diminish” is vermindern. For the meaning of these two words in Amos 1:2, see Shalom M. Paul, Amos: A Commentary on the Book of Amos (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991), 40, n. 65. 81 For instance, Isa 24:4, 33:9; Jer 12:4, 23:10; Hos 4:3; Amos 4:7.

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I)

73

word indicate the mourning for a dead person.82 Assuming that the Ugaritian shares similar culture, language, and thought world with the Hebrews, the suffering of nature in the Story of Aqhat can be seen as a reflection of an unjust murder, not as mourning for the death of Aqhat.83 The motif of the effect of a misdeed as exemplified by the suffering of nature is well-known in ancient Near Eastern literature.84 For instance, in the Baal Cycle, after the death of Baal, there is the absence of rain as implied by El’s speech (KTU 1.6 III: 1-9). The first forty lines are missing in this column. Based on the remaining portion of El’s speech, the missing lines include El’s reading of nature: If the rains have not returned, it indicates that Baal is dead. The following lines record the alternative possibility that if the rains return, then Baal is alive. Nature Diminished after Baal’s Death (KTU 1.6 III:2-9)

(2) w hm . ḥy . ’a[liyn . b‘l]

(2) But if Mi[ghtest Baal] lives,

(3) w hm . ’i¨ . zbl . b‘[l .’arṣ]

(3) and if the Prince, Lo[rd of the Earth] exists,

(4) b ḥlm . l¨pn . ’il . d pid

(4) in the dream of the Kind One, El, the Good-Natured,

(5) b Ärt . bny . bnwt

(5) in the vision of the Creator of Creatures,

(6) šmm . šmn . tmṭrn

(6) let the heavens rain oil,

(7) nÆlm .tlk . nbtm

(7) let the wadis run with honey.

(8) w ’id‘ . k ḥy . ’aliyn. b‘l

(8) And I will know that Mightiest Baal lives,

(9) k ’i¨ . zbl . b‘l . ’arṣ

(9) the Prince, Lord of the Earth exists.

82 2 Sam 21:1-2 is a rare occurrence of land mourning for the death of a person in the Hebrew Bible. 83 Additionally, the context of Aqhat does not suggest a judgment motif as in the Hebrew Bible. The words ‫ אבל‬and ‫ יבשׁ‬in the Hebrew Bible carry the force of judgment. In Amos 1:2, it reads: “Yahweh roars from Zion, and from Jerusalem, he utters his voice. And the pastures of the shepherds wither (‫)אבל‬, And the top of Camel dries up (‫)יבש‬.” Other passages which indicate a judgment context include Isa 15:6, 19:7, 27:11; Jer 4:28; Joel 1:10-12. 84 Gibson and Walls also interpret the failure of vegetation following Aqhat’s death as belonging to unjust murder and blood revenge. Gibson, “Myth,” 66. Walls, The Goddess Anat, 206.

74

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

El then asks Shapshu through Anat to search the wells of the field since they are parched (KTU 1.6 IV: 1-5). Anat begins, Drought Appeared after Baal’s Death (KTU 1.6 IV:1-5)

(1) pl 85. ‘nt . šdm . y špš

(1) Search the wells of the fields, O Shapshu,

(2) pl . ‘nt . šdm [.] ’il .

(2) Search the wells of the fields.

yštk (3) b‘l . ‘nt . mḥr¨t

(3) Baal has stopped the wells of the ploughed land.

(4) ’iy .’aliyn . b‘l

(4) Where is Mightiest Baal?

(5) ’iy . zbl . b‘l . ’arṣ

(5) Where is the Prince, Lord of the Earth?”

(6) ttb‘ . btlt . ‘nt

(6) Maiden Anat departed.

(7) ’idk . l ttn . pnm

(7) Then she set her face

(8) ‘m . nrt . ’ilm . špš

(8) toward the Luminary of the gods, Shapshu.

(9) tšu . gh . w tṣḥ

(9) She lifted up her voice and she cried,

(10) tḥm . ¨r . ’il . ’abk

(10) “Word of Bull El, your Father,

(11) hwt . lṭpn . ḥtkk

(11) decree of the Kind One, your Begetter:

(12) pl . ‘nt . šdm . y špš

(12) ‘Search the wells of the fields, O Shapshu,

(13) pl . ‘nt . šdm . ’il [.]

(13) Search the wells of the fields of El.

yštk (14) b‘l . ‘nt . mḥr¨th

(14) Baal has stopped the wells of the ploughed land.

(15) ’iy . ’aliyn . b‘l

(15) Where is Mightiest Baal?

(16) ’iy . zbl . b‘l . ’arṣ

(16) Where is the Prince, Lord of the Earth?’

In the Story of Kirtu, King Kirtu contracts a fatal illness because he fails to fulfill his vow to the goddess, Athirat. As a result, his illness leads to

85 I am following Wyatt’s understanding of the root ply or plh “to search” because the word “search” echoes Shapshu’s word in line 20, “I will search...” See Wyatt, RTU, 137 n. 91.

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I)

75

a drought in the land.86 In KTU 1.16 III: 1-16, after king Kirtu is sick, an individual addresses another individual (possibly El addresses another god) to investigate the extent of the drought: Famine Appeared after Kirtu’s Illness (KTU 1.16 III:1-16)

(1) yṣq . šmn . b ṣ‘ . w y

(1) He pours oil in a bowl and he (said):

(2) ‘n . tr . ’arṣ . w šmn

(2) “Look, explore earth and heaven,

(3) sb . l qṣm . ’arṣ

(3) travel to the ends of the earth,

(4) l ksm . mhyt .

(4) to the edge of mhyt.

‘n (5) l ’arṣ . mṭr . b‘l

Look (5) to the earth for the rain of Baal,

(6) w l šd . mṭr . ‘ly

(6) and to the field for the rain of the Most High.

(7) n‘m . l ’arṣ . mṭr . b‘l

(7) Pleasant to the earth (is) the rain of Baal,

(8) w l šd mṭr . ‘ly

(8) and to the field (is) the rain of the Most High.

(9) n‘m . l ḥṭt . b‘n

(9) Pleasant to the wheat in the furrow,

(10) bm . nrt . k smm

(10) (to) the emmer in the ploughed field,

(11) ‘l . tlm k . ‘ṭrṭrt

(11) to the tlmk on the ridge.

(12) nšu . riš . ḥr¨m

(12) The plowmen raised their heads,

(13) l `r . ‘bd . dgn .

(13) up towards the Servant of Dagon.

kly (14) lḥm . b ‘dnhm .

(14) “The food is spent from its storage,

kly (15) yn . b ḥmthm .

(15) the wine is spent from its wineskins,

k[l]y (16) šmn . b q[b‘thm]

(16) the oil is spent from its c[asks].”

In Genesis 4: 1-12, after Cain kills his brother, Abel, Yahweh says to Cain, ‫ואמר מה עשׂית דמי אשחיך צעקים אלי מן־האדמה׃‬ ‫ועתה ארור איה מן־האדמה אשׁר פציה את־פיה לקחת‬ ‫את־דמי אחיך מידך׃ כי תעבד את־האדמה לא־תסף תת‬ ‫כּחה לך נע ונד תהיה בארץ׃‬ 86

See KTU 1.16 III: 1-16.

76

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT And he (God) said, “What have you done? The voice of the blood of your brother is crying out to me from the ground. And now, you are cursed from the ground, which has opened its mouth to take the blood of your brother from your hand. When you cultivate the ground, it will not yield its strength To you, you will be a fugitive and a wanderer in the land.”

Another example is in 2 Samuel 21:1-2 where Israel suffers a famine because of Saul’s murder of the Gibeonites. ׁ

‫ויהי רעב בימי דוד שׁלשׁ שׁנים שׁנה אחרי שׁנה ויבקש‬

‫דוד את־פני יהוה ס ויאמר יהוה אלֹ־שׁאול ואל־בית הדמים‬ ‫על־אשׁר־המית את־הגבענים׃‬ And there was a famine in the days of David (for) three years, year after year. Then David sought the face of YHWH and YHWH said, “(It is) to Saul and to his bloody house, because He put the Gibeonites to death.”87

On the other hand, a good and righteous reign brings fertility to the land. In the Prologue of the Code of Hammurabi, Hammurabi introduces himself as a good and righteous king who heaps high abundance and plenty and perfects every possible thing for the city of Nippur; who revitalizes the city of Uruk and provides abundant waters for its people; who enlarges the cultivated area of the city of Dilbat.88 In the Baal Cycle, after Baal revives from his death, El dreams “the heavens rain oil, the wadis run with honey.”89 The opposite is true. In the Erra Epic, Erra, the god of plague and lord of the underworld challenges Marduk’s reign and causes a reversal for the city of Babylon from its supremacy to its ruin (Tablet IV: 40-42). The text reads: Woe to Babylon, which I made as lofty as a date-palm’s crown, but the wind shriveled it.

See also Jer 12:4. See “The Laws of Hammurabi,” translated by Martha Roth (COS 2.131:336). 89 KTU 1.6 III: 6-7. 87 88

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I)

77

Woe to Babylon, which I filled with seeds like a Pine-cone, but whose abundance I did not bring to fruition. Woe to Babylon, which I planted like a luxuriant orchard, but never tasted its fruit.90

The difference in the consequences of a misdeed and a good deed is also reflected in the covenantal curses and blessings in Deut 28. Some examples of the blessings of adhering to Yahweh’s commandments include: the produce of the ground will be blessed (28:4), and the heavens will give rain to the land in its season (28:12). The curses of disobedience to God’s commandments include: the produce of the ground will be cursed (28:18), Yahweh will make the rain of the land powder and dust (28:24), and an unknown people will eat up the produce of the ground (28:33). Thus, the misdeeds or good deeds of deities and human beings have direct bearings on the condition of nature. Since Baal is in control of nature, the drying up of the vegetation reveals Baal’s protestation against Anat’s violence. Baal Withholds Rain. The author attributes the lack of rain to the absence of Baal. In so doing, he connects the suffering of nature to Baal. This is an “aside” he provides to the audience. The author writes, Drought Appeared (KTU 1.19 I. 44-46)

(44) bl . ṭl . bl rbb

(44) No dew, no rain,

(45) bl . šr‘. thmtm .

(45) no surging of the deeps,

bl (46)

ṭbn91

. ql . b‘l .

no (46) goodness of the voice of Baal.

In each line, bl (“no” or “without”) introduces the subsequent phrases. The effect of Anat’s violence results in a progressive absence of water: no dew (soft dropping of water), to no rain, to no surging of the deep (flood), to no thunder.92 This absence of water in turn results in a cracked and dried up earth.93 This indicates that a drought has come upon the land – a sure negative effect on nature.94 “Erra and Ishum,” translated by Stephanie Dalley (COS 1.113: 412-413). The word comes from ṭb, “good.” 92 Dr. Hunt, verbal communication. 93 KTU 1.19 II: 19-20. 94 This is true even if not a seasonal pattern as de Moor suggested. De Moor suggests a seasonal relationship that this untimely drought takes place in late spring when the sirocco, an extremely dry and hot desert wind, threatens to destroy the 90 91

78

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

From the author’s aside, he provides hints to the audience that Baal is behind the vegetation and the drought problem. This diminishing of nature points to Baal’s disapproval of Anat’s violence. The audience, however, remains ignorant of Baal’s inner thoughts and feelings. Why does Baal disapprove of Anat’s violence? Not only does Baal protest indirectly through causing nature to diminish, he also retaliates directly by helping Dan’il to retrieve the remains of Aqhat. Baal Helps Dan’il to Retrieve Aqhat’s Remains. After realizing the death of his son, Dan’il invokes Baal to break the wings of the birds that might have devoured Aqhat’s remains.95 Baal responds by helping him to recover the remains of Aqhat as described in the following lines.96 Baal Helped Dan’il to Recover Aqhat’s Remains (KTU 1.19 III: 1-14) (1) [gh .]w yṣḥ [.]

(1) [He raised his voice] and he cried:

kn[p. nšrm] (2) b‘l . y¨br

(2) “May Baal break [the wings of the eagles],

b‘l . y¨br [. Äiy . hmt]

may Baal break [the birds’ pinions],

(3) tqln . tḥ p‘ny .

(3) Let them fall under my feet!

’ibq‘ [. ûbdthm . w]

I will tear open [their livers]97 and

(4) ’aḥd. ḥm . ’i¨ . šmt

(4) I will look whether there is any fat,

ḥm . ’i[¨] (5) ‘`m .

whether there is any (5) bone.

’ab[p]ky . w . ’aqbrnh (6) ’ašt . b Ært . ’ilm

.’arṣ98

I will weep and I will bury him. (6) I will place him in the hole of the gods of the earth.”

(7) b ph . rgm . l y[x]ṣa

(7) The words have not left his mouth,

bšpth . hwt[h]

nor his speech his lips,

future crops. De Moor, “The Seasonal Pattern in the Legend of Aqhatu,” SEL 5 (1988): 67; De Moor, The Seasonal Pattern, 175. 95 KTU 1.19 III: 1-39. 96 KTU 1.19 III: 1-45. 97 This could be referring to the stomach or innards. See Wyatt, RTU, 304, n. 238; Pardee, “The ’Aqhatu,” 353. 98 The Ugaritians consider the deceased as deified beings. See Pardee, “The ’Aqhatu,” 353, n. 109.

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I)

79

(8) knp . nšrm . b‘l . y¨br

(8) Baal breaks the wings of the eagles,

(9) b‘l . ¨br . diy hmt .

(9) Baal breaks the birds’ pinions.

tqln (10) tḥt . p‘nh .

They fell (10) under his feet.

ybq‘ . kbdthm . w[yḥd]

He tore open their livers and [he looked]:

(11) ’in . šmt .

(11) There was no fat,

’in . ‘`m .

There was no bone.

yšu . gh (12) w yṣḥ .

He raised his voice (12) and he cried:

knp . nšrm . ybn

“May mend the wings of the eagles,

(13) b‘l . ybn . diy . hmt .

(13) may Baal mend the birds’ pinions.

nšrm (14) tpr . w du .

Let the eagles (14) flee and fly away.”

Lines 7-9, “the words have not left his mouth, nor his speech his lips,” serve as another “aside” or clue provided by the author to Baal’s perception of Anat’s violence. Before Dan’il finishes his imprecation, Baal already breaks the wings of the birds as if he cannot wait until Dan’il finishes his words. This hasty response indirectly reveals to the audience of the story that Baal dislikes Anat’s violence against Aqhat and is in a hurry to remedy the situation. Baal’s actions after the death of Aqhat reflect his perception of Anat’s violence. Rather than siding with his fellow divine beings El and Anat, Baal chooses to side with Dan’il, a human king. Baal’s threefold reaction towards Anat’s violence – causing the infertility of the land, withholding rain, and helping Dan’il to recover the remains of Aqhat, suggest Baal’s disapproval of Anat’s violence against Aqhat. Although the author is reticent in exposing Baal’s inner thoughts on Anat’s violence, elsewhere in ancient literature the diminishing of nature reflects an unjust act. We may presume that this reflection represents the perception of Baal. For Baal, Anat’s violence against Aqhat is unjustified. Therefore, Baal’s silent protestation against Anat’s violence finds its expression in his threefold reaction after the death of Aqhat. Baal’s counter point of view of Anat’s violence forms a stark contrast to El’s permission for Anat to kill. This disparity presents an apparent disharmony in the divine realm. Therefore, it is difficult for the audience of the story to perceive El and Baal as a unit. This disparity leaves the audience in perplexity about the story’s ethical judgment of Anat’s violence. Whose point of view is normative? El’s? Or Baal’s?

80

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

The Interest Point of View Although Baal is a god, his actions prove that he identifies with the human characters more than with his fellow divine beings. Baal’s loyalty to Dan’il before and after the death of Aqhat obviously puts him on the same side with the human characters of the story. From the interest point of view, this identification with the human characters draws the audience closer to Baal. This closeness is in direct contrast to El’s siding with (or yielding to) the divine character Anat and giving in to her threats. Yet, at the same time, Baal’s silence seems to reflect his limited power in altering the situation. He can only protest, but is unable to bring Aqhat back to life. This also reflects the interest point of view that Baal’s point of view may not be the normative point of view of the story. Relationship and Interest. The conflicting points of view between the gods appear also in the Story of Kirtu. In this text, Athirat afflicts king Kirtu with a fatal illness because of his failure to fulfill his vow made to her. 99 El later creates a healer to remove Kirtu’s illness.100 El’s action directly conflicts with Athirat’s intent to punish Kirtu. Why does El want to act against Athirat by showing favor to Kirtu? The relationship between Kirtu and El may provide an answer. Being a king, Kirtu enjoys a special relationship with El. The text describes Kirtu as the “lad of El, (Çlm ’il)”101 and El as Kirtu’s “father (’ab).”102 When Kirtu cries for his lack of progeny, El takes the initiative to come down to Kirtu and inquire into his welfare.103 El not only instructs Kirtu about how to find a wife, but also blesses Kirtu with eight children.104 El functions as a patron or a personal god to Kirtu and often attends Kirtu’s needs. This is a special relationship that causes El to show special favor to Kirtu and to act against his own consort, Athirat. The same question can be applied to Baal. Why does Baal show favor to Dan’il and act contrary to El’s will in the Story of Aqhat? A closer look at the relationship between Baal and Dan’il reveals that Baal is the patron god or the personal god of Dan’il.

KTU 1.15 III: 25-30. KTU 1.16 V: 25-28. 101 E.g. KTU 1.14 I: 41, 9. 102 E.g. KTU 1.4 I: 41, II: 6, IV: 6. 103 KTU 1.14 I: 35-43. 104 KTU 1.14 II: 6 - 1.15 II: 28. 99

100

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I)

81

This relationship is shown in the beginning of the story. The Story of Aqhat begins with Dan’il’s six day sacrifice to the gods. On the seventh day, Baal draws near in compassion and speaks to him: Baal Interceded to El (KTU 1.17 I: 16-33)

(16) ’abyn at (17) [d]n’il . mt . rp’i .

(16)“The misery of (17) Dan’il, man of Rapi’u,

’anÆ . Çzr

the sigh of the hero,

(18) mt . hrnmy .

(18) man of Harnemite.

d ’in.bn .lh (19) km . ’aÆh .

There is no son to him (19) like his brothers,

w . šrš . km . ’aryh

and no scion like his kinsmen.

(20) bl. ’i¨. bn. lh. wm105 ’aḥh .

(20) There is no son to him like his brothers,

w šrš (21) km . ’aryh .

and no scion (21) like his kinsmen.

uzrm. ’ilm . ylḥm

Girded, he feeds the gods,

(22) uzrm yšqy .bn . qdš

(22) Girded, he gives drinks to the sons of (the) Holy.

(23) l tbrknn . l ¨r .’il ’aby

(23) Bless him, Bull, El, my father,

(24) tmrnn . l bny . bnwt

(24) strengthen him, Creator of Creatures.

(25) w ykn106 . bnh . b bt .šrš . b qrb (26) hklh

(25) And let him beget his son in (his) house, scion within (26) his palace.”

nṣb107 . skn108 . ’ilibh109 .

Who sets up a stela for his divine ancestors,

KTU notes that this word should be emended to km. See KTU, 47, n. 5. Wyatt understands the word as from the root kwn “beget.” Wyatt, RTU, 255. 107 The structure of the following verses makes nṣb a participle. See Dijkstra and de Moor, “Problematic Passages,” 175, n. 39; Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 49. 108 De Moor’s study shows that the function of the stela is to commemorate the dead ancestors. See J. C. de Moor, “Standing Stones and Ancestor Worship,” UF 27 (1995): 1-20. 109 The term ’ilībh means “God of his father,” i.e. the appellation of the family deity. This word is also attested in Akkadian as ’ilābi. See Avishur, “The ‘Duties,’” 51. Theodore Lewis argues that this word parallels in meaning to “Dingir a-bi” in Ug V.18. The translation “divine ancestor” would fit both the pantheon lists and this verse. See Theodore J. Lewis, Cults of the Dead in Ancient Israel and Ugarit (HSM 39; Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars, 1989), 58. Van der Toorn also identifies “’ilīb” as the deified ancestors for the same reason as Lewis. He adds that the son sets up a stela when the father is alive. Van der Toorn also notes that “setting up the stela of the 105 106

82

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

b qdš (27) ztr110 . ‘mh .

in the sanctuary (27) a monument (for) his clan;

l ’arṣ111 .mšṣu. qṭrh112(28) l ‘pr .

Who brings out his smoke from the earth,

Ämr . ’a¨rh .

(28) Who protects his step from the dust;

ṭbq . lḥt (29) niṣh .

Who closes the mouth of (29) those who revile him;113

grš . d . ‘šy . lnh

Who drives out those who disturb him;

(30)’aÆd . ydh . b

škrn114

.

(30) Who takes hold his hand in drunkenness,

ancestor” is a set expression for the cult of the ancestors, which need not to be taken literally. See Karel van der Toorn, Family Religion in Babylonia, Syria and Israel (Leiden. New York. Koln: E.J. Brill), 160. It is uncertain whether setting up a stela for one’s divine ancestors is performed when one is alive. We only know of one incident in the Hebrew Bible where Absalom erects a stela for himself while he is alive because he has no sons to do so for him after his death (2 Sam 18:18). 110 The word ztr has no cognate in any of the Semitic languages. See Gray, The Legacy of Canaan, 76, n. 1. Its translation varies. Gray takes ztr as a dialectic form of Hebrew ‫“ סתר‬refuge,” see Gray, The Legacy of Canaan, 76; Gibson translates “sunemblem,” CML, 104, n. 4; Coogan renders, “a family shrine,” Stories from Ancient Canaan, 33; Boda translates “thyme,” in “The List,” 10; van der Toorn translates “symbol,” in Family Religion, 155; Parker translates “sign,” UNP, 53; Wright translates “ztr-object?” Ritual in Narrative, 48, and Wyatt translates “cippus,” RTU, 256. Based on the parallelism to line 26, ztr represents some kind of symbol or sign which parallels the word skn “stela” in line 26. Segart takes the word as “monument.” See Stanislav Segert, A Basic Grammar of the Ugaritic Language (Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California, 1984), 185. 111 Based on the context, the word denotes the “underworld.” See Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 59. 112 “His smoke” is a metaphor for a man’s last breath. See Wyatt, RTU, 257, n. 31. This word also occurs in KTU 1.18 IV: 37 describing Aqhat’s death, “His life went off like a breath, his soul like a sneeze, from his nose like smoke.” 113 This duty may appear as in the context of mortuary rite. See McAfee, “The Patriarch’s,” 72. The dead does not necessarily indicate the cultic aspect of the act. The son may simply defend the honor of his father whether he is alive or dead. 114 The image of a drunkard father is not unfamiliar in the ancient Near East. Cf. In Genesis 9, Noah is drunk and his sons have to cover him. In another Ugaritic text “El’s Mrzḥ,” El has a hangover and two people have to carry him. See Parker, UNP, 193-196. Eissfeldt is the first scholar who makes the connection of a father’s drunkenness in this text to the cultic institution of Mrzḥ. See Eissfeldt,

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I)

83

m‘msh (31) [k ]šb‘ . yn

Who carries him when (31) (he is) sated with wine;

spu . ksmh115 . bt . b‘l

Who eats his portion in the house of Baal,

(32) [w ] mnth . bt . ’il .

(32) and his share in the house of El;

ṭÆ . ggh . b ym(33) [¨i]ṭ .

Who plasters his roof on the day of (33) mud,

rḥṣ . npṣh . b ym . r¨

Who washes his garment 116 on the day of mire.”

Then El responds to Baal’s intercession and pronounces his blessing of progeny to Dan’il.117 After realizing his son’s death, Dan’il invokes Baal, not any other deity, to break the wings of the birds to look for Aqhat’s remains.118 It is this special relationship between Baal and Dan’il that most likely causes Baal to act contrary to Anat’s violence. In fact, Baal’s loyalty to Dan’il dominates his character before and after Anat’s violence. “Sohnespflichten,” 268. For information about the Marzeah in the Ugaritic Texts, see Lewis, Cults of the Dead, 80-94; Smith, UBC, 140-144. 115 Interpreters understand the word ksm in two senses. One is “emmer” or “spelt.” The other option is “portion” or “share.” Since the latter rendering fits the parallelism (mnth “share”) of the following line, therefore, I take the second option. 116 Pope suggests that the activities of repairing the roof and doing laundry are related to funerary rituals. The roof may refer to the tomb or funerary feast. The washing of the garment may refer to the orgiastic character of the celebration. See Marvin H. Pope, “The Cult of the Dead at Ugarit,” in Ugarit in Retrospect: Fifty Years of Ugarit and Ugaritic (Edited by G. D. Young; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1981), 160 n. 6. The washing of garments is an act belonged to the feminine sphere as suggested by El (KTU 1.4 IV: 61-62). Margalit suggests that the washing of the garment is a cultic act. Thus, he links the word npṣ “garment” to npṣ gzr “the warrior’s garment” (Pughat’s garment) in KTU 1.19 IV: 44. He also cites 1 Sam 21:6 where David said to the priest of Nob that his men have abstained from women and the clothing of the soldiers is ritually clean. It is uncertain how the (sexual) contact of women is related to the ritual cleanliness of the soldiers’ garment. Margalit’s observation offers the possibility to interpret this act of washing as more than just a familial act. See Margalit, UPA, 279. Wright and Wyatt are dubious about Margalit’s interpretation. Wright reasons that since mud is the object being washed and not blood, therefore the cleansing is a profane nature and not a cultic one. See Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 67. Wyatt states that there is no need to see this garment as a military garment. He, however, does not provide reasons for his statement. See Wyatt, RTU, 259, n. 39. 117 KTU 1.17 I: 34-48. 118 KTU 1.19 III: 1-41.

84

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

El’s action in the Story of Kirtu and Baal’s action in the Story of Aqhat both show divine favor to their respective human devotees at the expense of their fellow divine marriage partners.119 Smith’s insight may help explain this phenomenon. Smith notes that some deities when functioning as patrons of one group, may undertake the destruction of others. Smith considers this phenomenon as an expression of blessing for humans. 120 Smith’s observation is interesting because it brings out an important principle: one’s loyalty influences one’s point of view. This principle leads to its ethical significance: one’s perception of violence is directly contingent upon one’s relationship with the perpetrator (i.e. the one who does violence) and with the victim of the violence. For El, his commitment to king Kirtu causes him to act contrary to Athirat’s will. For Baal, his loyalty to Dan’il accounts for his silent protestation against Anat’s violence. It is worth noting that El is the supreme god and Baal is his subordinate. In the divine realm, El’s decisions determine the course of events. Although Baal silently protests against Anat’s violence, he is unable to revoke El’s permission and alter the fate of Aqhat. This outcome reflects Baal’s limited power. However, the author’s inclusion of Baal’s point of view serves its critical function to the audience of the story. It makes room for the audience to raise questions and to struggle to decide whose point of view is the normative point of view. The Emotional Point of View In the beginning of the story, the text indicates Baal’s compassion toward Dan’il for his lack of a son.121 After the death of Aqhat, no single word is recorded of Baal’s emotional state. The audience can only infer Baal’s emotion from his various actions. This indirect portrayal of Baal’s emotion puts the task of interpretation on the part of the audience and creates an emotional distance for the audience to gain assess into Baal’s thought world and feelings. 119 Van Rooy thinks that there is an estrangement between Anat and Baal in the Story of Aqhat. See H. F. van Rooy, “The Relationship between Anat and Baal in the Ugaritic Texts,” JNSL 7 (1979): 85-95. However, a disagreement between two parties is not necessarily an indicator of an estranged relationship. For example, in the Baal Cycle, Anat opposes Baal when the latter attempts to challenge the verdict of El regarding Yamm’s kingship (KTU 1.2 I), yet later she defends Baal’s kingship by killing Mot (KTU 1.6 II). 120 Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism, 30-31. 121 KTU 1.17 I:16.

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I)

85

The Contextual Point of View: Baal And Violence in Other Ugaritic Texts Does Baal’s protestation against Anat’s violence mean that he opposes violence? The answer from both the iconographical and textual information is negative. I. Cornelius’ study on the iconography of Baal has shown that Baal is depicted as a menacing god and a serpent slayer in reliefs in the Late Bronze and Iron Age I periods (1500-1000 BCE). As a menacing god, Baal appears to raise his fist or lift his weapon threateningly over his head. As a serpent slayer, Baal is depicted as someone holding a long spear attacking a serpent.122 Both images involve violence. The seals discovered in Anatolia and Syria also bear witness to the association between the storm god and weapons, often the weapons are a lance in the form of a shaft of lightening or a spear pointed toward the ground. A battle-mace also accompanies the weapons. The image of Baal as the storm god who associates with weapons and violence is depicted in the sixteenth-fifteenth century relief of the “Great Stele of Baal.” This relief presents Baal brandishing a battle-mace over his head in his right hand and in his left hand, he carries a thunderbolt with a spearhead ending pointing toward the ground. He wears a two-horned helmet and is depicted as a “vigorous, young, graceful, athletic deity marching forward.123 From the textual aspect, Baal’s manner of obtaining kingship through acts of violence suggests that Baal does not oppose violence. In the Baal Cycle, Baal fights against Yamm, who symbolizes chaos, and Mot, who personifies death.124 He also annihilates the sea monsters, Leviathan (ltn) and the Serpent (b¨n), who may be associated with Yamm.125 Baal’s weapons against Yamm are called “ygrš ” (may he drive) and “’aymr ” (may he expel all).126 Both names are in accord with their functions to defeat Yamm. Baal indeed uses the first weapon to strike the trunk of Yamm and the second weapon to strike his skull. In this respect, Baal serves as a protector against forces of destruction. His victories over these powers portray him as a benefactor to the Ugaritians. 122 For descriptions and pictures, see Izak Cornelius, The Iconography of the Canaanite Gods Reshef and Ba‘al: Late Bronze and Iron Age I Periods (c 1500-1000 BCE) (OBO 140; Switzerland: Vandenboeck & Ruprecht Gottingen, 1994), 134-142, 161167. 123 Alberto R. W. Green, The Storm-God in the Ancient Near East (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2003), 154-165. 124 KTU 1.2 IV:11-41; 1.6 VI:16-22. 125 KTU 1.5 I:27-31. 126 KTU 1.2 IV:11, 19.

86

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

Several incantation texts also point to Baal’s role as a protector and benefactor of his people. For instance, in KTU 1.82:1-3, the author invokes Baal to smite Tnn (a serpent) and to destroy the arrows of Reshep who seems to be associated with the girl’s problem in the text. People Invoked Baal to Smite the Destructive Beings (KTU 1.82:1-3) (1) [x]mÆṣ . b‘l [. šx]y . tnn .

(1) (May) Baal smite [ ] Tnn,

w ygl . w ynsk . ‘d[x]

and may he arrive and pour [ ]

(2) [x]xy . l ’arṣ

(2) [ ] to the land.

[. ’i]dy . ’alt . l ’aḥš .

[A]lready, the curse I do not feel,

’idy . ’alt . ’in ly

already, the curse does not exist in me.

(3) [x]b/dt . b‘l . ḥ` . ršp .

(3) [Destroy],127 O Baal, the arrows of Reshep,

bn . km . yr . klyth wlbh

take note how he fires at his kidneys and his heart (?)

In KTU 1.119:28-36, people invoke Baal to drive away the enemies that attack the city. People Invoked Baal to Protect the City (KTU 1.119:28-36)

(28) y b‘lm . [’a]l [.]tdy ‘z

(28) “O Baal, drive the strong one

l ¨Çrn (29) y .

from (29) our gates,

qrd [l]ḥmytny .

the warrior, [from] our walls.

’ibr y (30) b‘l . nšqdš .

A bull, O (30) Baal, we shall consecrate,

mÄr b‘l (31) nmlu .

a vow, Baal, (31) we shall fulfill,

dkr b‘l . nš[q]dš

a ram, Baal, we shall con[se]crate,

(32) ḥtp b‘l [.] nmlu .

(32) an offering, Baal, we shall fulfill,

‘šrt . b‘l . n[‘] (33) šr .

a feast, Baal, we shall (33) feast.

qdš b‘l . n‘l .

(The) sanctuary of Baal, we shall go up.

ntbt bt [. b‘l] (34) ntlk .

the path of the house of [Baal], (34) we shall go,

Presume the root is šbt “destroy,” which seems to fit the context of shooting arrows. 127

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I)

87

w šm‘ [. b]‘l . l . ṣlt[km]

and [B]aal will hear [your] prayer.

(35) ydy . ‘z . l ¨Çrkm [.

(35) He will drive the strong one from your gates,

qrd] (36) l ḥmytkm[

]

the warrior, (36) from your walls …”

Other examples include KTU 1.100:9 and 1.107:39. In these texts, Baal is among the gods invoked to cast a spell against the snakebite and to gather the venom of the snake. In KTU 1.169, Baal is called upon to expel demons. If the Rapi’u in KTU 1.108 refers to Baal, then the author adores Baal’s strength, power, and rule.128 In all these texts, the ancient audiences perceive Baal’s military image and thus his violence as a positive attribute. For them, Baal is a god who intervenes in human history in humanity’s interest. The word “might” seems to be a better representation of Baal’s violence. Additionally, Baal’s epithets “’aliyn b‘l ”(Mighty Baal), 129 “’aliy qrdm”(Mightiest of the Heroes), 130 and “dmrn ”(the powerful, excellent one)131 all reveal his warrior image. This image is inseparable from victory and violence. The epithet “Mightiest of the Heroes” testifies to the theme of conflict among rival deities.132 128 The identity of Rapi’u is uncertain. L’Heureux, Avishur, and Loewenstamm think that Rapi’u is El. Lowenstamm maintains that El bears the epithet of “mlk” and only El fits the title “mlk ‘lm” (King of Eternity). See Samuel E. Loewenstamm, Comparative Studies in Biblical and Ancient Oriental Literatures (AOAT 204; Neukirchen-Vluyn, Verlag Butzon & Bercker Kevelaer, 1980), 322. Dietrich and Loretz consider Rapi’u as referring to Baal because Baal is associated with “healers” (rp’u), “King of Eternity” (mlk ‘lm), and “the Strong” (g¨r). See M. Dietrich and O. Loretz, “Baal RPU in KTU 1.108; 1.113 Und Nach 1.17 VI 25-33,” UF 12 (1980a): 179. For translations, see de Moor (who sees the text as an incantation), ARTU, 187-190; Yitzhak Avishur, Studies in Hebrew and Ugaritic Psalms (Jerusalem: The Magnes Press, 1994), 280-81; Wyatt, RTU, 395-398. R. M. Good thinks that Rapi’u is an independent deity since there is no evidence suggests that Rapi’u is a healer god. For past survey of KTU 1.108, see Robert M. Good, “On RS 24.252,” UF 23 (1991):155. Because of Baal’s connection with the Rapiuma texts in KTU 1.20-22, it is possible that Rapi’u can be identified with Baal. 129 KTU 1.4 V:59; 1.5 V:17; 1.6 V:10; 1.101:17-18. 130 KTU 1.3 III:14; IV:7-8; 1.4 VIII:34-35; 1.5 II:10-11, 18. 131 KTU 1.4 VII:39. 132 For analysis of these epithets, see Miller, The Divine Warrior, 39-45; M. Dietrich and O. Loretz, “Die Ba‘al-Titel B‘l Arṣ und Aliy Qrdm,” UF 123 (1980c), 392-93; N. Wyatt, “The Titles of the Ugaritic Storm-God,” UF 24 (1992):403-424, esp. 405. For the epithet “’Aliyn b‘l,” see Peter J. van Zijl, Baal: A Study of Texts in

88

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

Baal has his followers. Baal is commanded to take his clouds, his winds, his bolts, his rains, together with his seven boys (šb‘t Çlmk) and eight attendants (¨mn Ænzrk) and descend to the underworld.133 The Rapiuma text mentions “the soldiers of Baal” (mhr b‘l).134 Another text also notes “the divine helpers of Baal” (’il t‘Är b‘l).135 These groups of Baal’s devotees reflect Baal’s role as a leader of his groups. The latter two texts point to Baal’s military followers. Baal’s violence is not only revered but also feared. When Athirat perceives the coming of Baal and Anat, she reacts in fear and trembling as shown in her speech, Athirat Feared Baal and Anat (KTU 1.4 II:21-26) (21) tšu . gh . w tṣḥ .

(21) She raised her voice and she cried,

’ik (22) mÇy ’aliyn . b‘l

“Why (22) has Mightiest Baal come?

(23) ’ik . mÇyt . b[t]lt (24) ‘nt .

(23) Why has Mai[d]en (24) Anat come?

mÆṣy . hm [. m]Æṣ (25) bny .

Would you murder me or [mur]der (25) my sons,

hm [. mkly .ṣ]brt (26) ’aryy[.]

Or [finish the g]roup of (26) of my relatives?”

Athirat’s reaction reflects her perception of Baal and Anat both as “murderers” (mÆṣ). However, this text provides a rare indication that Baal’s violence can be viewed as a negative trait. The majority of the Ugaritic texts portray Baal’s violence positively. Thus, his frequently invoked epithet “Mighty Baal” fits the portrayal of his violence in the Ugaritic texts.136 Although Baal’s warrior image dominates his character, it is not portrayed as invincible. For instance, when Baal sees Mot, he shows fear and immediately announces his surrender.137 His descent to the throat of Mot proves his non-omnipotent nature. He obtains his kingship only through Anat’s help. Even at the end of the Baal Cycle, it is Shapshu’s intervention

Connection with Baal in the Ugaritic Epics (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Verlag Butzon & Bercker Kevelaer, 1972), 341-45. 133 KTU 1.5 V:6-9. 134 KTU 1.22 I:9. 135 KTU 1.47:26. 136 This epithet occurs 68 times and is the most common designation for Baal. 137 KTU 1.5 II:6-12.

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (I)

89

that stops the stalemate between Baal and Mot. In his struggle to supremacy, Baal fails to defeat Mot.138 Additionally, in KTU 1.12, Baal is described as being consumed by “the Devourers.” The fragmentary nature of this text prevents us from grasping its entire context, yet it is clear in this text that Baal does not emerge as an invincible victor.139 In view of Baal’s association with violence, his protestation against Anat’s violence is not so much due to his opposition to the idea of violence but more because of his relationship with the victim of the violence.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION In the beginning of the story, both El and Baal agree to grant Dan’il a son. Yet, later in the story, El revokes his decision and permits Anat to kill the son. El’s divine favor becomes divine retribution. He then disappears from the scene and Baal reappears. Baal’s reappearance is characterized by his actions of protestation: causing the infertility of the land, withholding rain and helping Dan’il to retrieve Aqhat’s remains. Thus, the story presents a disparity of Anat’s violence in the divine world between El and Baal. Both El and Baal do not object to acts of violence since both of them are closely associated with violence elsewhere in the Ugaritic texts. In Anat’s violence against Aqhat, El permits and Baal protests. El permits through direct speech. Baal protests through direct and indirect actions. A major premise that underlies El and Baal’s different points of view is the matter of loyalty. Conflicting loyalties cause conflicting points of view. In the Story of Aqhat, El’s commitment to Anat, his daughter, exceeds that of Aqhat, a human rebel. Baal’s commitment to Dan’il, his devotee, takes precedence over Anat, his sister and consort. Their points of view on Anat’s violence differ because their relationships with the victim in the story vary. The difference in the concept of divine-human order also helps explain the disparity between El and Baal’s point of view. El thinks that, “whoever resists Anat will be crushed.” From El’s point of view, the divine holds the rules of the game of life and the duty of human beings is to obey. Therefore, for El, Anat’s violence is a case of divine punishment. However, Baal’s silent protestation after Anat’s violence points to his disagreement of El’s divine-human order. Since the diminishing of nature is often a reflec-

KTU 1.6 VI:16-35. For translations, see de Moor, ARTU, 128-34; Parker, UNP, 188-91; Wyatt, RTU, 162-68. 138 139

90

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

tion of an unjust deed, this most likely represents Baal’s point of view on Anat’s violence. The author presents two conflicting points of view in the divine realm “divine punishment” and “unjust killing” to reflect the complexity and ambiguity of Anat’s violence. For the audience of the story, El’s concept of divine-human order seems to be the normative point of view since the author records it through direct speech. However, Baal’s silent protestation through various actions serves as a critique of El’s “normative” point of view. The two conflicting points of view are also tied to the author’s characterization of El and Baal. The author portrays El as a remote deity and portrays Baal as a personal god of Dan’il’s family. He establishes El’s authority as the life-giver and life-taker, yet he also casts doubt on his authority through Anat’s threats. He characterizes Baal as a compassionate god who is only able to protest in silence. By leaving these ambiguities and tensions, the author invites his implied audience to struggle to establish his or her own point of view regarding Anat’s violence.

4 DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (II) – ANAT AND YATPAN Not only do El and Baal’s points of view of Anat’s violence show disparity, the author also reveals the shift in Anat’s own point of view of her violence before and after her act of killing. This apparent dissonance adds to the multidimensional portrayal of Anat’s violence in the story. The purpose of this chapter is to investigate how the author of the story uses the characterization and points of view of Anat and Yatpan to influence his implied audience concerning Anat’s violence. We will first describe the author’s characterization of Anat, then we will determine Anat’s point of view of her own violence by comparing the nature and motive of her violence before her act of killing with her reaction after the killing. Then we will examine her violence against Aqhat in the light of her violence elsewhere in the Ugaritic texts. Lastly, we will unfold the characterization and the point of view of Anat’s henchman, Yatpan, regarding Anat’s violence. The conclusion investigates the author’s possible intention in using Anat’s shift in point of view and the outcome of her violence as a means to influence the perception of his implied audience of Anat’s violence.

ANAT The Characterization of Anat in the Story of Aqhat The author portrays Anat as a “full-fledged” character since she displays a broad range of traits, and about whom the audience knows more than is necessary for the plot.1 In the Story of Aqhat, Anat is presented as a goddess who shows a wide range of emotions. For instance, she laughs when hearing Aqhat’s insult and when she is about to kill him. She expresses an-

1

Berlin, Poetics and Biblical Interpretation, 23, 32. 91

92

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

ger and rage when she appeals to El to make him acquiesce to her request. She also weeps after killing Aqhat.2 Not only does Anat display a wide range of emotions, she also possesses a variety of character traits such as covetousness, deception, and violence. She engages in multiple activities including negotiation, plotting, hunting, and killing. Anat appears to be a “real” character with both virtues and vices, like a real person living in the real world. The Perceptual Point of View Before Anat’s Violence Since the major characters in the story, whether divine or human, have a point of view concerning Anat’s violence, it would be interesting to explore her own point of view of her violence as a way to discover the nature of her act. The author reveals Anat’s point of view through her confrontation with Aqhat before her act of killing and through her own speech after the killing. Before her act of killing, the story places Anat in a banquet scene. In the banquet, Anat spots and covets Aqhat’s bow.3 Immediately, Anat begins her plan to possess the bow. She first suggests the offering of silver and gold in exchange for it. When that fails to persuade Aqhat, Anat offers immortality. Below is a description of Anat’s offers and Aqhat’s refusal. Anat Offered Wealth (KTU 1.17 VI:15-25)

(16) tšu . gh . ]w tṣḥ .

(16) [She lifted up her voice] and she cried,

šm‘ . m‘ (17) [l ’aqht . Çzr .

“Hear, now, (17) [Aqhat the Hero],

i]rš . ksp . w ’atnk

ask for silver and I will give (it) to you.

(18) [Ærṣ . w ’aš]lḥk .

(18) [Gold, and I will send] (it) to you.

w tn . qštk . ‘m (19) [btlt . ] ‘n[t .]

But give your bow to (19) [Maiden Anat],

qṣ‘tk . ybmt. limm4

your arrows to the Sister-in-law of the peoples.”

KTU 1.17 VI:41; 1.18 I:7-14, 22, IV:39. KTU 1.17 VI: 10-14. 4 The exact meaning of the phrase “ybmt limm” baffles the commentators. Gibson translates the “Sister-in-Law of Peoples,” CML, 108; Coogan translates the “Mistress of the Peoples,” Stories from Ancient Canaan, 36; De Moor translates “Wanton Widow of the Nations,” ARTU, 237; Margalit has the “Levirate-Wife of (DN) Lim,” UPA, 150; Pardee has “Sister-in-Law of Li’mm,” “The ’Aqhatu,” 346; Parker has “Sister of LIMM,” UNP, 60; Wyatt has the “Beloved of the Powerful one,” RTU, 237. The meaning of the phrase is obscure. See Walls’ analysis of the term. 2 3

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (II) (20) w y‘n . ’aqht . Çzr .

(20) Then Aqhat the hero replied,

’adr5

“The strongest trees (21) from Lebanon,

. ¨qbm (21) b lbnn .

93

’adr . gdm . b rumm

the strongest sinews from the wild ox,

(22) ’adr . qrnt . b y‘lm .

(22) The strongest horns from the Mountain goats,

mtnm (23) b ‘qbt . ¨r .

tendons (23) from the bull’s heels,

’adr . b Çl il . qnm

the strongest reeds from the great marsh,

(24) tn . l k¨r . w Æss .

(24) give to Kathar-wa-Khasis,

yb‘l . qšt . l ‘nt

let him make a bow for Anat,

(25) qṣ‘t . l ybmt . limm .

(25) arrows for the Sister-in-law of the peoples.”

Anat ignores Aqhat’s suggestion and then offers Aqhat immortality in exchange for the bow. Anat Offered Immortality (KTU 1.17 VI:25-33)

(25) w t‘n . btlt (26)‘nt .

(25) And Maiden (26) Anat answered,

irš . ḥym . l ’aqht . Çzr

“Ask for life, Aqhat the hero,

(27) ’irš . ḥym . w ’atnk .

(27) ask for life, and I will give (it) to you;

bl mt6 (28) w ’ ašlḥk .

immortality, (28) and I will send (it) to you.

’ašsprk . ‘m . b‘l

I will cause you to count years with Baal;

(29) šnt . ‘m . bn ’il . tspr . yrÆm

(29) With the son of El, you shall count the months

Walls, The Goddess Anat, 94-107. The word “ybmt” is associated with Hebrew “‫”יבמת‬ (Deut 25:5-9, Ruth 1:15). This meaning refers to “sister-in-law.” “Limm” may be linked to “hmlt” (the multitudes) based on the parallelism of KTU 1.5 VI: 23-4. This parallelism also reflects that “Limm” may be associated with Baal. In view of Anat’s kinship relationship with Baal, it makes sense to think that the epithet “Sister-in-Law of the Peoples” is related to Baal. 5 The author uses the word ’adr “strong,” at least four times, one is missing in line 22. These materials suggest that the bow is a composite bow. Pardee takes ’adr as a verb meaning “I will vow,” “The ’Aqhatu,” 346. This, however, makes Aqhat the one to supply the materials, not Anat. See Wyatt, RTU, 272. 6 From bl and mt “without death.”

94

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

(30) k b‘l . k yḥwy . y‘šr .

(30) Like Baal, he shall live indeed.

ḥwy . y‘š (31) r . w yšqynh . ybd . w yšr .‘lh

He shall be feasted, alive, (31) The minstrel shall chant and sing concerning him.”

(32) n‘m[n . w y]‘nynn .

(32) [And she] said to him,

’ap ’ank . ’aḥwy (33)’aqht [. Ç]zr .

“Surely I will revive (33) Aqhat the [he]ro.”

The fact that Anat offers wealth and immortality reveals her inner thought that possessing Aqhat’s bow may not be a “rightful” act in the first place. If Anat thinks that she has the right to possess Aqhat’s bow, she would have done so without making any offers in exchange for it. We find a similar situation in the story of Naboth’s vineyard (1 Kgs 21). In this story, king Ahab covets Naboth’s vineyard and offers to exchange for it with a better vineyard or for money. Naboth refuses on the basis that the vineyard is the inheritance of his fathers. So Ahab becomes sullen and loses his appetite for food. Since the Law commands that one’s land cannot be sold permanently because the land belongs to Yahweh (Lev 25:23), it explains Ahab’s sullenness. If Ahab thinks that as a king he has the right to possess Naboth’s vineyard, he would not have asked to use something else in exchange for it. For Anat, the response of Aqhat catches her in surprise. Aqhat Refused (KTU 1.17 VI:33-38)

w . y‘n . ’aqht . Çzr

But Aqhat the hero replied,

(34) ’al . tšrgn . y btltm .

(34) “Do not lie,7 O Maiden,

dm . l Çzr (35) šrgk . ÆÆm .

to a hero (35) your lie is rubbish.

mt . ’uÆryt . mh . yqḥ

What does a man get in the end?

(36) mh . yqḥ . mt . ’a¨ryt .

(36) What does a man get as his destiny?

spsg . ysk (37) [l] riš .

Glaze will be poured (37) [upon] the head,

ḥrṣ . l `r . qdqdy

gold on the top of the skull.

(38) [’ap ]mt . kl . ’amt .

(38) [Surely] the death of all I shall die,

7 Spronk translates “Do not distort things” drawing upon the Hebrew word ‫“שׂרץ‬to be intertwined.” See Klaas Spronk, Beatific Afterlife in Ancient Israel and in the Ancient Near East (AOAT 219, Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker; Neukirchen: Neukirchener Verlag, 1986), 152.

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (II) w ’an . mtm . ’amt

95

and I shall die indeed.”

Aqhat bluntly refuses Anat’s offers of wealth and immortality. Some commentators interpret Anat’s offer of immortality as a deception on the basis that she has no power to do so.8 Others maintain that what Anat offers is not immortality in the strict sense but a revivified life like Baal.9 Since the text clearly indicates what Anat offers is a “life without dying” (blmt), and not a revivified life, the second interpretation is dubious. Based on Aqhat’s response of charging Anat with deceit, he apparently thinks that Anat lies to him by making a promise she cannot deliver – the promise of immortality. At the conclusion of his speech to Anat, Aqhat adds the following words as an after thought, further provoking Anat’s fury: Aqhat Insulted Anat (KTU 1.17 VI:39-41)

(39) [’ap.m]¨n . rgmm . ’argm .

“(39) [Also, anoth]er thing I will say:

qštm (40) [k l . ]mhrm.

Bows (40) [are for] warriors!

ht . tṣdn . tin¨t (41) [b h g]m .

Will women now hunt (41) [with it]?”

These last words of Aqhat betray his male superiority and gender stereotype. Anat perceives Aqhat’s refusal to surrender his bow as intentional rebellion (pš‘) and his insult of Anat’s gender role as an expression of pride (gan). She replies to Aqhat: Anat Intended to Punish Aqhat (KTU 1.17 VI: 42-45)

(42) ¨b . ly . l’aqht . Çzr .

(42) “Come to me, Aqhat the Hero,

See Ashley, “The ‘Epic of Aqht,’” 371; Margalit, “Death and Dying in the Ugaritic Epics,” in Death in Mesopotamia (Edited by B. Alster; CRRAI 26; Copenhagen: 1980b), 243-254; Mullen, The Assembly of the Gods, 233-235; M. Pope, “Rezensionen: Klaas Spronk, “Beatific Afterlife in Ancient Israel and in the Ancient Near East.” UF 19 (1989): 452-63, esp. 457; Paolo Xella, “Death and the Afterlife in Canaanite and Hebrew Thought,” in CANE vol. III, 2062-3; Wyatt, RTU, 275-276, n. 116. 9 The advocate for this view include Hendel and Spronk. See Ronald S. Hendel, The Epic of the Patriarch: The Jacob Cycle and the Narrative Traditions of Canaan and Israel (HSM 42; Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1987), 80. Hendel draws upon Tzvi Abusch, “Ishtar’s Proposal and Gilgamesh’s Refusal: An Interpretation of the Gilgamesh Epic, Tablet 6, Lines 1-79,” HR 26 (1986): 143-187. Spronk, Beatific Afterlife, 152. Cf. Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 130, n. 21. 8

96

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

¨b ly w lk (43) [a¨b . ]hm .

come to me and to you (43) [I will come].10

l ’aqryk . b ntb . pš‘

If I meet you in the path of transgression,

(44) [xxxxx]x . b ntb . gan .

(44) [

’ašqlk . tḥt (45) [p‘ny . ’a]

I will fell you under (45) [my feet],

tk . n‘mn . ‘mq . nšm

O you, gracious one, strongest 11 of men.”

] in the path of pride,

From Anat’s point of view, Aqhat, as a human being, should trade his bow for her offering of wealth or immortality, whether in accordance with his wishes or against his will. Aqhat’s refusal and his male pride challenge the authority of Anat. Since Anat perceives Aqhat’s refusal as a transgression – transgression by rejecting her offer of exchange and transgression by insulting her gender role, the killing of Aqhat serves as a divine punishment for his rebellion. The Conceptual Point of View In ancient Near Eastern thinking, values are directly associated with the perception of the divine-human order, their violation being a transgression because it breaches the harmony of this cosmic order.12 For the ancients, piety involves surrendering to the divine realm and participating appropriately in the divine-human order.13 Aqhat, by refusing to give up the bow and by insulting Anat’s gender role, crosses the line of a divinely ordained order. By killing Aqhat, Anat reasserts the divinity that Aqhat attempts to challenge. Her killing accomplishes this objective and teaches human audiences of the story to submit to the divine.14 Other translations: “Attend to me and [I will tell] you (what I will do),” Gibson, CML, 109; “Return to me, and I shall return to you!” de Moor, ARTU, 240; “Come back to me, [I will warn(?)] you,” Parker, UNP, 62; “Leave me and go away [ ],” Wyatt, RTU, 277. 11 Or “wisest,” “cleverest.” See Segert, BGUL, 196. 12 Giorgio Buccellati, “Ethics and Piety in the Ancient Near East,” in CANE 3:1691. 13 Buccellati, “Ethics and Piety,” 1686, 1693. 14 Anat’s vengeance against Aqhat is carried out in the sense of retributive vengeance which aims to punish the enemy. Words associated with this kind of retributive vengeance include “blood (dm)” and “rebellion (pš‘).” See H.G.L. Peels, The Vengeance of God: The Meaning of the Root NQM and the Function of the NQM-Texts 10

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (II)

97

Anat’s conception of Aqhat’s rebellion echoes El’s conception of the divine-human order. This perception of Aqhat’s rebellion and the conception of the divine-human order apparently justify Anat’s violence.15 Anat’s Motive Behind Her Act of Violence Is divine punishment Anat’s primary motive to kill? In the encounter between Anat and Aqhat, the whole confrontation centers on the bow. The punishment occurs later when Aqhat refuses to surrender the bow, but not before. Therefore, Anat’s primary motive for killing Aqhat is to fulfill her desire to possess the bow.16 For Anat, violence is the means to get what she wants. Her own words confirm this motive. In KTU 1.17 VI: 10, the text reads, “Upon raising her eyes, Anat sees the bow.” The text explicitly tells the reader that from the very first sight, Anat covets the bow. Anat Coveted the Bow (KTU 1.17 VI:13)

(13) tṣb17 . qšt . bnt

(13) She coveted the bow.

After her act of murder, she repeatedly says that she smites Aqhat for his bow.

in the Context of Divine Revelation in the Old Testament (Leiden, New York, Koln: E.J. Brill, 1995), 266. Both terms appear in Anat’s killing of Aqhat. The word “dm” occurs in KTU 1.18 IV: 24 and “pš‘” in 1.17 VI: 43. 15 However, what complicates the portrayal of Anat’s violence is that Anat also crosses the normal order expected of a deity. In the previous rituals in the story such as the ritual done by Dan’il in the beginning of the story, the feast that Dan’il offers to Katharat, and the feast for Kothar-wa-Khasis (KTU 1.17 I: 1-15, II: 2446; V: 9-39), humans have been making requests. Now Anat the deity is making a request. Anat also violates the ritual process by making it threatening to Aqhat’s life. Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 114-117. 16 Gaster thinks that the bow is of divine character since it was made by the craftsman god and belongs to Anat originally. Therefore, Anat is anxious to recover the property that is rightfully hers. The context of the story, however, does not support this interpretation. Nowhere in the text does it suggest that the bow belongs to Anat originally. See Gaster, Thespis, 283. 17 The cognate in other ancient Near Eastern languages suggests this meaning “covet.” Cf. Akkadian “ṣabu,” Aramian “ṣeba,” both mean “desire,” Arab “ṣaba,” meaning “aspire to.” See Caquot and Sznycer, TO I, 430, n. m; Wyatt, RTU, 271, n. 98.

98

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

Anat Killed for the Bow (KTU 1.18 IV:40-41)

(40)’abn . ’ank . w ‘l . q[štk . mÆṣtk . [ ]

(40) And for your bow, I smote you.

‘l] (41) qṣ ‘tk . ’at . l ḥ[ytk . xxxxxx]

For (41)Your arrows, you ceased to live.

Anat Killed for the Bow (KTU 1.19 I:14-16) (14)‘l . qšth . (15)’imÆṣh .

(14) For his bow, (15) I smote him;

‘l . qṣ‘th . hwt (16) l . ’aḥw .

For his arrows, (16) I did not let him live.

Ginsberg states that it is not frustrated love that prompts Anat’s violence, but as repeatedly stated in the text, Anat kills for Aqhat’s bow.18 Others also interpret Anat’s objective as a case of divine covetousness. 19 As Ginsberg maintains, the text has repeatedly stated Anat’s objective of killing. Based on the evidence supplied by the text, it is apparent that Anat kills for the bow apart from any modern psychologizing. Her primary objective is to possess the bow. Being a goddess of war, it is not surprising that the bow catches her attention. The punishment of Aqhat for his refusal comes after Anat’s initial motive to possess the bow. For Anat, taking Aqhat’s life is the means to bring him (and perhaps the human audience of the story) into submission to her will – to surrender the bow. At the same time, she wants to assert her authority as a goddess and warn him of not rebelling against a deity. The Perceptual Point of View After Anat’s Violence Surprisingly, Anat’s reaction after her act of violence is not characterized by joy and fulfillment, but by sorrow and unfulfillment. After Anat kills Aqhat in KTU 1.18 IV: 27-37, the text continues: Anat Wept (KTU 1.18 IV:38-42)

(38)‘nt . b ṣmt . mhrh20 . [xxxxx]21

(38) Anat in the slaying, her soldier [ ]

Ginsberg, “The North-Canaanite,” 19, n. 41. Gaster, Thespis, 283; Kapelrud, The Violent Goddess, 66; Driver, CML, 8; Wyatt, “The Story of Aqhat,” 251. 20 Parker translates “warrior” instead of “soldier,” UNP, 66. Margalit reads mprh (his convulsions) based on line 26 of the same column rather than KTU’s mhrh, UPA, 156. So does Wyatt, RTU, 287. The gap following this word makes either translation irrelevant to our understanding of the lines. 18 19

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (II)

99

(39) ’aqht . w tbk . yl[d . dn’il xxx]22

(39) Aqhat, and she wept. [ ]

(40) ’abn . ’ank. w ‘l . q[štk . mÆṣtk .

(40) “and for [your bow, I smote you.

‘l] (41) qṣ ‘tk .’ at . l ḥ[ytk . xxxxxx]23

for] (41) your arrows, you ceased to live.”

(42) w Ælq. ‘pt . m [Æṣk . xxxxx]

(42) And perished [ ]

The text indicates Anat’s response to her killing of Aqhat: she weeps! Most scholars interpret Anat’s emotional outbreak as her remorse about her slaying of Aqhat.24 In line 12 of the same column (KTU 1.19 I), Anat says twice, “How bitter! How bitter!” (kmr, kmrm)25 – an expression of her emotional state which accounts for her weeping as that of sadness rather than one of joy. Not only that, after her weeping, the text includes the description of the loss of the bow.

Margalit reconstructs this lacuna into [wt‘n . bmt (.)] which is a mere conjecture. Margalit, UPA, 332. 22 Gibson reconstructs this lacuna into yl[k . ’aqht.] and he translates “woe to [(you). Aqhat]! See Gibson, CML, 113; Margalit reconstructs this lacuna into yl[d. ‘l. umt] and translates “she bewept the chi[ld, a mother’s suckling,” UPA, 156, 332; Parker gives up on the reconstruction and leaves the space blank. See Parker, UNP, 67. Due to the uncertainty of the text, I take this latter position. 23 Ginsberg, Gibson, Pardee, and Margalit all have a reconstruction different from that of KTU ’s. They reconstruct lḥ[ytk . xxxxxx] as lḥ[wt. aqht] in which Margalit translates “you did not l[ive (enough), O Aqhat.” See Margalit, UPA, 156, 332. Ginsberg, Gibson, and Pardee have similar translation: you did not live. Instead of lḥ[ytk], Parker has lḥ[wtk] and translates “I took your li[fe]” rather than having “your life” as the subject. Parker, UNP, 67. 24 For example, Gaster, Margalit, Walls, and Wyatt. See Gaster, Thespis, 294; Margalit, UPA, 337; Walls, The Goddess Anat, 196; Wyatt, RTU, 287. Gaster even goes so far as to say that Anat does not intend to kill Aqhat. She means to revive him afterwards. See Gaster, Thespis, 294. Margalit refutes Gaster’s interpretation. See Margalit, UPA, 33. The seven-year period of death seems too long for Aqhat to be revived again. 25 KTU restores line 7 (kmr [kmr]) on the basis of line 12. See KTU, 56. Also see the translation of de Moor followed by Wright. De Moor, ARTU, 247; Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 141-2. De Moor adds that this phrase occurs also in Isa 33:7, Ez 27: 30, Esth 4:1. 21

100

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

Anat Lost the Bow (KTU 1.19 I:1-5)26

(1)[l]’aqht (2)tkr27 . x[xxxxx]x .

(1) [Concerning] Aqhat (2) [

]

l qrb[ . x]mym (3) tql .

into the midst of waters (3) it fell.

‘[nt xxxxxx]x lb . t¨br (4) qšt .

[

] broken was (4) the bow.

w[ xxxx]nr. y¨br (5) ¨mn28.

[

] broken were (5) eight.

The bow that Anat desires is broken during her actions. At the end of her action, she does not get what she desires. Anat’s reaction of weeping after the violence forms an ironic confirmation of her prior perception that she has no right to possess Aqhat’s bow. The bow does not belong to her, and after resorting to violence, she still does not get it. If the bow symbolizes Aqhat the person, then the loss of the bow equals to the loss of Anat’s desire – Aqhat. If the bow symbolizes power, then the loss of the bow represents Anat’s failure to obtain that power. Her weeping also makes an interesting twist to her prior perception of her violence as one of divine punishment. Is Anat weeping for the death of Aqhat or is she weeping for her lost bow? If Anat weeps for the death of Aqhat, this would contradict her initial intention to kill Aqhat. Based on Anat’s motive in killing Aqhat, it is likely that she weeps for the broken bow since Anat has put so much effort into acquiring it, yet in the end does not succeed in winning the expected object of her attention. Instead she feels failure, anger, embarrassment, and loss. These unhappy emotions suggest that Anat’s violence against Aqhat does not bring the expected satisfaction to her. 26 Cooper thinks that the beginning of KTU 1.19 is among the most difficult passages in Ugaritic literature. Alan Cooper, “Two Exegetical Notes on AQHT,” UF 20 (1988): 19. 27 Gibson reads wtrd rather than KTU’s tkrb. He translates “and (the bow) came down.” See Gibson, CML, 113; Wyatt suggests that the original reading of the first seven lines of this column is indistinct, with a square of text missing from the middle. Wyatt, RTU, 288, n. 167. Del Olmo Lete, followed by Cooper, both leave the word untranslated because the root krb does not exist in the Ugaritic language. Del Olmo Lete, Mitos, 345-6 and Cooper, “Two Exegetical Notes,” 20. Since the reading is indistinct, any attempt to restore the word runs the risk of conjecture. 28 Pardee translates “... the eight [...] were broken ... Pardee takes this word as the subject of the verb in the previous line based on the parallel construction in lines 3 and 4. His interpretation makes the most sense. Pardee, “The ’Aqhatu,” 350. Gibson also understands this word as “eight.” His translation, however, is too vague to tell whether this word is the subject or the object of the verb in line 4. Gibson, CML, 133.

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (II)

101

Before her act of violence, Anat shares the same view with El that whoever resists her should surely be crushed. She justifies her violence by perceiving Aqhat as a transgressor. After her act of violence, the extant text does not indicate Anat’s inner thoughts. Yet her weeping and the loss of the bow seem to suggest the futility of her violence. This outcome reflects that Anat does not perceive that the use of her violence in this context has been an effective means to achieve her goal. This outcome may also reflect the author’s ideology: Violence is not always justified as the means to an end. The Emotional Point of View Unlike other divine characters in the story, Anat’s emotion is unreservedly expressed and emphasized by the author. Anat displays a wide range of emotions including laughing, raging, and weeping. These emotions depict her as a “real” character. Her weeping after killing Aqhat is highly instructive to the audience’s perception of her violence. Her weeping for the lost bow does not add credibility to her violence, but serves to undermine it. Her unrestrained emotion also puts her credibility in question. The Interest Point of View It is no accident that the author includes Anat’s weeping and the loss of the bow as the result of her violence as a part of the story. The author seems to use her weeping and her failure to possess the bow to contrast with her previous perception before her violence and casts doubt on her ability to obtain the object of her desire. This outcome does not reflect positively on Anat’s character nor on her competency. The failure of getting the bow leaves an imprint on the mind of the audience more strongly than Anat’s previous perception of Aqhat as a transgressor since the failure is the outcome of her violence. This interest point of view shapes the audience’s response toward Anat’s violence as a negative act. THE CONTEXTUAL POINT OF VIEW: ANAT AND VIOLENCE IN OTHER UGARITIC TEXTS Does the outcome of weeping and losing the bow suggest that violence may not be an effective means to accomplish Anat’s goals in all circumstances? To what end does Anat employ violence in other contexts? A glimpse of Anat’s association with violence elsewhere in the Ugaritic texts throws light onto these questions.

102

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

Many commentators have noted Anat’s close affinity with violence.29 Anat’s violence is related to her image as a warrior. This image is reflected in both iconography and texts. 30 Kang considers Anat as one of the “mythic-historic warriors” who were also known to other cultures. Her iconography depicts her as a divine warrior.31 Based on Keel and Uelinger’s study on the images of the goddesses in ancient Syria,32 the prevalence of political and warrior deities characterizes the period of the Late Bronze Age.33 Most of Anat’s appearance during this period depicts her as a warrior goddess wearing an atef-crown,34 standing on a war horse, or sometimes striding over a fallen enemy.35 In another stele, Anat is shown in a sitting pose, brandishing a branch in her right hand and holding a shield and a spear in her left. Her pose resembles the enthroned male gods, but her weapons and the posture of her arms are identical to those of the male god Reshep as shown in the Egyptian stelae of the New Kingdom.36 In this sense, Anat is the female version of a male warrior god. Wyatt maintains that Anat’s warlike character is essentially the heroic quality of a king. Her participation in the head smashing role is a stereotypical image of royal power as reinforced by her fourfold epithets “Mistress of

For example, Kapelrud, The Violent Goddess, 48-82; Ashley, “The ‘Epic of Aqht,’” 309-315; Bowman, “The Goddess Anat,” 195-200; Amico, “The Status of Women,” 455-492; Margalit, UPA, 477; Walls, The Goddess Anat, 161-210. Handy, Among the Host, 122-126. 30 Eaton, “The Goddess Anat,” 104-128; N. Wyatt, “The ‘Anat Stela from Ugarit and Its Ramifications,” UF 16 (1984): 327-337. 31 Sa-Moon Kang, Divine War in the Old Testament and in the Ancient Near East (Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1989), 78-9. 32 Othmar Keel and Christopher Uelinger, Gods, Goddesses, and Images of God in Ancient Israel (trans. Thomas H. Trapp; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1998), 49-108. 33 Keel and Uelinger, Gods, Goddesses, v. 34 The atef-crown represents royalty. Urs Winter, Frau und Gottin: Exegetische und ikonographische Studien zum weiblichen Gottesbild im Alten Israel und in dessen Umwelt (OBO 53; Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht Gottingen: Universitatsverlag Freiburg Schweiz, 1983), 228. 35 Keel and Uelinger, Gods, Goddesses, p. 67, fig. 71; p. 87, fig. 107, 108, 109; p.88, fig. 110; p. 141, fig. 164a, 164b, 164c. In the Late Bronze Age, the horse was used to convey exclusively military connotations, Keel and Uelinger, Gods, Goddesses, 68. 36 Ora Negbi, Canaanite Gods in Metal (Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, 1976), 85. 29

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (II)

103

kingship, Mistress of dominion, Mistress of high heavens and Mistress of the royal crown” in KTU1.108:6-8.37 The Exaltation of Anat (KTU 1.108:6-8) (6) w tšt . ‘nt . g¨r .

(6) And may Anat of g¨r38 drink,

b‘lt . mlk .

the Lady39 of kingship,

b‘ (7) lt . drkt .

L(7)ady of dominion,

b‘lt . šmm . rmm

Lady of high heavens,

(8) [b‘]lt . kp¨

(8) Lady of the royal crown.40

The textual evidence also reflects Anat’s warrior image. For example, in KTU 1.10, Baal describes Anat as follows: Baal Praised Anat (KTU 1.10 II:20-25)

(20) ḥwt . ’aÆt . wnark

(20) Life, sister, and longevity be yours!

(21) qrn . dbatk . btlt . ‘nt

(21) The horns of your power, maiden Anat,

(22) qrn . dbatk . b‘l . ymšḥ

(22) The horns of your power, let Baal anoint,

Wyatt, “The ‘Anat,’” 331-333. Ug. g¨r. Spronk translates “Anat of Gathar,” see Beatific Afterlife, 178; Tarragon translates “Anat de Gathar,” see TO II, 115; Good translates “Anat the Geshur,” see “On RS 24.252,” 159, all take g¨r as a geographical name and interpret the epithet as a local manifestation of Anat. Dietrich and Loretz translate “Anat des Starken,” see “Baal,” 174; Wyatt has “Anat the Powerful,” RTU, 396; both take g¨r as the word for “strong.” Both interpretations are possible. Cf. L’Heureux understands the word as “aged wine,” see Rank Among the Canaanite Gods, 170. 39 The commentators often translate b‘lt as “mistress,” e.g. Spronk, Beatific Afterlife, 178; De Moor, ARTU, 188; Good, “On RS 24.252,” 158; Avishur, Studies, 280; Wyatt., RTU, 396. The translation “mistress” is misleading because of its association with the meaning of the “second wife.” 40 Ugaritic kpt refers to headdress or turban. See Gibson, CML, 149. Thus L’Heureux translates “diadem,” Rank Among the Canaanite Gods, 178. Dietrich and Loretz and Avishur translate “turban, ” see “Baal,” 174 and Studies, 280. Spronk and de Moor have “royal cap,” Beatific Afterlife, 178; ARTU, 188; Tarrigon translates “huppe (tuft),” TO II, 116; Good has “kupšu hat,” “On RS 24.252,” 158; Del Olmo Lete has “firmament (?)” CR, 187. 37 38

104

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

(23) b‘l . ymšḥ.hm . b‘p

(23) Let Baal anoint them against weariness.

(24) nṭ‘n . b ’arṣ . ’iby

(24) In the earth, let us gore my foes,

(25)w b‘pr . qm . ’aÆk

(25) and in the dust, those arise against your brother!

The “horn” in the Hebrew Bible often symbolizes physical might and power.41 By anointing her horns, Baal prepares Anat to engage in battles with him to fight against his enemies. In the Baal Cycle, Anat appears as a warrior. KTU 1.2 II first introduces us to Anat’s warrior image.42 Anat Fought in the Valley (KTU 1.3 II:3-16)

(3) klat . ¨Çrt (4) bht . ’nt .

(3) (4) Anat closed the gates of (her) house

w tqry . Çlmm (5) b št . Çr .

and she met the boys (5) at the foot of the mountain

w hln . ’nt . tm (6) tÆṣ . b ‘mq .

And behold, Anat (6) fought in the valley,

tÆtṣb . bn (7) qrytm

she battled between (7) the two towns.

41 L. J. Coppes, “Qeren,” pages 815-6 in TWOT II. This war-like image of Anat also appears in KTU 1.13, 1.83. 42 Much literature has discussed Anat’s double massacre. For instance, John Gray, “The Blood Bath of the Goddess Anat in the Ras Shamra Texts,” UF 11 (1979): 315-24. Gray thinks that Anat’s massacre of human soldiers has a ritual background. Good sees Anat’s killing as a harvest metaphor. See Robert M. Good, “Metaphorical Gleanings from Ugarit,” JJS 33 (1982): 55-59. Walls thinks that Anat’s purpose and motivation for the slaughter of humans are unknown. He suggests that this episode may not play an important role in the mythic narrative but may simply provide a thematic introduction to the goddess herself. See Walls, The Goddess Anat, 15-65. Smith questions whether Anat’s killing of human soldiers involves consumption of them as a way of ingesting the enemy’s strength and virtue. See M. S. Smith, “Anat’s Warfare Cannibalism and the West Semitic Ban,” in The Pitcher is Broken: Memorial Essays for Gosta W. Ahlstrom (Edited by Steven W. Holloway and Lowell K. Handy; JSOTSup, Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995), 368-386. Lloyd interprets Anat’s double massacre as killing the prisoners of war first in reality and then in Anat’s palace as a ritual performance. See J. B. Lloyd, “Anat and the ‘Double’ Massacre of KTU 1.3 II,” in Ugarit, Religion and Culture, 151-165. For a semantic analysis of KTU 1.3 II:23, see Josef Tropper, “‘Anat Kriegsgeschrei (KTU 1.3 II 23),” UF 33 (2001): 567-571.

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (II)

105

tmÆṣ . lim . Æp y[m]

She fought the people of the [se]ashore,43

(8) tṣmt . ’adm . ṣat . špš

(8) she killed humans of the sunrise.

(9) tḥth . k kdrt . riš

(9) Beneath her, like balls, (are) heads,

(10) ‘lh . k ’irbym . kp .

(10) Above her, like locusts, (are) palms,

k . qṣm (11) Çrmn .

like grasshoppers (?), (11) (are) mountains

kp . mhr .

of palms of soldiers.

‘tkt (12) rišt . l bmth .

She fixed (12) heads to her back,

šnst (13) kpt . b ḥbšh .

she attached (13) palms to her belt.

brkm . tÇl[l] (14) b dm . Ämr .

Her knees she glea[ned] (14) in warrior’s blood,

ḥlqm . b mm‘ (15) mhrm .

her thighs,44 in the gore of (15) soldiers.

mṭm . tÇrš (16) šbm .

With staffs, she drove away (16) the old men,

b ksl . qšth . mdnt

with the string of her bow, the opponents.

After her fighting, Anat is not satisfied. So she goes down to her house, arranges her furniture, and immediately engages in another battle. Since the context is lost, we are uncertain of Anat’s motive in fighting and what Anat intends to achieve in her slaying of human soldiers. However, her warrior and violent image emerges in this graphic and bloody scene. This scene is described not in general terms but in detail with gruesome images. For instance, it describes specific body parts both for the human soldiers (heads [riš] and palms [kp]) and for Anat (knees [brkm] and thighs [hlqm]). It mentions the specific weapons of Anat “the staffs (mtm) and the string of her bow (ksl qšth) (line 16). Additionally the text also employs simile (k), “heads like balls,” “palms like locusts (lines 9-10)” to aid in the audience’s visual perception of this graphic scene. The word “blood,” dm (line 14) is also mentioned to add “color” to this scene – bloody red. This graphic scene raises the possibility that the author may intend to use the detailed and colorful description for a visual purpose: to form a visual image of Anat’s violence against the human soldiers in the audience’s mind. 43 The sea-shore is the west and the sunrise refers to the east. This bicolon means “all men from east to west.” See Wyatt, RTU, 73, n. 18. 44 The word ḥlqm is a dual from the root ḥlq “to divide.” The meaning of “thighs” forms a parallel image to “knees.”

106

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

Anat not only fights against human enemies but also divine enemies, including El’s beloved Yamm and his divine animals as we will discuss shortly. Athirat’s reaction when she sees the coming of Baal and Anat (KTU 1.4 II:21-26) also reveals her perception and fear of these two “murderers” (see chapter 3). Several examples show that Anat prefers to use violence as a means to her ends. This is evident in the Baal Cycle but not clear in other genres of the Ugaritic texts such as the prayers and hymns since we do not know the context of these texts. In the Baal Cycle, when Anat assists Baal to gain his kingship, she fights against Baal’s enemies. 45 The context suggests that Anat’s motive for fighting Baal’s enemies is to defend Baal’s kingship. In KTU 1.3 III:32 - IV: 4, the text describes Anat’s response after she perceives the coming of Baal’s messengers: Anat Fought the Enemies of Baal (KTU 1.3 III:32 – IV:4)

(32) hlm. ‘nt. tph. ’ilm.

(32) There, Anat perceived the gods,

bh. p‘nm (33) tṭṭ .

below, her feet (33) trembled,

b‘dn . ksl . t¨br

behind, (her) loins cracked,

(34)‘ln . pnh . td‘ .

(34) above, her face sweated.

tÇṣ . pnt (35) kslh .

Shook were the joints of (35) her loins.

’anš . dt . `rh .

Weak were those of her back.

tšu (36) gh . w . tṣḥ .

She lifted (36) up her voice and she cried,

’ik . mÇy . gpn . w ugr

“Why Gpn and Ugr come?

(37) mn . ’ib . yp‘ . l b‘l .

(37) What enemy rose against Baal?

ṣrt (38) l rkb . ‘rpt .

(What) foe (38) against the Cloudrider?

l mÆšt . mdd (39)’il ym .

Surely I smote the Beloved of (39) El, Yamm;

l klt . nhr . ’il . rbm

Surely I destroyed River, the Great God;

45

See text and translation above. KTU 1.3 V: 38-47.

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (II) (40) l ’ištb46 . tnn . ’ištm . lh (?)

(40) Surely I lifted up Tnn 47 and destroyed him.

(41) mÆšt . b¨n . ‘qltn

(41) I smote the writhing serpent,

(42) šlyṭ48 . d . šb‘t . rašm

(42) the tyrant of seven heads.

(43) mÆšt . mdd ’ilm . ’arš

(43) I smote the Beloved of El, Arsh.

(44) ṣmt . ‘gl . ’il . ‘tk

(44) I destroyed the Calf of El, Atk.

(45)mÆšt .k{.}lbt . ’ilm . ’išt

(45) I smote the Dog of El, Fire.

(46) klt . bt . ’il .

(46) I destroyed the daughter of El,

Äbb . ’imtÆṣ . ksp

Flame that I might fight for silver

(47)’itr¨ . Ærṣ .

(47) (and) inherit gold.

ṭrd. b‘l rev. iv (1) b mrym . ṣpn . mšṣṣ . k . ‘ṣr

Has Baal banished (1) from the heights of Saphon, knocking him like a bird from his perch,49

(2)’udnh . gršh . l ksi . mlkh

(2) (Who) drove him from the throne of his kingship,

(3) l nÆt .

(3) From the resting place,

l kḥ¨ . drkth

from the siege of his dominion?

(4) mnm . ’ib . yp‘ . l b‘l

(4) What enemy rose against Baal,

ṣrt . l rkb . ‘rpt

(What) foe against the Cloudrider?”

107

46 The root šbm “lifted him up bodily” indicates Anat’s superior strength. Wyatt, Pardee and Smith translate “bound.” See Wyatt, RTU, 79, Pardee, “The ’Aqhatu,” 252, and Smith, UNP, 111. 47 Another fragmentary text, KTU 1.83, seems to relate to Anat’s fighting with a dragon (tnn). For translation, see Wyatt, RTU, 368-369. 48 The Akkadian cognate šalaṭu (authority, in authority) favors the translation of “tyrant.” CAD, Š: 238. See Gibson, CML, 50; Smith, “Baal,” 111. Based on the Hebrew cognate ‫( לוט‬to wrap up), BDB, 532. Margalit proposes the meaning of “encircling.” This is an image of a dragon encircling his treasures and prey. The verb is a š stem of lyṭ (enwrap, envelop). See B. Margalit, A Matter of Life and Death: A Study of the Baal-Mot Epic (CTA 4-5-6) (AOAT 206; Kevekaer: Butzon & Bercker/Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukircherner Verlag, 1980a), 90. Both Pardee and Wyatt take this meaning. See “The Ba‘lu Myth,” translated by Dennis Pardee (COS 1.86:252); Wyatt, RTU, 79, n. 49. 49 This translation follows Wyatt’s who sees this line as an idiom which survives as a Hebrew variant in Prov 27:8 and 1 QH 4:8. See Wyatt, RTU, 80.

108

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

Anat’s first response after perceiving the coming of Baal’s messengers is a fearful cry, “What enemy rose against Baal?” (KTU 1.3 III:37). After recounting her past victories over the enemies of Baal including Yamm, the Serpent Tnn, and El’s animals, Anat seems to regain the confidence and strength to defend Baal again. At the end of her speech, she repeats her initial inquiry, “What enemy rose against Baal?” (KTU 1.3 IV:4). By repeating the questions before and after her speech and by enclosing the descriptions of fighting Baal’s enemies in the past within the envelope structure, the text highlights Anat’s concern with Baal’s safety and kingship. Later, when Mot arises to challenge Baal’s kingship, he causes Baal to descend to the underworld. Anat again comes to Baal’s rescue with violence.50 The negative portrayal of Mot forms a striking contrast to the heroic image of Anat. The Ugaritic texts depict Mot as a monstrous deity who threatens human lives. For instance, in the Baal-Mot section of the Baal Cycle (KTU 1.5 and 1.6), the text repetitively describes visually Mot’s limitless appetite to devour deities and humans (KTU 1.5 I:6-8, 14-27; II:2-6; 1.6 II:15-19; V:19-25; VI:10-16) as the following texts shown. Mot Described His Own Appetite (KTU 1.5 I:14-22)

(14) p np{.}š . npš . lb’im (15) thw.

(14) My appetite51 is the appetite of the lion in (15) the wasteland,

ḥm . brlt . ’anÆr (16) b ym .

or the desire of the whale (16) in the sea.

ḥm . brky . tkšd (17) rumm .

or go to pools like (17) wild oxen,

‘n . kÄd . ’aylt

or to a spring (like) a hind.

(18) hm . ’imt . ’imt . npš .

(18) Or, truly, does my appetite

blt (19) ḥmr .

consume (19) (like) a donkey?

p ’imt . b kl’at (20) ydy . ’ilḥm .

So truly, I will eat with (20) both my hands,

hm . šb‘ (21) ydty b ṣ‘ .

or (my) seven portions (21) are in the bowl,

hm . ks . ymsk (22) nhr

or (my) cup contain (22) a river?

Mot Threatened Baal to Give Up His Brothers (KTU 1.6 V:19-25)

50 51

KTU 1.5 I-V, 1.6 II:30-35. Or “throat.”

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (II)

109

(19)tn.’aḥd(20) b . ’aÆk . ’isp’a .

(19) Give one of your brothers (that) I may eat,

w y¨b (21) ’ap . d ’anšt .

and (21) the anger I feel will go away.

’im (22) ’aḥd . b ’aÆk . l ttn

If (22) one of your brothers you do not give,

(23) w hn . ’aḥ`x[xxx]l/ṣ

(23) then I will seize [xxx],

(24) [x]xx . ’akly[ . bn nšm]

(24) [x]xx, I will finish [humans],

(25) ’akly . hml[t . ’arṣ]

(25) I will finish the multitu[des of the Earth].

The fact that no cult is devoted to Mot and that no offering list includes him supports his negative image in Ugaritians’ lives. 52 In light of Mot’s negative image, Anat’s annihilation of him is presented in a positive light – she is a heroine. Anat first asks Mot to give up Baal.53 When the latter refuses, Anat resorts to violence. The following lines describe Anat’s killing of Mot: Anat Annihilated Mot (KTU 1.6 II:30-35)

(30) tiÆd (31) bn . ’ilm . mt .

(30) She seized (31) Divine Mot,

b ḥrb (32) tbq‘nn .

(31) With a sword, (32) she split him,

b ƨr . tdry (33) nn .

With a sieve, she winnowed (33) him,

b ’išt . tšrpnn

With a fire, she burned him,

(34) b rḥm . tṭhnn .

(34) With a mill-stone, she grinded him,

b šd (35) tdr‘.nn

In a field, (35) she sowed him.

It is worth noting that the author describes Anat’s violence against Mot in graphic detail again including the weapons she uses (sword [Ærb] and sieve [Ætr]) and the manner of killing (winnow [dry], burn [šrp], grind [thn], and sow [dr‘]). This emphasis supports the notion that the author intends to impress Anat’s violent image firmly in the mind of the audience. In the Baal Cycle, Anat often employs violence to attain her goal (KTU 1.3 III:38-47; V:19-25; 1.6 II:30-37). All three incidents are related to Baal. These texts show that for Anat, violence serves as an effective means

52 See KTU 1.39, 1.41, 1.43, 1.46, 1.102, 1.104, 1.109, 1.119, 1.130, 1.148, 1.162, 1.168. 53 KTU 1.6 II:11-12.

110

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

to defend Baal. If Baal is perceived as a benevolent warrior god, then Anat’s violence in defending him can also be perceived as something positive. There is a rare exception in the Baal Cycle where Anat uses other means to achieve her objective in defending Baal. This incident appears in the House of Baal section of the cycle. After Anat fails to obtain El’s consent to build a house for Baal, she and Baal then go to Athirat to entreat her to ask El on their behalf.54 In this event, Anat does not resort to violence as means to her end. Instead, she offers gifts of silver and gold to Athirat.55 Anat also entreats Athirat nicely.56 In the Story of Aqhat, when Anat perceives Aqhat’s refusal and insult as a threat to her authority, she immediately plots to harm him. This image is consistent with her perception of threats in the Baal Cycle. The difference, however, that in the Baal Cycle, Anat’s violence helps her to attain her goal in protecting Baal, whereas in the Story of Aqhat, her violence fails to accomplish her goal in possessing the bow. For Anat, violence is not always the most effective means to her ends. One common element connecting the violence of Anat in the Baal Cycle and in the Story of Aqhat is the graphic depiction of Anat’s violence (KTU 1.3 II:3-16; III:38-47; V:19-25; 1.6 II:30-37; 1.18 IV:16-37). The author does not mention Anat’s violence by simply stating the fact but he elaborates and paints a visual picture in the audience’s mind. This common element suggests that the author purposely intends the audience to associate Anat with violence and might.

YATPAN The Characterization of Yatpan in the Story of Aqhat The character Yatpan occurs only in the Story of Aqhat. The name “Yatpan” does not appear in the god lists (KTU 1.47; 1.118; and RS 20.24).57 Whether he is a lesser deity or a human being remains unknown. If Yatpan is a divine being, he occupies the lowest rank in divinities as a servant of KTU 1.4 III: 23-44. KTU 1.4 II: 26-28. These gifts are made by Kothar-wa-Khasis which include a canopy and a couch, a grand dais, a grand throne and footstool, and grand laced sandals, a grand table filled with figures, a grand bowl, all made by silver and gold. See KTU 1.4 I: 20-43. 56 KTU 1.4 III: 32-36. 57 For texts and translations, see Del Olmo Lete, CR, 72-73; Wyatt, RTU, 360362; Pardee, Ritual and Cult, 14-15. 54 55

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (II)

111

Anat.58 Del Olmo Lete considers Yatpan as a deity and places his name under the category “gods not in the (god) list but known.”59 In the Story of Aqhat, Yatpan plays a minor but indispensable role. He first appears as “an agent.” According to Berlin’s definition, “an agent” is someone who is passive, whose feelings and thoughts are not revealed by the story, and nothing is known about the character except what is necessary for the plot.60 This definition fits the role of Yatpan. In his first appearance, the author does not bother to remark on Yatpan’s feelings and thoughts about Anat’s violence. Yatpan merely concedes to Anat’s plan. His function as an agent is evident: Anat needs a helper, an intermediary to carry out her violence. Yatpan assumes that role. The author designs this role on purpose since later in the story, Pughat needs an object for vengeance. Since a human being cannot kill a deity like Anat, Yatpan serves as the substitute. Nothing more about his character is mentioned apart from his function as an agent. In his first appearance, Yatpan is presented as the henchman of Anat, one who merely follows her plans. After Anat succeeds in exacting El’s permission, she enlists Yatpan to carry out the violence. Anat Enlisted Yatpan to Kill Aqhat (KTU 1.18 IV:5-15)

(5) [t]tb‘ . btlt . ‘nt [.

(5) Maiden Anat departed.

’idk . l ttn . pnm]

[Then she set her face]

(6) ‘m . yṭpn61 . mhr . š[t .

(6) toward Yatpan, the warrior of the La[dy].62

See Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism, 57. See Del Olmo Lete, CR, 80. Other names under this list include Gapnu and Ugaru, the messengers of Baal. 60 Berlin, Poetics and Biblical Interpretation, 27, 32. 61 Watson has noted the etymology of the name “Yatpan.” The meaning of his name parallels the part he plays in the attack on Aqhat. Since Anat uses Yatpan in the manner of a trained bird of prey, it is possible that his name is associated with a falcon, or a hawk. Watson proposes the meaning “Render” or “Ripper.” The Akkadian word naṭāpu supports this meaning. See CAD, N II:128. See Watson, “Puzzling Passages,” 373. 62 The translation “the warrior of the Lady” fits Yatpan’s role in the story as the henchman of Anat. The title št as Anat’s epithet also occurs in KTU 1.13:7 “your warriors” referring to Anat’s warriors and KTU 1.22 I:9 “the warriors of Anat.” This epithet of Anat will help to explain Pughat’s disguise as Anat. Cf. Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 211-213. 58 59

112

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

tšu . gh] (7) w tṣḥ .

[She raised her voice] (7) and she cried,

y¨b63

“Let Yatpan turn [

. yṭp . x[xxxxxxxxxx]

]

(8) qrt . ’ablm .

(8) the town of ABLM,

’ablm . [qrt . zbl . yrÆ]

ABLM, [the city of the prince of YariÆu.

(9) ’ik . ’al . yḥd¨ .yrÆ .

(9) How will YariÆu not be renewed?

b q[rn . šm’alh]

in the ho[rn of his left],

(10) b qrn . ymnh .

(10) in the horn of his right.

b’anšt[.xxxxxxxxx](11) qdqdh .

in the weak [

w y‘n . yṭpn . m[hr . št]

Then Yatpan, the wa[rrior of the Lady] replied,

(12) šm‘ . l btlt . ‘nt .

“(12) Listen, O Maiden Anat,

’at . ‘[l . qšth] (13) tmÆṣh .

[For his bow], (13) you will strike him,

qṣ‘th . hwt . l tḥ[wy . xxx]

(for) his arrows, you will not [let him live],

(14) n‘mn . Çzr . št .¨rm .

(14) The pleasant one, the hero, has laid a meal,64

w[ xxxxx] (15) ’išt’ir . b Ädm .

[ ] (15) he has stayed in dwellings

w n‘rs[ . xxxx]

and has settled [

] of (11) his head.”

].”

In his speech to Anat, Yatpan echoes Anat’s plan to smite Aqhat for his bow. As Anat’s henchman, Yatpan’s job is to obey and he does. Then Anat instructs Yatpan in detail of how she will carry out her plan to slay Aqhat. Anat Instructed Yatpan How to Slay Aqhat (KTU 1.18 IV:16-27)

(16) w t‘n . btlt . ‘nt .

(16) And Maiden Anat replied,

¨b . yṭp . w[ xxx] (17) lk .

“Come, Yatpan, and [I will teach?] (17) you,

’aštk . km . nšr . b ḥb[šy]

I will put you like a eagle in my be[lt],

(18) km . diy . b t‘rty .

(18) like a bird in my sheath.

63 It is uncertain whether the word is “to sit” or “to turn.” Since the context suggests going to the town of ABLM, I choose “to turn.” 64 The fragmentary nature of the text makes it unclear whether Yatpan instructs Anat to prepare a meal or whether Aqhat is the one who prepares the meal.

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (II)

113

’aqht .[km . y¨b] (19) l lḥm .

(When) Aqhat [sat down] (19) to eat,

[[b]] wbn . dn’il . l ¨rm .

and the son of Dan’il to dine,

[‘lh] (20) nšrm . trÆpn .

[above him], (20) the eagles will hover,

ybṣr . [ḥbl .d] (21) ’iym .

[the flock of b]irds (21) will circle (?)

bn . nšrm . ’arÆp . ’an[k .]

Among the eagles, I will hover,

‘l (22) ’aqht . ‘dbk .

above (22) Aqhat, I will place you,

hlmn .¨nm qdqd

strike him twice (on) the skull,

(23) ¨l¨id . ‘l . ’udn .

(23) three times over the ear,

špk . km . šiy (24) dm .

spill (his) (24) blood like an executioner(?)

ûm . šÆṭ . l brkh .

like a slaughterer, to his knees.

ṭṣi . km (25) rḥ . npšh .

(25) Let his life go out like a wind,

ûm . ’i¨l . brlth .

his spirit like a spittle,

km (26) qṭr . b ’aph .

(26) from his nose, like a smoke,

b ’ap . mprh . ’ank (27a) l ’aḥwy.

Surely, (?) (27a) I will not let him live.”

The text omits Yatpan’s verbal response to Anat’s plan. The author seems to assume Yatpan’s consent and thus it is unnecessary to include his response in the text. The following line (line 27b) immediately speaks about Anat executing her plan of action to kill Aqhat. Yatpan does exactly as told. In this brutal scene of killing, Yatpan functions no more than “an agent.” However, toward the end of the story, the author reveals more information about Yatpan, probably to depict him as a villain in contrast to Pughat, the heroine. We know more about Yatpan now than when he first appears in the story. Whether he develops into a full-fledged character remains unknown since the broken text prevents us from discovering this. The extant text does not show a broad range of Yatpan’s traits, yet one trait dominates: his arrogance. His arrogance is linked to his perception of Anat’s violence. The Perceptual Point of View When Pughat infiltrates the tents of Yatpan, the author uses Yatpan’s direct speech to reveal his arrogance. When the messenger delivers the news of Pughat’s coming, Yatpan speaks to Pughat:

114

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

Yatpan Boasted of his Might (KTU 1.19 IV:52-60)

(52) w y‘n . yṭpn . m[hr]

(52) And Yatpan, the wa[rrior] of

(53) št

(53) the Lady replied,

qḥn . w tšqyn . yn .

“Take this and give me wine to drink,

t[q]ḥ (54) ks . bdy .

ta[k]e (54) the cup from my hand,

qb‘t . b ymny .

the goblet from my right hand.”

tq(55)ḥ . pÇt . w tšqynh .

(55) Pughat took and she gave him to drink.

tqḥ [. ûs .] bdh

She took [the cup] from his hand,

(56) qb‘t . b ymnh .

(56) the goblet from his right hand.

w y‘n . yṭ[p]n[ . mh]r

Then Yat[pa]n, [the warrio]r of

(57) št .

(57) the Lady replied,

b yn . y št65 . ’ila66 . ’il šxn [.]

“By the wine, O Lady, I am mighty. I could [ ] El,67

’il (58) d yqny . Ädm .

El (58) who created the dwellings.

yd . mÆṣt . ’aq[h]t . Ç(59)zr .

The hand that slew Aq[ha]t the h(59)ero,

tmÆṣ . ’alpm . ’ib . št

will slay thousands of the Lady’s enemies,

[ . t]št (60) ḥršm . l ’ahlm .

[ ] (60) setting spell over the tents.”

The speech of Yatpan is brief (3 lines), but full of boast. In his speech, Yatpan claims two things: (1) He is mighty and can do anything or compares himself to El or the god(s); (2) He admits that he slays Aqhat and that he will slay thousands more of Anat’s enemies. Yatpan occupies the lowest rank in the hierarchy of the gods. His name is even excluded from the god lists. In light of his low status in the divine realm, Yatpan’s first claim that he is mighty and that he is comparable to El, the high god in the pantheon, is ironically and comically out of touch with reality. Wright notes that Yatpan thinks his status as being ele-

An epithet of Anat. Here, I take the word as from the root liy. For various renderings of this word, see Wyatt’s discussion. Wyatt, RTU, 312, n. 275. 67 Or god, thus, Yatpan is claiming divinity. See Dijkstra and de Moor, “Problematic Passages,” 213. See Wright for the possible reconstruction of the word ’ilšn as “slander.” Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 214. 65 66

DIVINE CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW (II)

115

vated to a divine level. 68 Indeed, Yatpan’s perception of himself comes from an inflated ego. In his second claim, Yatpan reveals his perception of Anat’s violence against Aqhat. First, he admits that he kills Aqhat. Second, he perceives Aqhat as one of Anat’s enemies. Third, he boasts that he can kill thousands of Anat’s enemies. From Yatpan’s point of view, Aqhat, by refusing to surrender his bow becomes the enemy of Anat and deserves to be punished. In this sense, Yatpan shares Anat’s point of view of her own violence before she kills Aqhat – the killing of Aqhat is a case of divine punishment. It is uncertain whether Yatpan is aware of Anat’s reaction after her violence and the outcome of her violence, i.e. her weeping and the losing of the bow. The fact that Yatpan appears to be boastful and the fact that he does not express any sorrow or remorse suggest that the author of the story purposely keeps him “in the dark” regarding Anat’s reaction after her act of killing. This may due to the relatively “insignificant” role that Yatpan plays in the story. Because of Yatpan’s relationship with Anat as her henchman, his perception of Anat’s violence is much influenced by her perception before her killing. Yatpan takes pleasure in his role as “the warrior of the Lady” and will assist her when asked. Yet, the story portrays Anat’s point of view in a multifaceted fashion and Yatpan’s point of view in a one-dimensional manner. This confirms the role of Yatpan in the story as an “agent” who serves his function and there is no need to elaborate more on his thoughts and feelings. The Interest Point of View From the interest point of view, by stressing Yatpan’s arrogance (a negative trait), the author places him in contrast to the positive portrayal of Pughat, as we will expound in the next chapter. In this sense, the character Yatpan serves as the foil against which the personality of the major character, Pughat, stands out.69 By depicting Yatpan as a villain, the author casts his role in a negative mode and thus influences the audience’s perception of him. In addition, by keeping Yatpan in ignorance of Anat’s reaction after her act of violence and in the identity of Pughat, and by informing the audience of that information, the author elevates the audience’s position and likewise gains the trust from the audience to take the author’s point of view

68 69

Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 218. Drawing upon Bar-Efrat’s idea. See Bar-Efrat, Narrative Art, 86.

116

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

implicit in the story – to perceive Yatpan as a villain, which indirectly casts doubt on Anat’s act of violence. The Emotional Point of View The extant text does not indicate the emotions of Yatpan. This is mostly because of his function in the story as an agent. As an agent, Yatpan serves his function to the plot and nothing else about him is necessary to be included in the story. Because of this lack of emotion attributed to Yatpan, the audience is emotionally distant from him and is unlikely to take his point of view.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION In addition to the conflicting points of view of El and Baal, the shift in point of view of Anat before and after her act of violence further adds to the complexity of the story’s portrayal of her violence. Before killing Aqhat, Anat perceives her act of violence as a divine punishment, a means to possess the bow, and an opportunity to assert her authority. However, after her killing of Aqhat, her weeping and the losing of the bow suggest the futility of using violence to achieve her ends. Because of Yatpan’s role as a henchman of Anat, his point of view conforms to Anat’s point of view before her act of violence. His boasts suggest that he does not share or most likely is unaware of Anat’s weeping and her losing of the bow. Thus, in the divine realm, we see El, Anat before her act of violence, and Yatpan sharing the same point of view of the violence against Aqhat that it is a case of divine punishment against a disobedient human being. The point of view of Baal and Anat after her act of violence provide a counter point of view to that of divine punishment. These two levels of disparity further demonstrate the complexity and ambiguity in the author’s portrayal of Anat’s violence. By including the weeping and the losing of the bow as the outcome of Anat’s violence, the author seems to depict her violence negatively. This negative outcome of Anat’s violence influences the audience’s perception of her violence as a negative act. Yet, questions remain: Is Aqhat responsible for his death? Is Dan’il and Pughat’s perception of his death accurate? We will explore these questions in the next chapter.

5 HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW: DAN’IL, PUGHAT, AQHAT Having examined the two levels of disparity in the divine characters’ point of view between El and Baal and between Anat’s shifts in perspective, we now turn to the point of view of the human characters in the story. In the human realm, there are also two levels of disparity of point of view. On the one hand, the disparity is revealed through the human characters, Dan’il and Pughat’s perception of Anat’s violence and Pughat’s violence. On the other hand, the disparity is revealed through the divine characters, El and Anat’s perception of Aqhat and the human characters Dan’il and Pughat’s perception of him. The purpose of this chapter is to show how the author of the story uses the diverging points of view of the human characters on the two acts of violence in the story to influence his implied audience’s ethical judgment of Anat’s violence. This chapter also demonstrates how the author, by disclosing and withholding information, affects the characters’ perception of Anat’s violence. We will first investigate the characterization of the human characters, Dan’il and Pughat, and present their diverging points of view on the two acts of violence in the story. We will then inquire into the reasons behind these contrasting viewpoints. Finally, we will situate Aqhat in the context of the two acts of violence.

DAN’IL The Characterization of Dan’il in the Story of Aqhat The character Dan’il in the story is depicted as a pious and a righteous king. He offers sacrifices to the gods and makes feast to the deities.1 The author describes him as one “who takes care of the case of the widow and defends

1

KTU 1.17 I:1-15; II:24-38; V:13-31; 1.19 IV:22-27. 117

118

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

the need of the orphan.”2 By attributing these positive character traits to Dan’il, the author establishes Dan’il’s integrity and credibility. The granting of a son to Dan’il may be due to his credibility as a righteous king. The movement from the theme “no son - son - no son” in the story sets the points of view of Dan’il of Anat’s violence and Pughat’s vengeance in context. The text describes Dan’il as a man in action both before and after the death of Aqhat. Before the death of Aqhat, Dan’il makes sacrifices to the gods, dines with the birth goddess, takes care of the case of the widow and orphan, and presents a bow to Aqhat. 3 After the death of Aqhat, Dan’il tears his clothes, adjures the clouds in the heat, inspects the condition of the land, prays for the diminished plants, asks Baal to help recover the remains of Aqhat, buries Aqhat, curses the towns near the site of Aqhat’s death, and blesses Pughat for her mission of vengeance.4 The author not only describes Dan’il as a man in action, but also portrays him as a man of emotion. For instance, when Dan’il hears the news of the granting of a son, “his face beams, he breaks out into laughter.” When he hears the news of the death of his son, Dan’il “trembles and perspires.” When he buries Aqhat, he weeps. He mourns Aqhat for seven years.5 The text presents Dan’il as a “real” person with multiple character traits. He is a man of integrity, a devout worshipper, righteous, loyal to his family, one who loves his children, one who expresses anger, sadness, joy, and a sense of justice, retaliation and vengeance. Because of these descriptions, Dan’il appears to be a full-fledged character. This positive portrayal of Dan’il’s character helps the audience to identify with his experiences and feelings. Since the story does not explicitly indicate Dan’il’s perception of Anat’s violence, we can only infer his perception through the descriptions of his emotions and actions. Dan’il’s Perception of Anat’s Violence The author does not explicitly point out Dan’il’s perception of Anat’s violence either through Dan’il’s speech or through the author’s evaluation of him. The author chooses to use Dan’il’s emotions and his actions after the death of Aqhat to reflect Dan’il’s perception of Anat’s violence. KTU 1.17 V:7-8; 1.19 I:23-25. KTU 1.17 I:1-15, II:24-40; V:7-8, 33-39. 4 KTU 1.19 I:36-37, 39-42, II:12-25; III:1-4-IV:17, 35-40. 5 KTU 1.17 II:8-12; 1.19 II:44-47; III:40; IV:11-17. 2 3

HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW

119

Dan’il’s emotion after the death of Aqhat is characterized by distress and grief. This distress and grief form a stark contrast to Dan’il’s longing for a son at the beginning of the story. Dan’il Longs for a Son. The lacking of progeny and the need for a son is one of the common motifs in ancient literature.6 The Story of Aqhat begins by describing Dan’il performing a ritual to the gods.7 This ritual lasts for six days. On the seventh day, Baal draws near in compassion and makes a plea for El to give Dan’il a son so that he can perform filial duties to Dan’il.8 El subsequently blesses Dan’il with a son.9 The text repeats this list of filial duties three more times in the rest of the story, with minor variations in the pronominal suffixes.10 Below is its first occurrence when Baal intercedes for Dan’il. The List of Ideal Sonship (KTU 1.17 I: 23-33) (26) nṣb . skn. ’ilibh . b qdš

(26) Who sets up a stela for his divine ancestors,

(27) ztr . ‘mh .

in the sanctuary (27) a monument (for) his clan;

l ’arṣ . mšṣu . qṭrh (28) l ‘pr .

Who brings out his smoke from the earth,

Ämr . ’a¨rh .

(28) Who protects his step from the dust;

ṭbq . lḥt (29) niṣh .

Who closes the mouth of (29) those who revile him;

6 For example, Abraham and Sarah lack a son (Gen 15), Hannah prays for a son (1 Sam 1), king Kirtu prays for his lack of progeny (KTU 1.14-16). 7 KTU 1.17 I: 1-15. I assume that the first missing ten lines describe or are related to Dan’il’s desire to have a son since the surviving text starts with Dan’il’s performance of ritual to the gods. Then Baal comes and intercedes to El for Dan’il to have a son. Dan’il may have stated his reason for his ritual in those missing lines. KTU 1.17 I: 2-48. 8 KTU 1.17 I: 16-33. 9 KTU 1.17 I: 34-48. The surviving text does not explicitly mention Dan’il’s objective in performing the ritual. The missing ten lines at the beginning of the story may have included the reason for Dan’il’s ritual performance. Nevertheless, based on the remaining text that comes down to us, we can infer from Baal’s plea to El that Dan’il’s objective in performing the ritual is to ask the gods for a son. 10 These four lists are in KTU 1.17 I: 26-33, 44-48, II: 1-8, 16-23. McAfee points out that in the missing portion of the text, it is possible that the author repeats the list again. See McAfee, “The Patriarch’s Longed-for Son,” 68.

120

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

grš . d . ‘šy . lnh

Who drives out those who disturb him;

(30)’aÆd . ydh . b škrn.

(30) Who takes hold of his hand in drunkenness,

m‘msh (31) [k ]šb‘ . yn

Who carries him when (31) (he is) sated with wine;

spu . ksmh . bt . b‘l

Who eats his portion in the house of Baal,

(32) [w ] mnth . bt . ’il .

(32) and his share in the house of El;

ṭÆ . ggh . b ym (33) [¨i]ṭ .

Who plasters his roof on the day of (33) mud,

rḥṣ . npṣh . b ym . r¨

Who washes his garment on the day of mire.

The author places this list at the beginning of the story and repeats the list three times – a seemingly purposeful device. The significance of the list’s position in the story (at the beginning of the text) and the frequency of its repetition (four times total) in the surviving text point to its unique function and place in the story. What is the function of this list in the story? In both biblical and Akkadian literature, repetition serves a variety of functions. Below we group them into four categories pertaining to the narrative purposes. The possible functions of the list will follow this grouping. (1) Repetition unfolds and advances a plot. It is not just the event told that is important but also who tells and retells the event that plays an active role in the dynamics of the action.11 In the Story of Aqhat, the list of Ideal Sonship is repeated three times by different characters: Baal, El, Messenger of El and Dan’il. Therefore, the author uses this list to move the plot development from one character to another. It is worth noting that both El and Baal are well aware of Dan’il’s desperate need of a son. This knowledge foreshadows their subsequent actions towards the fate of Aqhat. (2) Repetition increases the reader’s suspense. For instance, in the poem The Descent of Ishtar, Ishtar has to pass through seven gates in order to enter the netherworld. Before entering each gate, Ishtar has to take off one of her ornaments or apparels to gain admittance. This ritual is repeated seven times (total twenty one lines with seven three-line segment) with variation in the number of the gate and the name of the finery that is taken off. Reiner points out that this series of repetition serves to delay the action and increase the reader’s suspense as to what will happen to Ishtar.12 11 12

Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative, 375. Erica Reiner, Your Thwarts in Pieces, Your Moorings Rope Cut: Poetry from Babylonia

HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW

121

Similarly, McAfee thinks that the lists of the filial duties raise questions in the mind of the audience. The audience may ask questions such as: Will Dan’il die in this story? Will his son perform the duties for him?13 Other scholars also maintain that the four-fold repetition fits well with the literary purpose: to emphasize the need for a son and to enhance the increasing literary expectation of a son which prepares the way for the depths of disappointment at the death of Aqhat.14 (3) Repetition may operate in the interests of cohesion, enrichment or reversal of meaning, and for dramatic emphasis.15 Aitken also identifies the dramatic function of repetition. He states that “repetitions mark climax, create and release tension, control the pace of the plot development and highlight contrasts, thereby enhancing the dramatic quality of the narration.”16 The list of Ideal Sonship may serve a number of these functions to enhance the dramatic effect of the need for a son. (4) Repetition can be used in the forms of “forecast” and “enactment” to contrast with the outcome. In this use, the author spells out an expected command, prophecy or scenario and then states the actual state of affairs.17 In this sense, the list of Ideal Sonship is what the characters expected from Aqhat and it forms a contrast to the outcome of their expectation – Aqhat does not and cannot live up to the expectations of the list. Buccellati uses the beginning verses of Enuma Elish to demonstrate the concept of anticipation and contrast. These verses provide a powerful description of the cosmic setting against which creation take place: e-nu-ma e-liš la na-bu-u ša-ma-mu šap-liš am-ma-tum šu-ma la zak-rat When on high no name was given to heaven,

and Assyria (Mich.: Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies, 1985), 40, 51. 13 McAfee, “The Patriarch’s Longed-for Son,” 69. 14 Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 38; Boda, “The List,” 11; McAfee, “The Patriarch’s Longed-for Son,” 69; Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 69. J-M. Husser, from a literary and poetic point of view, thinks that the enumeration of the duties of a son lends to the text a refrain-like rhythmical movement. Husser, “The Birth of a Hero,” 85. 15 Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative, 387. 16 Aitken, “Formulaic Patterns,” 9. Although Aitken chooses the passing of time as his focus, his study seems to apply to other forms of repetitions such as the repetition of the list of Ideal Sonship. 17 Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative, 376.

122

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT nor below was the netherworld called by name…18

This negative anticipation forms a contrast to the outcome of the story: the fifty names of Marduk given at the end of the poem create a resolution to the initial emphasis on the lack of a name for the cosmos and the gods.19 Similarly, in the Story of Aqhat, the list of Ideal Sonship may function to stress the anticipation of the son and contrast that with the unexpected outcome – the dutiful daughter. In view of these functions of repetition, it is difficult to delineate the author’s intended function(s). The list of the Ideal Sonship may serve multiple functions including all of the above four elements: to advance the plot development, to increase reader’s suspense and expectation of the ideal son, to create a dramatic effect on the need of a son, and to form a contrast to the outcome of the story. In any case, Dan’il’s need for a son is stressed through the repetition of the list. This need is actualized when the messenger delivers the news of El’s granting of Dan’il’s wishes. Upon hearing the news, Dan’il responds with joy: Dan’il Rejoiced (KTU 1.17 II: 8-15)

(8) b ’unil20 (9) pnm . tšmÆ .

(8) Dan’il’s face rejoiced,

w ‘l . yṣhl pi t

(9) and above, his countenance shone.

(10) yprq . lṣb21 . w yṣḥq

(10) He opened his mouth and laughed.

(11) p‘n . l hdm . y¨pd .

(11) He placed (his) foot on the footstool.

ŷšu (12) gh . w yṣḥ .

He lifted up (12) his voice and cried:

’a¨bn . ’ank (13) w ’anÆn .

“At last I can sit down (13) and rest,

w tnÆ . b ’irty (14) npš .

and (14) (my) soul can rest in my breast,

“Epic of Creation,” translated by Benjamin R. Foster (COS 1.111:391). Giorgio Buccellati, “On Poetry – Theirs and Ours,” in Lingering Over Words: Studies in Ancient Near Eastern Literature in Honor of William L. Moran (Edited by Tzvi Abusch, John Huehnergard, Piotr Steinkeller; Atlanta: Scholars, 1990), 120. 20 KTU has “Lg. dn’il” in note 5, thus, the reading should be “dn’il.” See KTU, 48. 21 Gibson has “throat” instead of “mouth,” see Gibson, CML, 105; Pardee renders “forehead,” “The ’Aqhatu,” 345; Parker avoids the specifics and simply paraphrases “he breaks out into laughter,” UNP, 55. 18 19

HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW

123

k yld . bn . ly . km

For a son will be born to me like

(15) ’aÆy . w šrš . km . ’aryy

(15) my brothers, and a scion like my kinsmen.”

Dan’il’s response to the news of El granting him a son further confirms his need for a son and reveals his motive of performing the ritual to the gods – He wants a son, a son who can fulfill the filial duties, a son who can attend him in his old age and after his death. From praying for a son to hearing the news of granting a son, the righteous Dan’il experiences an emotional and a dramatic journey from distress to delight. Dan’il Trembles for the Loss of the Son. However, Anat’s killing of Aqhat turns this delight back to distress. In fact, this distress is a far more intense than the previous one since Dan’il had experienced the granting of a son and now he has lost him. This distress has now escalated to despair. With the death of Aqhat, Dan’il’s dream of having a son vanishes without a trace. The movement from distress to delight and then to despair makes the audience sense the depth of Dan’il’s grief and disappointment. Dan’il’s emotional journey depicts Anat’s violence as a negative act. After hearing the messengers delivering the news of Aqhat’s death, the text describes Dan’il’s physical reaction: Dan’il Trembled (KTU 1.19 II: 44-47)22

(44) bh . p‘nm] (45) tṭṭ .

(44) Below, his feet (45) trembled;

‘l[n . pnh . td‘ . b‘dn23]

Above, his face sweated;

(46) ksl24 . y¨[br .

Behind, (46) (His) loins cracked.

yǧ . pnt . kslh]

Shook were the joints of his loins,

(47)’anš . d[t . `rh .

(47) Weak were those of his back.

Upon hearing the news of Aqhat’s death, Dan’il responds with intense quaking and fear. Dan’il’s fear gives the audience of the story a window into his emotional state and invites the audience to sense the effect of Anat’s violence through Dan’il’s point of view and to identify with Dan’il’s loss. 22 The lines 44-47 are restored based on the parallel texts KTU 1.3 III: 32-5 and 1.4 II: 16-20. Both describe Anat’s physical reaction upon perceiving threats. 23 Gordon sees this word as the adverb b‘d “behind.” See Gordon, UT, 374. 24 Ksl refers to “back.” See Segert, BGUL, 190, In order to distinguish this word from `r (“back”) in line 47, we use the translation “loin.”

124

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

His response to this sad news acutely contrasts with his response to the joyful news of Aqhat’s birth.25 There is no indication in the text that Dan’il is aware of the encounter between Anat and Aqhat and that it is because of Anat’s covetousness that compels her to kill, nor is he aware of Aqhat’s lack of respect for the goddess that has contributed to his death. This lack of knowledge on the part of Dan’il strongly influences his perception of Anat’s violence. Thus, the author presents Dan’il’s point of view as a one-sided view. Then Dan’il raises his voice and cries. He asks Baal to retrieve the remains of Aqhat from the bodies of the birds (see the text in chapter 2, KTU 1.19 III:1-45). The first two attempts fail. Dan’il succeeds in the third attempt and finds Aqhat’s remains in the body of the mother bird, ṣamal. He then weeps and buries Aqhat.26 Dan’il’s performance of the burial rite for Aqhat is in stark contrast to his expectation of a son to perform filial duties before and after his death. The emotional distress, the physical reaction, and the verbal entreat to Baal point to Dan’il’s perception of Anat’s violence as a malevolent act. Dan’il imprecates the towns near Aqhat’s death. Upon finishing Aqhat’s burial rite, Dan’il curses three towns near the site of Aqhat’s death. He calls down banishment and blindness on the inhabitants of the towns and loss of vegetation on their lands for their share of the blood-guilt.27 Dan’il Cursed the Towns (KTU 1.19 III:45-IV:6)

(45) qr . my[m] (46) mlk . yṣm .

(45) QR-MY[M], (46) the king cursed:

y lkm . qr . mym .

“Woe to you, QR-MYM,

d‘[lk] (47) mƧ . ’aqht . Çzr .

n[ear you] Aqhat the hero (47) was smitten.

’amd . gr bt ’il

Stood a supplicant in the house of El.

(48) ‘nt . brḥ . p‘lm.h .

(48) Now and forever a fugitive,

‘nt . p dr . dr

now to all generations.”

(49) ‘db . ’uÆry mṭ . ydh

(49) Then he took (his) staff (in) his hand,

(50) ymÇ . l mrrt . tÇll . bnr

(50) he came to MRRT-TGLL-BNR.

(51) yšu . gh . w yṣḥ .

(51) He lifted up his voice and he cried:

KTU 1.17 II: 8-11. Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 194. KTU 1.19 III: 1-41. 27 Gibson, CML, 26. 25 26

HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW

125

y lk . mrrt (52) tÇll bnr

“Woe to you, MRRT-TGLL-BNR,

d ‘lk . mÆṣ . ’aqht (53) Çzr

near you Aqhat (53) the hero was smitten.

šršk . b ’arṣ . ’al (54) yp‘

May your root not (54) grow from the land.

riš . Çly . bd . ns‘k

May (your) head bow in the hand that plucks you.

(55) ‘nt . brḥ . p ‘lmh

(55) Now and forever a fugitive,

(56) ‘nt . p dr . dr

(56) now to all generations.”

‘db . ’uÆry . mṭ ydh

Then he took (his) staff in his hand.

(1) ymÇ .l qrt . ’ablm

(1) He came to the city of ABLM.

’ablm (2) qrt . zbl . yrÆ .

ABLM, (2) the city of Prince YariÆ.

yšu . gh (3) w yṣḥ .

He lifted up his voice (3) and he cried:

y lk . qrt . ’ablm

“Woe to you, the city of ABLM,

(4) d‘lk . mÆṣ . ’aqht . Çzr

(4) near you, Aqhat the hero was smitten.

(5) ‘wrt . yštk . b‘l .

(5) May Baal strike you (with) blindness,

l ht (6) w ‘lmh .

from now (6) and forever,

l ‘nt . p dr . dr

from now to all generations.”

This practice of cursing the towns near the site of someone’s death brings to mind the practice prescribed in Deut 21:1-9.28 In this passage, if a slain person is found lying in the open country, and it is not known who has struck him, then the elders and judges should go out and measure the cities near the slain one. The elders of the nearest city shall sacrifice a heifer, wash their hands, and declare before the Levitical priests that they are innocent from the blood-shed. By cursing the towns near Aqhat’s death, Dan’il attempts to bring on the guilty towns their punishment. His cursing further reflects his perception of Anat’s violence that it is an unjust act and that Aqhat is the victim whose blood has been shed wrongfully. Dan’il Mourns for the Loss of the Son. The next reaction of Dan’il is mourning. The description of Dan’il’s mourning and its duration reflects 28 John Harrison Tullock, “Blood-Vengeance Among the Israelites in the Light of Its Near Eastern Background” (Ph. D. diss., Vanderbilt University, 1966), 156. Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 126.

126

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

the extent of his grief. After cursing the three towns, Dan’il invites weeping women (“bkyt” and “mšspdt”) to enter into his house.29 The text describes Dan’il’s mourning in the following passage: Dan’il Mourned (KTU 1.19 IV:11-17)

(11) ybk30 . l ’aqht (12) Çzr .ydm‘ . l kdd31 . dn’il

(11) He wept for Aqhat, (12) the hero, shed tears for the child of Dan’il,

(13) mt .rp’i .

(13) man of Rapi’u.

l ymm . l yrÆm

From days to months,

(14) l yrÆm . l šnt .

(14) from months to years,

‘d (15) šb‘t . šnt .

until (15) seven years.

ybk . l’ aq (16) ht . Çzr .

He wept for Aq(16)hat, the hero,

ydm‘ . l kdd (17) dn’il . mt . rp[’i . m]k .

shed tears for the child of (17) Dan’il, man of Rapi’u.

The weeping women and the duration of mourning for seven years enhance the tragic result of Anat’s violence.32 The time reference of seven years is enclosed in an envelope-kind of structure, repeating twice (lines 11, KTU 1.19 III: 45-56 - IV: 1-11. After Anat’s killing of Aqhat, the verb bk “weep” occurs seven times in the extant text: once for Anat (KTU 1.18 IV: 39), four times for Pughat (KTU 1.19 I: 34, II: 8, 9, 10), and twice for Dan’il (KTU 1.19 I: 35). The synonym dm‘ “shed tears” occurs three times: once for Pughat (KTU 1.19 I: 35) and twice for Dan’il (KTU 1.19 IV: 12, 16). Ilimilku employs this word pair (bk and dm‘) in the Baal Cycle and in the Kirtu text as well. In the Baal Cycle, Anat weeps and sheds tears for Baal’s death (KTU 1.6 I: 9-10). In the Kirtu text, king Kirtu weeps and sheds tears for the death of his progeny (KTU 1.14 I: 26-27, 31-32, 39-40; II: 8-9). Thus, Ilimilku uses this word pair to express the tragedy of the death of one’s close family members. Aitken notes that this word pair reflects a formulaic pattern used in the context of mourning. See Aitken, “Word Pair and Tradition,” 33. Cf. This word pair appears in Lam 1:2, which is also in the context of mourning. 31 Margalit emends kdd to mdd or jdd and translates “the beloved (child) of Dan’il. Margalit, UPA, 164, 442-3. 32 See KTU 1.19 IV: 9-15. In the Hittite myth of Elkunirša, Ašertu also appointed the mourners to mourn for the death of her sons for seven years. See “Elkunirša and Ašertu,” translated by Gary Beckman (COS 1.55, 149). Normally the mourning period for the dead is seven days (Gen 50:10; 1 Sam 31:13) or thirty days (Deut 34:8) or seventy days (Gen 50:3). The seven-year mourning expresses the extent and the depth of the tragedy. 29 30

HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW

127

15) exactly the activity Dan’il undertakes. In this sense, the seven years of mourning do not seem to make any difference to Dan’il’s family.33 Aqhat remains dead. Dan’il continues to mourn. Wright rightly notes that, “The statement about seven-year mourning is the last and, though briefly related, the most comprehensive account of mourning because of its duration, the number of people involved, and the inclusion of both genders.”34 The text repeats Dan’il’s epithet “man of Rapi’u (mt rp’u)” which means “man of healing” twice35 to further intensify the irony of Aqhat’s death from which Dan’il is incapable of healing and restoration. The word “Rapi’u” comes from the root rp’ meaning “to heal.”36 Its Hebrew cognate is ‫ רפא‬.Besides the meaning “to heal,” the word also carries the connotation “to darn,” “to mend,” “to repair,” “to pacify.” 37 On the meaning of the verb ‫ רפא‬, J. Gray states that This verb is used in the sense of conferring fertility in Genesis 20: 17, where the Lord “heals” or restores fertility to the harem of Abimelech of Gerar, and in 2 Kings 2: 21, where Elisha “heals” or gives fertilizing properties to the spring of Jericho which had previously brought sterility and death to the land.38

Caquot and Sznycer (1974: 419) translate the epithet of Dan’il mt rp’i “man of healing.” In a similar sense, de Moor (1987: 225) renders it “the Saviour’s man” followed by Coogan (1978: 32) “the Healer’s man.” De Moor notes that “Saviour” or “Healer” is an epithet of Baal. Therefore he takes Dan’il’s epithet “the Saviour’s man” as characterizing Dan’il as the protégé of Baal.39 This epithet may also link to the Rapiuma texts where rp’i refers to the dead ancestors.40 Here, we have an interesting foreshadowing of a twist on the theme of dead ancestors, because in the story, the father Hunt, verbal communication. Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 195. Aitken also notes that this is the most elaborate example of the formulaic patterns for the passing of time. In this case, “in the seventh year” reinforces the period of the enduring action. See Aitken, “Formulaic Patterns,” 5. 35 KTU 1.19 IV: 13, 17. 36 For a detailed discussion of the meaning of this word, see Margalit, UPA, 251-60. 37 BDB, 950; HALOT III, 1274. 38 Gray, The Legacy of Canaan, 154, n. 6. 39 De Moor, ARTU, 225, n. 5. 40 Other commentators take this epithet as referring to a place name. For example, Gibson, CML, 101; Margalit, UPA, 143; Parker, UNP, 51; Pardee, “The ’Aqhatu,” 343; and Wyatt translates the epithet “man of Rapi’u,” RTU, 250. 33 34

128

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

mourn for the ancestors but mourns for the son. The double meanings of healing and death may also reflect the story line. However, it is uncertain whether the Rapiuma texts serve as the sequel to the Story of Aqhat. As a result of Anat’s violence, Dan’il experiences no happiness but only grief. Dan’il may not be aware of Aqhat’s arrogance that has contributed to his death. All he knows is that Anat deprives him of his previous son, of an heir, of the hope to continue his family line, and possibly of his kingdom. All his responses after the death of Aqhat including his fear, his grief, his discovering of Aqhat’s remains and his curses suggest that Dan’il disapproves Anat’s violence against his son. He perceives it as an unjust act. Dan’il’s Perception of Pughat’s Violence There is a shift of mood from mourning to rejoicing in the next scene. After the seven years of mourning for Aqhat, Dan’il charges the weeping women to depart from his house. Then he presents a ritual offering to the gods.41 Based on what follows, the motive of Dan’il’s offering of sacrifices seems to ask the gods’ favor to redeem the tragedy of losing a son. Dan’il Offered a Sacrifice to the Gods (KTU 1.19 IV:22-27) (22) w yqr[y] (23) dbḥ . ’ilm .

(22) Then he ma[de] (23) an offering to the gods,

yš‘ly . dǨhm (24) b šmym .

he caused his incense rise (24) to the heavens,

dǨ hrnmy [.] b [k] (25) bkbm .

incense of hrnmy to the (25) stars.

‘lh . yd . d[n’il . xx]xx

Upon it, the hand of Da[n’il]

(26) ‘lh . yd . ‘d . lhklh xxx

(26) Upon it, the hand again to his palace …

mṣ (27)ltm . mrqdm . dšn . l bt[h]

[cym]bals, castanets of ivory to [his] house.

The text indicates that the object of Dan’il’s ritual is a general reference “the gods” (’ilm), but it does not specify the identity of these gods. Since Dan’il is unaware of the heavenly encounter between Anat and El, he is ignorant about the role El played in the death of Aqhat, unless the original text contains that piece of information.42 However, this is unlikely since KTU 1.19 IV:22-27. This calls to mind the heavenly scene between Yahweh and the Satan in Job 1-2. Job remains ignorant about this heavenly scene throughout the whole book. 41 42

HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW

129

the lacuna in the text does not have enough space to disclose the encounter between El and Anat to Dan’il. If Dan’il indeed includes El as one of the gods to whom he appeals, this would create a sense of irony since it is El’s divine permission that decrees Aqhat’s death. Dan’il’s ignorance of the role El played in his son’s death suggests a further level of disparity between the author/audience’s knowledge and Dan’il’s knowledge about what has occurred in the divine realm. By allowing this disparity, the author elevates the audience’s knowledge more than Dan’il’s, thus helps the audience to sympathize with Dan’il’s ignorance. If the term “the gods” included Baal, this would seem to confirm Baal’s disapproval of Anat’s violence. However, the term “the gods” elsewhere in the context of making offering to the deities in the Story of Aqhat refers to the gods as a collective divine body in general without drawing specific attention to any particular god.43 Here, we may construe the term as referring to the divine realm in general. This general address to the “gods” rather than to any specific god such as “Baal” subtly points to the “strain between the human and the divine” at this juncture of Dan’il’s life.44 The idea of invoking the blessings of the gods before one goes on a serious mission also appears in the Baal Cycle. When Baal descends to the underworld, El orders Shapshu to seek him. 45 He delivers his message through Anat. In response, Anat carries El’s message to Shapshu and then confers a blessing upon her. Anat Blessed Shapshu (KTU 1.6 IV:22-24)

(22) ’an . l. ’an .y špš

(22) Wherever (you go), O Shapshu,

(23) ’an . l. ’an . ’il . yÇr[k]

(23) wherever (you go), may El protect [you],

(24) tÇrk . šlm[

(24) may [

]

] protect you in peace.

The next forty lines are unintelligible. When the text resumes, Baal reappears and sits on his throne. This result indicates that Shapshu’s mission of seeking Baal succeeds. This success may be associated with Anat’s conference of the blessing of El upon her.

For instance, KTU 1.17 I:2; V:20. Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 221. 45 Shapshu, the sun goddess, travels through the underworld during the night. See KTU 1.6 VI:49. 43 44

130

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

Dan’il’s seeking of divine blessing suggests that there is an unsatisfactory state that needs to be dealt with: the death of Aqhat.46 From Dan’il’s point of view, Aqhat’s death is unjustified and needs to be redeemed. His reasons for that, however, remain unknown to the audience. It may simply be that Aqhat is his son despite what he does to the goddess Anat. In this sense, one’s relationship to the victim of violence has a great influence upon one’s perception of the violence committed against the victim. One element present in this ritual and in contrast to the previous cursing and mourning is the element of joy. Wright notes that this ritual differs from the previous rituals in the story in that it includes different accompaniments such as cymbals (mṣltm) and clappers (mrqdm).47 Elsewhere in the Ugaritic texts, the words mṣltm and mrqdm occur twice (KTU 1.3 I:19; 1.108:4-5). 48 In both of these two occurrences, the context is related to celebration and joyful feast. For instance, after Baal wins the battle against Yamm, he holds a victory feast. There, a hero deity sings to Baal with the accompaniment of cymbals. Baal’s Victory Feast Employed Cymbals (KTU 1.3 I:18-22)49 (18) qm . ybd . wyšr

(18) He rose, chanted and sang,

(19) mṣltm . bd . n‘m

(19) (with) cymbals in the hands of the musician.

(20) yšr . Çzr . tb . ql

(20) The hero sang (with) a good voice,

(21) ‘l . b‘l . bṣrrt (22) ṣpn

(21) for Baal in the heights of (22) Saphon.

In the hymnic prayer to the deity Rapi’u,50 the poet invokes the people to bless Rapi’u and to extol him with music including both mṣltm and mrqdm. The Praise to Rapi’u Involved Cymbals and Castanets (KTU 1.108:15)

(1) [xx]n .yšt . rp’u . mil . ‘lm .

(1) May Rapi’u, king of eternity drink [ ],

This is not unlike the case of Anat seeking El’s permission to deal with an unsatisfactory state: the rebellion of Aqhat. 47 Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 200. 48 Dietrich and Loretz, Word List, 136, 138. 49 When Anat speaks of Baal’s revivification, she may allude to this feast. See KTU 1.17 VI:30-32. 50 The identity of Rapiu is uncertain. 46

HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW

131

w yšt (2) [’il ]g¨r . w yqr .

may he drink, (2) the strong and the powerful [god],

’il . y¨b . b ‘¨trt

the god (who) sat on Ԭtrt,

(3) ’il ¨pṭ51 . b hdr‘y .

(3) the god (who) rules in hdr’y,

d yšr . w yÄmr

whom one sings and makes music

(4) b knr . w ¨lb.

(4) with zither and flute,

b tp . w mṣltm .

on tp(?) and cymbals,

b m(5)rqdm . dšn .

with (5) clappers of ivory,

b ḥbr . k¨r . `bm

with the ḥbr skillful `bm.

Studies have shown that music is used to celebrate the cultic events both in Ugarit and Israel. 52 All the occurrences of the word ‫“ מצלתים‬mṣltm” in the Hebrew Bible appears in the context of celebration of cultic events such as in transporting the ark to the city of David and in the dedication of the wall of Jerusalem.53 The function of cymbals used in the cultic events is related to its nature as a percussion instrument.54 It is connected with rhythm and not melody. Thus, the accompaniment of cymbals conveys a joyful mood to the occasion of celebration. This joyful element points backward as an indication of the end of mourning, and forward as a preparation for Pughat’s vengeance. This double function indirectly cast Anat’s violence in a negative light and the vengeance of Pughat in a positive light. Dan’il Blesses Pughat for Her Mission of Vengeance. After Dan’il makes sacrifice to the gods, Pughat in turn requests the blessing of Dan’il to exact vengeance for Aqhat:

KTU reads ¨b`. Korpel, A Rift in the Clouds, 484. Annie Caubet, “La Musique à Ougarit: nouveaux témoignages matériels,” in Ugarit, Religion and Culture, 10. For a sketch of cymbals, see Caubet, “La Musigque,” 29, fig. 1. Joachim Braun, Music in Ancient Israel/Palestine: Archaeological, Written, and Comparative Source (trans. Douglas W. Stott; Grand Rapids, Mich., Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2002), 20. 53 1 Chron 13:8; 15:16, 19; 16:5, 42; 25:6; 2 Chron 5:12, 13; 29:25; Ezra 3:10; Neh 12:27. 54 Matahisa Koitabashi, “Significance of Ugaritic mSltm “Cymbals” in the Anat Text,” in Cult and Ritual in the Ancient Near East (ed. H.I.H. Prince Takohito Mikasa; Otto Harrassowitz: Wiesbaden, 1992), 3. 51 52

132

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

Pughat Sought Dan’il’s Blessings for Revenge (KTU 1.19 IV: 29-35)

(29) qrym . ’ab . dbḥ . l ’ilm

(29) My father offered a sacrifice to the gods,

(30) š‘ly . dǨh . b šmym

(30) he caused incense to rise into heavens,

(31) dǨ . hrnmy . b kbkbm

(31) incense of hrnmy into the stars.

(32) l tbrkn55 . ’alk . brktm

(32) (Father), Bless me, I will go blessed!

(33) tmrn. ’alk . nmrrt

(33) Strengthen me, I will go strengthened!

(34) ’imÆṣ . mÆṣ . ’aÆy .

(34) I will slay the slayer of my brother.

’akl [.] m (35) kly[ . ‘]l56 .’umty

I will finish [ ] (35) (Who) finished my mother’s child.”

w y‘n . dn (36) ‘il . mt . rp’i.

And Dan (36) ’il, man of Rap’iu replied,

npš . tḥ[.] pÇ[t] (37) ¨kmt . mym .

“By my life, let Pugha[t] (37) bearer of water, live,

ḥspt . l š‘r (38) ṭl .

who extracts dew from the flee (38) ce,

yd‘t [.] hlk . kbkm xx

who knows the course of the stars,

(39) npš . hy57 . mÆ .

(39) by my life (?), my brain (?)

tmÆṣ . mÆṣ[ . ’aÆh]

You will slay the slayer of [your brother],

(40) tkl . mkly . ‘l . ’umt .[xx]

You will finish the one who finished the child of your mother …

The objective of Pughat’s request from Dan’il is to avenge her brother, Aqhat, by killing the murderer. Dan’il in turn assures Pughat of his own blessing, not the gods’ blessing. By conferring his blessing to Pughat, Dan’il approves Pughat’s act of vengeance – a vengeance that will be accomplished through an act of violence. By implication, Dan’il perceives Pughat’s violence as an act of vengeance, an act to remedy a wrong. It is possible that Pughat invokes the gods to bless her mission of vengeance. I take the word tbrkn as 2ms with Dan’il as the subject since the context suggests that Pughat is speaking to Dan’il. Cf. Gibson and Aitken take the subject as referring to the gods, “Let the gods bless me.” See Gibson, CML, 120 and Aitken, The Aqhat Narrative, 77, 105. 56 Pardee remarks that in the strict sense, this word means “suckling, ” thus it denotes “child.” See Pardee, “The ’Aqhatu,” 355. 57 KTU reads “hy.” See KTU, 61. The context suggests the word “ḥy.” 55

HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW

133

The Conceptual Point of View The extant text does not mention whether Dan’il has inquired into the cause for his son’s death. The only possible lacuna that may have included Dan’il’s inquiry appears in KTU 1.19 II:49-55 where Dan’il responds to the news of his son’s death, because there are no other major gaps in the rest of the story to justify the inclusion of Dan’il’s inquiry. Yet, it is doubtful whether these six lines, being so brief, would include Dan’il’s inquiry and the messengers’ reply. It is more likely that Dan’il does not inquire into the reason for his son’s death. This suggests that what matters to Dan’il is the death of his son, not so much the cause behind it. The death of his son constitutes enough reason for Dan’il to disapprove of Anat’s violence. For Dan’il, Anat’s violence is a case of unjust murder and his son, Aqhat, is the victim of that crime. This is a personal matter. The author purposely withholds the piece of information regarding the encounter between Anat and Aqhat from Dan’il so as to present Dan’il’s point of view as a one-sided point of view. On the contrary, Dan’il approves Pughat’s violence. He confers “by his life” his blessings upon Pughat for her mission of vengeance. Thus, Dan’il views Pughat as a blood-avenger who will redeem the family honor by slaying the murderer. These two opposing points of view on Anat and Pughat, a murderer and an avenger, reveal that Dan’il does not object to the idea of violence. He is concerned with the cause for violence. For him, it is reasonable to use violence for the cause of justice as in the case of taking vengeance for the death of a family member but it is wrong to use violence to kill his son regardless of any “legitimate” reasons. This latter concept leads to the connection between one’s perception of violence and one’s relationship with the victim of the violence. In Dan’il’s case, if the victim of Anat’s violence is someone else outside of his family, he may not have cared enough to respond the way he did. Therefore, Dan’il’s perception and conception of violence are tightly bound up with his relationship with the victim of the violence. Since the victim of Anat’s violence is his son, it accounts for the two diverging points of view of Dan’il regarding the two acts of violence in the story. The Emotional Point of View The text places great emphasis on the emotions of Dan’il, from desiring a son, to having a son, to losing the son, and to taking vengeance against the losing of the son. Dan’il is depicted as a real human character with flesh and

134

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

blood. This emphasis on emotion aids greatly in the audience’s identification of Dan’il’s feelings and his plight. The Interest Point of View The story brings out the issue of the need for a son and the tragic loss of the son. This experience must have engendered sympathy in the story’s audience. By portraying Dan’il as a positive character, and by elevating the audience’s knowledge over Dan’il’s, the author establishes a reliable relationship with the audience, which influences the audience’s perception of Dan’il by sympathizing with his tragedy and his ignorance. In addition, the author’s descriptions of Dan’il’s distress, anger, and grief also affect the audience’s emotion and invite the audience to identify with Dan’il’s loss and feelings. The identification with Dan’il’s emotion arouses a sense of justice and vengeance on the part of the audience. Lanser states that the more the character is “subjectified,” the greater the audience’s access to his or her persona and the more powerful the affinity or identification with that particular character.58 Thus, the “subjectification” of Dan’il by the author of the story greatly influences the perception of the audience.

PUGHAT The Characterization of Pughat in the Story of Aqhat Pughat first appears in KTU 1.19 I: 34, after Anat kills Aqhat and plays a significant role subsequent to that event. The name “Pughat” is a common Ugaritic word for “girl,” 59 the feminine counterpart to the male pÇy, “boy.”60 The names of Aqhat’s parents (Dan’il and Danatiya) both build on the root dny “the administration of justice” which may reflect their social roles as king and queen. The name of Aqhat, which means “obedience,” reveals his familial role. 61 As opposed to her parents and her brother’s names, the name “Pughat” simply reflects her gender as a female. Her epithets reflect her role as a “house girl.” Susan Sniader Lanser, The Narrative Act: Point of View in Prose Fiction (Princeton: Princeton University, 1981), 206. 59 This word appears 6 times in KTU 1.15 III: 7-12, describing that king Kirtu’s wife will bear girls to him. It also occurs in KTU 1.102 where there is a list of census including women, children and young people. This word designates young girls. 60 McAfee, “The Patriarch’s Longed-for Son,” 104-5. 61 McAfee, “The Patriarch’s Longed-for Son,” 145. 58

HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW

135

Pughat’s threefold epithet “the bearer of water” (¨kmt my), “the collector of dew from the fleece” (ḥspt. lš‘r. ṭl), and “the one who knows the course of the stars” (yd‘t. hlk. kbkbm)62 emphasize Pughat’s household duties: she draws and collects water and she rises up early when the stars are about to disappear from the sky.63 From these images, the author depicts Pughat as the “the girl next door,” and the dutiful daughter. After the death of Aqhat, Pughat’s “house girl” image soon changes into a warrior image. She exacts blessing from her father to avenge her brother. She places a knife and enters the tent of Yatpan to carry out her vengeance. The story describes Pughat as a dutiful daughter, a faithful sister, a blood-avenger, and a heroine. She expresses distress and grief at her brother’s death, but also shows courage, strength and determination when she decides to avenge her brother. Therefore, in the Story of Aqhat, Pughat is portrayed as a full-fledged character, a positive figure like Dan’il, her father. This positive portrayal encourages the audience to side with her. The Perceptual Point of View After the death of Aqhat, the author describes Pughat’s reactions. The perception of Pughat on Anat’s violence is reflected in her emotion, her speech, and her actions after the death of Aqhat. The author first draws attention to her emotion, and then focuses on her speech and actions. Pughat Expresses Grief. The story first describes Pughat’s emotion when she perceives the diminished state of the land and the flock of birds hovering over her father’s house.64 Then the text reads: Pughat Wept (KTU 1.19 I: 34-35)

(34) tbky . pÇt . bm . lb

(34) Pughat wept in (her) heart,

(35) tdm‘. bm . kbd

(35) Shed tears in (her) liver.

(36) tmz ‘. kst . dn’il . mt

(36) Rent is the garment of Dan’il, man of

(37) rp’i . ’al. Çzr. mt hrnmy

(37) Rap’iu, robe of the hero, man of Harmemite.

The text repeats her first epithet “the bearer of water” three times (KTU 1.19 II: 1-3, 6-7; IV: 28). Wyatt notes that “knowing the course of stars” involves elements of astronomy and astrology. However, Pughat is a house girl, not a diviner. This epithet may simply refer to her reading of the agricultural seasons off from the celestial calendar. See Wyatt, RTU, 297, n. 209. 63 Margalit, UPA, 364-5. 64 KTU 1.19 I: 29-33. 62

136

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

Upon her observation of the vegetation and the flock of birds: Pughat weeps in her heart. Pughat’s intuition tells her that something disastrous has happened since it is a common belief in ancient cultures that the suffering of nature implies misdeed and death. 65 The context suggests that Pughat may not realize that the victim is her brother since the news of Aqhat’s death comes later in the story.66 Therefore, both Pughat and Dan’il perceive the diminishing of nature without knowing the cause behind it. However, the author has revealed the cause to the audience of the story. His purpose of withholding this information from Pughat and Dan’il seems to help the audience anticipate their response once Pughat and Dan’il realize the cause for Aqhat’s death, thus creating suspense and a dramatic effect for the story. In KTU 1.19 I: 49, Dan’il calls his daughter to lead a donkey for him to ride on in order to inspect the condition of the land. The author describes Pughat’s emotion vividly in the following lines: Pughat Assumed Duties of a Son (KTU 1.19 II: 8-11)

(8) bkm67 . tmdln . ‘r

(8) Weeping, she saddled a male-donkey,

(9) bkm . tṣmd . pḥl .

(9) weeping, she harnessed a donkey,

. ’abh .

weeping, (10) she lifted up her father.

bkm (10)

tšu68

tštnn. l [b]mt ‘r

She placed him unto the back of the donkey,

(11) l ysmsm69 . bmt . pḥl70

(11) onto the most comfortable part of the back of the donkey.

65 Gibson, CML, 25. Other examples of the death of a person affects nature include Baal’s death (KTU 1.6 IV: 1-5), the death of Abel (Gen 4:10), the death of Saul (2 Sam 1:19-27), and the death of Enkidu (Gilgamesh Epic VIII: I). 66 KTU 1.19 II: 27-44. 67 Most commentators take the m in bkm as an enclitic mem, and translate bk “weeping.” e.g. Caquot, TO I, 446; Parker, UNP, 69; Pardee, “The ’Aqhatu,” 352; and Wyatt, RTU, 298. Margalit offers an alternative translation by taking bkm as cognate with Arabic bakima “be dumb, silent, mute.” Thus he translates “silently.” Margalit reasons that this interpretation is in line with Pughat’s self-control as she cries “inwardly.” See Margalit, UPA, 159, 360, n. 13. Margalit’s translation, though different, would not deny the negative emotion of Pughat. Dijkstra and de Moor take the word as an adverb of time (comparable to Hebrew and Aramaic bkn) meaning “thereupon.” See Dijkstra and de Moor, “Problematic Passages,” 203. De Moor later renders the word “then.” See De Moor, ARTU, 252. Gibson has “forthwith.” In his notes, he adds “possibly ‘weeping.’” See Gibson, CML, 115. 68 From the root NŠ’, “to lift up.” Segert, BGUL, 194.

HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW

137

The story presents a picture of a young girl who experiences great emotional pain as she leads the donkey to her father and lifts her father up onto the back of the donkey – an activity normally performed by a male.71 Lines 8-11 above recall an episode in the Baal Cycle.72 In this latter story, Athirat’s male servant Qudsh wa-Amrar prepares the donkey for Athirat to ride on in order to journey to El’s abode. The author employs the same vocabulary and wording in both texts. 73 He seems to suggest that now Pughat, the daughter, takes the place of Aqhat, the son – an ironic twist to Dan’il’s need for a son. Pughat Exacts Blessings from Dan’il for Vengeance. Close to the end of the story, Pughat’s role as an avenger replaces her initial image as a house girl. Her action takes over her emotion. After the seven years of mourning for Aqhat’s death, Dan’il sacrifices to the gods and asks their favor to redeem the tragedy of his son’s death. Immediately following that, Pughat comes to her father and asks for his permission to slay the slayer of her brother (see text and translation above, KTU 1.19 IV:29-35). The exaction of the blessing from the gods and from Dan’il and the joyful aspect of the feast are instructive for the author’s portrayal of Pughat’s vengeance since they shift the story’s focus from the previous tragic mood to a now hopeful mood. This change of mood indicates that what follows will serve as a remedy for what went wrong. Therefore, the blessings of Dan’il, together with the accompanying music at the feast indirectly cast Pughat’s vengeance in a favorable light. In Pughat’s speech of exacting blessings from Dan’il, she uses the word “slay (mÆṣ)” (KTU 1.19 IV:34). This word carries the meaning of striking someone with lethal and decisive blow. 74 This word is used in Anat’s double-massacre (KTU 1.3 II:5-6) to kill the human soldiers, in Anat’s threat against El (KTU 1.3 V:23) to smash his crown, and in Anat’s killing of Aqhat (KTU 1.18 IV:13, 40; 1.19 I:14, 15). Here, the story uses 69 In Segert’s glossary, this word means “beautiful, pleasant,” see Segert, BGUL, 188. The meaning “beautiful” is in the sense of “the most comfortable part.” 70 Wyatt notes that this bicolon occurs at KTU 1.4 IV: 14-5. See Wyatt, RTU, 298, n. 212. 71 Van Selms, Marriage & Family, 112 72 KTU 1.4 IV: 18-15. 73 For example, mdl ‘r “leads the donkey,” (1.19 II: 8; 1.4 IV: 9), ṣmd pḥl “ropes up the ass,” (1.19 II: 9, 1.4 IV: 10), lbmt ‘r “the back of the donkey,” (1.19 II: 10, 1.4 IV: 14), lysmsm bmt pḥl “the most comfortable back of the ass,” (1.19 II: 11, 1.4 IV: 15). 74 Walter C. Kaiser, ‫ מחץ‬, in TWOT, 499.

138

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

the same word to describe Pughat’s vengeance coming from her own mouth. This choice of word suggests the author’s intention to use Pughat’s vengeance as a reversal for Anat’s violence in order to redeem what Anat has done. Both women are portrayed as warriors capable of violence. Yet Pughat’s violence is cast in a more favorable light than Anat’s. Pughat Avenges. After obtaining Dan’il’s blessing for vengeance, Pughat prepares to infiltrate into the camp of Yatpan to carry out her mission. She first disguises herself by putting on her clothing. Pughat Disguised Herself (KTU 1.19 IV:44-46) t[ ] (44) tlbš . npṣ. Çzr .

Un[derneath](44) she put on a hero’s clothing,

tšt . Æ[lpn] b (45) nšgh .

she placed a k[nife] in (45) her nšg

ḥrb . tšt . b t‘r[th]

a sword she placed in [her] sheath.75

(46) w ‘l . tlbš . npṣ . ’a¨t .

(46) And on top she put on a woman’s clothing.

The wearing of a hero’s clothing underneath and a woman’s clothing on top suggest the element of deception, as does the concealment of the weapons. Wyatt observes that the description of Pughat’s clothing is in the form of an envelope: the bicolon on clothing frames the bicolon on weapons, which make a tetracolon. Thus the weapons are concealed within Pughat’s garments. 76 These deceptions acutely contrast with Anat’s employment of deception in killing Aqhat. Before Anat carries out her violence, she lures Aqhat to the town of ABLM by pretending that she wants to teach him the art of hunting.77 The text at this particular juncture is very broken and we do not know the exact nature of Anat’s “lure.”78 Anat may have used her charm as a means to atHeb.‫תער‬ Wyatt, RTU, 310, n. 267. 77 KTU 1.18 I: 22-34. 78 The text reads “’at .’aÆ. wan. [ ].” Many commentators and KTU 1.18 I: 24 restore to ’a[Ætk], to mean “you are (my) brother, and I am [your sister].” Lying behind this statement is the suggestion that Anat is making a formal marriage proposal to Aqhat. See Gaster, Thespis, 290; De Moor and Dijkstra, “Problematic Passages,” 194; Gibson, CML, 111; Coogan, Stories From Ancient Canaan, 39; de Moor, ARTU, 242; Pardee, COS 1.103: 348. Although this reading is possible, it is based on the conjecture of the restored reading. As Walls indicates, the poor condition of this line diminishes the above interpretation. Wyatt maintains that the proposed a in (a[Ætk]) is an over-written horizontal wedge, and thus renders the above 75 76

HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW

139

tract Aqhat. As Wyatt points out “sexual feelings and activity and physical violence have a long joint history.” In any case, Anat’s lure of Aqhat involves deception – “she disarms Aqhat by pretending that all is well between them, as though they are jolly hunters together.”79 Not only do both Pughat and Anat employ deception in their missions to kill, they also share the manner of placing their respective weapons in their sheaths. Anat Placed Yatpan in her Sheath (KTU 1.18 IV:27-29)

(27) tqḥ . yṭpn . mhr . št

(27) She took Yatpan, the Soldier of the Lady,

(28) tštn . k nšr . b ḥbšh

(28) she placed him like an eagle in her belt,

km . diy (29) b t‘rth .

like a bird (29) in her sheath.

Just as Anat places Yatpan in her sheath, Pughat places her weapons in her sheath. Just as Yatpan functions as a “weapon” for Anat to kill, the knife and the sword function for Pughat as weapons to kill. These similarities in language and image suggest that the author intends to contrast Pughat’s vengeance to Anat’s killing. Up to this point, the descriptions of the activities of Pughat move progressively from one step to another, from exacting blessings to preparing for vengeance, which will culminate in the actual act of vengeance. After putting on her clothing, the story continues: Pughat Infiltrated the Tents of Yatpan (KTU 1.19 IV:47-52)

[lm] (47) ṣb’i. nrt ’ilm . špš .

(47) When the lamp of the gods, Shapshu, set,

‘r[bt] (48) pÇt . m’inš . šdm .

(48) Pughat entered the encampment (in) the fields,

l m‘r[b] (49) nrt . ’ilm . špš .

(49) when the lamp of the gods, Shapshu, declined,

mÇy[t] (50) pÇt . l ’ahlm .

(50) Pughat arrived at the tents.

reading impossible. See Wyatt, RTU, 279, n. 132. Dressler suggests the translation for this line “Come, brother, and I [ ].” See Harold H.P. Dressler, “The Metamorphosis of a Lacuna: Is AT.Aï. WAN ... a Proposal of Marriage?” UF 11 (1979a): 211-17. Parker and Wyatt follow Dressler’s interpretation. See Parker, UNP, 64 and Wyatt, RTU, 279. This translation seems to fit the context of Anat’s offering to teach Aqhat to hunt. 79 Wyatt, RTU, 280, n. 132.

140

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

rgm . l yṭ[pn . y] (51) bl . ‘agrtn

80.

b’at . b Ädk .

[pÇt] (52) b’at . bhlm .

Word (51) was brought to Yat[pan]: “The woman we hired has come to your dwellings, [the girl] (52) has come to your tents.”

What is Pughat’s disguise? Two views are suggested in the past: (1) Pughat disguises herself as Anat;81 (2) Pughat disguises herself as a prostitute or a servant girl. 82 Both views depend on the understanding of the word “’agrtn.” Judging by the word itself without the vowels, it can be taken as either active or passive in meaning, either “the one who hires” or “the one who is hired.” If the intended meaning is the former, then the referent is Anat since Anat has the power to hire Yatpan and his servants. If the intended meaning is the latter, then the referent may be a prostitute or a servant girl. This would point to Pughat’s disguise as either a prostitute or a servant girl. I find the first view more convincing for the following reasons: (1) Since the messengers of Yatpan do not express suspicion upon Pughat’s arrival, they must have regarded Pughat as someone they recognized. However, there is no indication that Pughat has a prior relationship with Yatpan. This suggests that Pughat disguises herself as someone whom they are able to recognize. Pughat’s putting on of a warrior’s clothing before she enters the camp indicates her intent to disguise herself as someone who will not be arousing suspicion. (2) Yatpan’s boast seems logical when we take his object of boasting as Anat rather than a prostitute or a servant girl since he claims that the hand that slays Aqhat will slay thousands of the Lady’s (i.e. Anat) enemies. Why would Yatpan mention his slaying of Aqhat if the object of his boast is a prostitute or a servant girl who is unaware of the identity of Aqhat? It is unlikely that a prostitute or a servant girl hired by Yatpan will have a prior knowledge of Aqhat. Yatpan’s boast makes sense only when we take his object of boasting as Anat. (3) The interpretation of the word št (KTU 1.19 IV:57, 59) as Anat’s epithet rather than the verb “to drink” (šty) seems to make more sense in understanding Yatpan’s boast. As Wright states, “the evidence that št is an Akk. “hireling” (’aÇru). See CAD A1, 151-53. For example, Gibson, CML, 121; de Moor, ARTU, 264; Watson, “Puzzling Passages,” 375-76; Margalit, UPA, 452; Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 209; Wyatt, RTU, 311. 82 For example, Aitken, The Aqhat Narrative, 105; Parker, The Pre-Biblical Narrative, 131; Walls, The Goddess Anat, 208-9. 80 81

HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW

141

epithet is not conclusive but is relatively strong.”83 Two other places point to št as Anat’s epithet (KTU 1.13:7; 1.22 I:9). Both places connect “warrior” to “Anat.”84 Yatpan’s own epithet “mhr št” (Soldier of the Lady)85 also adds support to the interpretation of št as Anat’s epithet. (4) The descriptions of Pughat’s vengeance call to mind the descriptions used for Anat’s violence. For example, the manner in which Pughat conceals her weapons (KTU 1.19 IV:43-46) echoes the way Anat places Yatpan as her weapon (KTU 1.18 IV:27-29); Pughat uses the word mÆṣ (KTU 1.19 IV:34) to indicate her mission of vengeance that forms a reversal of Anat’s employment of the same word mÆṣ (KTU 1.19 I:14-15) in her slaying of Aqhat. Both Pughat and Anat execute their violence in the context of feast scenes. These similarities suggest that the narrator intended to use Pughat as an antagonist of Anat. Pughat disguising herself as Anat would form a literary balance to the plot and the design of the story. Unfortunately, the story leaves us in suspense as to whether Pughat succeeds in her revenge. Many scholars propose the supposed ending of the story, i.e. Pughat’s successful revenge, based on the comparative evidence.86 Parker, for instance, contends that the conventional ending for a story like the Story of Aqhat always ends in a female’s successful avenging of her male enemy. This is the same with Anat’s vengeance over Mot in the Baal Cycle (KTU 1.6 II: 30-35), Jael’s killing of Sisera in Judges 5, a nameless woman’s killing of Abimelech in Judges 9, and Judith’s killing of Holophernes in the Apocrypha (Judith 13). Parker adds that since various parts of the Story of Aqhat employ traditional narrative motifs in its composition,87 its ending corresponds to this Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 212. KTU 1.13 is a hymn to Anat. Line 7 reads mhrk “your warrior.” KTU 1.22 is part of the Rapiuma text. I:9 has mhr ‘nt “warriors of Anat.” 85 KTU 1.18 IV:5, 27. 86 For example, Gray, Coogan, De Moor, Margalit, Walls, Parker, and Wright. 87 For example, in the beginning of the story, we have a patriarch who longs for a son (KTU 1.17 I: 1-33). This motif corresponds to king Kirtu’s longing for progeny (KTU 1.14 I: 1-35) and Abraham’s longing for a son (Gen 15-18). The hospitality of Dan’il’s family to Kothar-wa-Khasis is comparable to the hospitality of Abraham to the three visitors (Gen 18: 1-16) and Lot’s hospitality to the messengers of God (Gen 19: 1-16). The encounter between Anat and Aqhat is reminiscent of the encounter between Ishtar and Gilgamesh (Gilgamesh Epic, VI) and the encounter between Jezebel and Naboth (1 Kgs 21). For a detailed comparison of various portions of Aqhat with other ancient Near Eastern parallels, see Parker, “Death and Devotion,” 72-81. 83 84

142

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

tradition as well. Parker’s interpretation, however, overlooks one element. The stories cited above all involve a deity killing another deity or a human being killing another human being. The Story of Aqhat, however, overturns this traditional motif: A human being attempts to kill a divine being, Yatpan, although Yatpan occupies the lowest rank in the divine realm. This is a rare exception in ancient literature. It is possible that the ending may not conform to the traditional narrative motif. Therefore, whether Pughat succeeds in her revenge in the story remains a conjecture rather than a supposed fact. Although it is very likely that the story may end in Pughat’s successful revenge, the rarity of exceptions to the traditional narrative precludes certainty on this element of the story. The fact that Pughat takes vengeance against Yatpan reveals her perception of Anat’s violence as an unjust act and her brother’s death as an innocent death. The Role of Pughat as a Blood-Avenger By volunteering to slay the slayer of her brother, Pughat takes the responsibility to redeem the death of her brother. Other examples in ancient literature where a sister takes the role of avenging a brother include Anat, who redeems her brother/husband Baal in the Baal Cycle, Isis, who redeems her brother/husband Osiris in Egypt, and Geshtinanna, who redeems her brother Dumuzi in Sumer.88 In his study of blood-vengeance in Israel, Tullock defines bloodvengeance this way: “Blood-vengeance is an act whereby the avenger, on behalf of one who has been slain or otherwise injured by another, takes measures to inflict upon the offender a like or a worse injury than the offender has inflicted upon his victim.”89 Tullock’s definition takes into account the cases of injury, either physical or psychological such as a rape and a curse. He also states that the act of vengeance is generally based on family relationship but it can apply to a covenant relationship as well.90 This definition is a rather broad and inclusive one. Peel provides a more refined and narrower definition of bloodvengeance: “The right and obligation, in the case of the murder of a blood Amico, “The Status of Women,” 155-6. Tullock, “Blood-Vengeance,” 140. 90 For example, David’s covenantal relationship with Jonathan and his marital relationship with Michal, Saul’s daughter, makes him obligated to avenge Saul’s death (2 Sam 1:13-16). Tullock, “Blood-Vengeance,” 140-142, 165. 88 89

HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW

143

relative, to enact vengeance upon the murderer and his descendants.”91 In contrast to Tullock’s definition, Peel’s definition identifies the nature of blood-vengeance as specifically referring to the act of murder, not including injury or other forms of crimes such as rape and curses, and it applies only to the family involved, not to someone outside of the family. This latter definition specifically applies to Pughat’s situation. From Pughat’s point of view, Aqhat’s death is viewed as a case of murder and thus she takes the right and obligation to enact vengeance upon the murderer. Additionally, the expressions used in describing the death of Aqhat bring to mind the expressions used in describing situations of bloodvengeance, which adds support to the interpretation of Pughat’s vengeance as a case of blood-vengeance. In Biblical Hebrew, two words are closely bound up with the concept of life and its subsequent loss: ‫ נפשׁ‬and ‫“( דם‬life” and “blood”). Since these words have received scholarly attention in the past, we do not intend to repeat the finds.92 Generally speaking, ‫ נפש‬has a broad range of meaning from “soul,” “living being,” ‘life,” “self,” to “desire,” “appetite,” “emotion,” and “passion.” It denotes “life” as it is manifested through breathing.93 The connection between “life” and “blood” is reflected in Lev 17:11 where it says: “the life of the flesh is in the blood” (‫)נפשׁ הבשׂר בדם הוא‬. Thus the spilling of blood (‫ )שׁפך דם‬denotes the loss of life. Since all three words ‫נפשׁ‬, ‫דם‬, and ‫ שׁפך‬are cognates with the corresponding Ugaritic words, npš, dm, and špk, we may assume they share the same semantic values as well. When Anat instructs Yatpan to kill, she uses the phrases “spill (his) blood” (špk … dm)94 and “let his life go off like a breath” (tṣi km rḥ npšh).95 These descriptions portray Anat’s killing as an intentional act of violence that aims to terminate the life of Aqhat. This detailed depiction of Aqhat’s violent death evokes a sense of vengeance in the minds of the story’s audience and paves the way for the blood-vengeance of Pughat. Tullock identifies one principal factor in motivating the act of bloodvengeance: to restore wholeness to the injured person or group. Vengeance is a matter of “getting-even.”96 This factor is what Peel calls the psychologiPeels, The Vengeance of God, 79. For example, Tullock, “Blood-Vengeance,” 47-70. 93 BDB, 659. 94 KTU 1.18 IV:23-24, 34-35. 95 KTU 1.18 IV:24-25, 36. 96 Tullock, “Blood-Vengeance,” 141. 91 92

144

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

cal motive and the material motive. In addition to this principal factor, Peels’s study also includes three other motives in the origin of the practice of blood vengeance. The five motives are listed as follows: 1. Psychological motive: It is part of human nature that with the violent death of a relative, there surfaces a desire for vengeance in which feelings of wrath, pride and honor play a role. 2. Material motive: Through the death of the blood relative, the family suffers a loss that calls for compensation. By killing the transgressor, the act of vengeance restores a form of balance. 3. Superstitious motive: According to animistic concepts, the soul of the murdered person would not leave the blood relatives in peace until the vengeance was complete and his blood was “set free”. 4. Moral motive: The common sense of justice requires retribution for any infringement of the right. 5. Religious motive: The god of the murdered person has lost a worshipper, which mandates vengeance; through blood vengeance the wrath of the god is appeased.97 Three of these five (no. 1, 2, and 4) suggested motives seem to apply to Pughat’s act of vengeance. The other two (no. 3 and 5) are uncertain due to the limited evidence supplied by the extant text. Pughat’s vengeance may involve all of the above motives. These motives cover a broad range of human experience: psychological, material, and moral. Most importantly, these motives suggest an unsatisfactory state: the death of a blood relative is not avenged. Thus, Pughat’s vengeance serves as a remedial action against this unsatisfactory state for the purpose of restoring some kind of balance, justice and wholeness to the family. The portrayal of Pughat as a blood avenger and Yatpan as a villain points to the author’s possible intention to contrast their actions and characters. Pughat emerges as a heroine and her act of vengeance is justified by the violent death of Aqhat and her own sense of restoration of wholeness to the family. From the context of the story, it is certain that Pughat intends to kill Yatpan. Yet, it is uncertain how exactly Pughat might view Anat, the goddess behind the death of Aqhat. When the messengers deliver the death news of Aqhat to both Dan’il and Pughat, they clearly indicate that Anat kills Aqhat. Below is the announcement of the death of Aqhat by the two messengers. The name of Anat is highlighted in bold print. Peels, The Vengeance of God, 81. For a survey of different perspectives in blood vengeance, see Tullock, “Blood-Vengeance,” 1-38. 97

HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW

145

Pughat Knew Anat was the Killer (KTU 1.19 II:40-44) (40) tmÇyn . tša . ghm . w[ tṣḥ]

(40) They came, raised their voices and [cried]:

(41) šm‘ . l dn’il . mt . [rpi]

(41) “Listen, Dan’il, man of [Rapiu],

(42) mt . ’aqht . Çzr .

(42) Aqhat the hero is dead.

[šṣat] (43) btlt . ‘nt .

(43) Maiden Anat [has expelled]

k r[ḥ . npšh]

[his life] like a win[d],

(44) [[’i]]k ’i¨l . brlth .

(44) his spirit like a breath.”

There is no doubt that Anat not only plans the procedures to kill Aqhat but also is involved in the actual killing of Aqhat. As the text indicates, in her act of killing, Anat puts Yatpan like a bird in her belt. Then she releases him right above Aqhat’s head, and Yatpan strikes Aqhat to death.98 Although Anat is not the “direct” executioner of Aqhat, she is definitely behind his death. Even though Pughat realizes that Anat is the real killer, she chooses Yatpan as the object of her vengeance. This fact is instructive in our understanding of the nature of Pughat’s vengeance. Elsewhere in ancient literature, when a blood-vengeance is enacted, it is usually carried out in the context of a deity against another deity such as in the case of Anat taking vengeance for Baal against Mot,99 or in the context of a human being against another human being as in the case of Joab killing Abner because Abner had killed Joab’s brother.100 In Israel, there is an exception where Yahweh takes vengeance for his people Israel against other human beings.101 As we mentioned earlier, at Ugarit, we have a rare KTU 1.18 IV: 27-37. Another example of a deity taking vengeance against another deity is: Tiamat avenges the death of Apsu and Mummu (Enuma Elish I, II). 100 2 Sam 2:18-23, 27. Other examples of a human being taking vengeance against another human being include: Gideon killed Zebah and Zalmuna who had killed Gideon’s brothers (Judg 8:18-21), the vengeance of the Gibeonites against the house of Saul (2 Sam 21:1-9), Amaziah’s vengeance for Joash (2 Kgs 14:5), and the vengeance for Zechariah ben Jehoiada on Joash (2 Chron 24:20-26). For an analysis of these passages, see Tullock, “Blood-Vengeance,” 189-206. Peels holds reservation in whether these texts can be applied to blood vengeance. See Peels, The Vengeance of God, 81. 101 The book of Nahum is a case in point. Here, God takes vengeance against the Ninevites for their bloodshed against the Israelites. See especially Nah 1:2-6. For an extensive research regarding Yahweh’s role in defending Israel, see Long98 99

146

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

incident in the Story of Aqhat where a human being takes vengeance against a deity, albeit a lesser deity, Yatpan. The role of Yatpan is significant to the plot of the story. He functions as “an agent” who executes the plan of his mistress Anat. Since a human being has no capacity to kill a goddess, the presence of Yatpan provides an object for Pughat to take vengeance against.102 The role of Yatpan in the story is reminiscent of “the messengers of Yahweh” (‫)מלאך יהוה‬in the Hebrew Bible who act on behalf of Yahweh. Pughat’s choosing of Yatpan as her object of vengeance reveals the hierarchical difference between divine and human realms. It heightens Pughat’s courage at the same time subtly points to Anat’s superiority as a deity who gets away with her crime.103 The Conceptual Point of View Based on the text, Pughat does not inquire into the cause for Aqhat’s death. She simply takes vengeance. There are no gaps in the text that would suggest the inclusion of Pughat’s inquiry into Aqhat’s death. Pughat’s intent to take vengeance suggests her point of view of her vengeance as a necessary act to redeem an unsatisfactory state, the murder of her family member, regardless of the cause of the death. Other observations concerning Pughat’s conception of violence include: (1) Since her vengeance is inseparable from an act of violence, Pughat’s violence is a means to her end. This is not unlike Anat, who uses violence as a means to her end. The two young ladies share this in common. (2) By concealing a sword in her sheath, Pughat intends to inflict Yatpan with the same violence he has inflicted upon Aqhat. This calls to mind Tullock’s definition of blood-vengeance: “to inflict upon the offender a like or a worse injury than the offender has inflicted upon his victim.”104 In this sense, Pughat accepts the notion and the possibility of using violence as a means to “return” or “correct” another violence, which fits the Hebrew Bible’s rule for retaliation – “an eye for an eye.” man and Reid, God is a Warrior, 31-88. 102 Walls, The Goddess Anat, 207. 103 Margalit and Wright interpret the death of the mother bird Ṣamal as the fate of Anat. They associate the bird with Anat since Anat is identified symbolically with a bird in KTU 1.13. See Margalit, UPA, 181, 406-408; Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 219. This interpretation is unlikely since no evidence in the Ugaritic texts suggests that Anat is dead. 104 Tullock, “Blood-Vengeance,” 140-41.

HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW

147

(3) By taking vengeance, Pughat approves her own violence against Yatpan and disapproves Anat’s violence against Aqhat. This disparity in her view of the two acts of violence suggests that she does not oppose the idea of violence. It is the reason for using violence that matters to her. (4) Last but not least, Pughat’s conception of violence is also closely linked to her relationship with the victim of the violence. If the victim were someone else outside of her family, it is unlikely that Pughat would take the measure to avenge the crime. Because of Pughat’s kinship relationship with Dan’il and Aqhat, she shares the same point of view with Dan’il regarding the two acts of violence in the story. The Emotional Point of View Like the emphasis of Dan’il’s emotions, the author also draws attention to Pughat’s emotions with the focus on her grief for the death of Aqhat. This depiction of her emotion aids the audience’s identification with her and helps the audience sense the effect of Anat’s violence upon her. The Interest Point of View The author portrays Pughat as a dutiful daughter and a faithful sister who avenges the death of her brother. Her vengeance is placed at the end of the story, which serves as the resolution to the problem of the death of Aqhat. This positive portrayal of her helps the audience to view her as a normative character in the story. The description of her weeping and sadness after the death of Aqhat also gains sympathy from the audience. The sense of loss that Pughat feels not only compels her to take vengeance but also invokes a sense of hope for a successful vengeance on the part of the audience. However, the fact that the object of Pughat’s vengeance is Yatpan and not Anat reflects the limitation of her power. Pughat’s lack of knowledge of Aqhat’s arrogance, which contributes to his death and the audience’s knowledge of it, complicates the perception of the audience regarding her vengeance.

AQHAT The Characterization of Aqhat Aqhat is the center of the story. He is the major character upon which every other character in the story hinges. The activity of every other character in the story revolves around Aqhat, either his birth or his death: El’s permission is concerned with Aqhat’s rebellion against Anat. The focus of Anat’s

148

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

covetousness is the bow of Aqhat. It is also Aqhat’s arrogance and rebellion that provoke Anat’s anger, which leads to her killing of Aqhat. Aqhat’s father, Dan’il, desires a son and the subsequent loss of the son prompts his actions of retaliation. Pughat is the sister of Aqhat who takes vengeance against the death of Aqhat. Baal, the patron god of Dan’il, intercedes to El for Dan’il to have a son and then when Aqhat dies, he protests against it. The story is rightly named after Aqhat. The author portrays Aqhat as a young man who is wise in his own eyes, but lacks the wisdom to perceive and recognize Anat as the goddess of war. In his brief appearance in the story, Aqhat has a distinctive voice of his own. His conversation with Anat reveals that he is a person who stands firm by what he believes. Thus, the character Aqhat is a full-fledged character. The Perceptual Point of View Aqhat, the central character in the story, although appearing briefly (KTU 1.17 VI:20-41), is significant to the plot of the story. Although he does not mention violence in his direct speech to Anat nor give any hint of his point of view of violence in the story, he is the key that links the two acts of violence – Anat kills him because she wants his bow and punishes him with violence for his pride and irreverence; Pughat attempts to kill the one who has killed Aqhat. Thus, Aqhat’s arrogance and rebellion account for Anat’s employment of violence and Aqhat’s subsequent death gives reason for Pughat’s violence. Aqhat’s perception of Anat is reflected in his encounter with Anat. Here we will once again investigate the conflicts aroused between them, but this time, the focus is on Aqhat. Anat’s Offer and Aqhat’s Refusal (KTU 1.17 VI:15-41)

(16) tšu . gh . ]w tṣḥ .

(16) [She lifted up her voice] and she cried,

šm‘ . m‘ (17) [l ’aqht . Çzr .

“Hear, now, (17) [Aqhat the Hero],

i]rš . ksp . w ’atnk

ask for silver and I will give (it) to you.

(18) [Ærš . w ’aÁ]lḥk .

(18) [Gold, and I will send] (it) to you.

w tn . qštk . ‘m (19) [btlt . ] ‘n[t .]

But give your bow to (19) [Maiden Anat],

q§‘tk . ybmt. limm

your arrows to the Sister-in-law of the Peoples.”

HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW

149

(20) w y‘n . ’aqht . Çzr .

(20) Then Aqhat the hero replied,

’adr . ¨qbm (21) b lbnn .

“The strongest trees (21) from Lebanon,

’adr . gdm . b rumm

the strongest sinews from the wild ox,

(22) ’adr . qrnt . b y‘lm .

(22) The strongest horns from the Mountain goats,

mtnm (23) b ‘qbt . ¨r .

tendons (23) from the bull’s heels,

’adr . b Çl il . qnm

the strongest reeds from the great marsh,

(24) tn . l k¨r . w Æss .

(24) give to Kathar-wa-Hasis,

yb‘l . qšt . l ‘nt

let him make a bow for Anat,

(25) qṣ‘t . l ybmt . limm . w t‘n . btlt (26)‘nt .

(25) arrows for the Sister-in-law of the peoples.” And Maiden (26) Anat answered,

irš . ḥym . l ’aqht . Çzr

“Ask for life, Aqhat the hero,

(27) ’irš . ḥym . w ’atnk .

(27) ask for life, and I will give (it) to you;

bl mt (28) w ’ ašlḥk .

immortality, (28) and I will send (it) to you.

’ašsprk . ‘m . b‘l

I will cause you to count years with Baal;

(29) šnt . ‘m . bn ’il . tspr . yrÆm

(29) With son of El, you shall count the months.

(30) k b‘l . k yḥwy . y‘šr .

(30) Like Baal, he shall live indeed.

ḥwy . y‘š (31) r . w yšqynh . ybd . w yšr .‘lh

He shall be feasted, alive, (31) The minstrel shall chant and sing concerning him.”

(32) n‘m[n . w y]‘nynn .

(32) [And she] said to him,

’ap ’ank . ’aḥwy (33)’aqht [. Ç]zr .

“Surely I will revive (33) Aqhat the [he]ro.”

w . y‘n . ’aqht . Çzr

But Aqhat the hero replied,

(34) ’al . tšrgn . y btltm .

(34) “Do not lie, O Maiden,

dm . l Çzr (35) šrgk . ÆÆm .

to a hero (35) your lie is rubbish.

mt . ’uÆryt . mh . yqḥ

What does a man get in the end?

(36) mh . yqḥ . mt . ’a¨ryt .

(36) What does a man get as his destiny?

150

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

spsg . ysk (37) [l] riš .

Glaze will be poured (37) [upon] the head,

ḥrṣ . l `r . qdqdy

gold on the top of the skull.

(38) [’ap ]mt . kl . ’amt .

(38) [Surely] the death of all I shall die,

w ’an . mtm . ’amt

and I shall die indeed.”

(39) [’ap.m]¨n . rgmm . ’argm .

“(39) [Also, anoth]er thing I will say:

qštm (40) [k l . ]mhrm

Bows (40) [are for] warriors!

ht . tṣdn . tin¨t (41) [b h g]m .

Will women now hunt (41) [with it]?”

Aqhat’s speech reveals his perception of Anat. Aqhat views Anat as someone who desires his bow, who lies to him by offering him immortality, and who, being a woman, wants to perform a male’s task and use a male weapon. Aqhat apparently refuses to budge. From Aqhat’s response to Anat, his arrogance is expressed in the following ways: 1. First of all, Aqhat refuses to surrender the bow. 2. Aqhat shows off his knowledge of how the composite bow is made.105 3. Aqhat bluntly charges Anat with deceit and lectures Anat on the reality of human mortality.106 4. Aqhat insults Anat’s gender and states his male superiority over her.107 The author does not hide this character trait of arrogance from the audience. Since Anat is the object of Aqhat’s speech, she is well aware of the latter’s arrogance. When Anat approaches El for permission to kill, she complains about Aqhat’s arrogance. 108 El responds, “whoever resists you will surely be crushed.”109 Thus, Aqhat’s arrogance is made known to the audience of the story, to Anat and to El. However, it is hidden from the human characters of the story, Dan’il and Pughat. When the messengers deliver the news of Aqhat’s death, they do not include the reasons for causing his death.110 There is no indication in the context that Dan’il and Pughat are aware of the encounter between Aqhat and Anat. The unveiling of Aqhat’s arrogance to the divine KTU 1.17 VI:20-23. KTU 1.17 VI:34-38. 107 KTU 1.17 VI:39-41. 108 KTU 1.17 VI:51-52. 109 KTU 1.18 I:19. 110 KTU 1.19 II:40-44. 105 106

HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW

151

characters and its veiling from the human characters of the story presents another disparate point of view, this time between the divine beings/author and the human characters of the story. In this respect, the audience sees what the author sees. The audience knows more than what Dan’il and Pughat know. This veiling of information from Dan’il and Pughat further points to the multi-dimensional portrayal of the author’s point of view: Where one stands and knows in the story influences one’s point of view on things, including the perception of Anat’s violence. The Interest Point of View The fact that Aqhat dies because of his arrogance and pride suggests that the author does not approve his arrogant attitude towards Anat. Aqhat is not wise enough or experience enough to recognize his own place in the hierarchical order of the world, which proves deadly, and ultimately goes against his self-interest.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION The two human characters, Dan’il and Pughat, share the same point of view of the two acts of violence in the story. Both of them disapprove Anat’s violence and approve Pughat’s violence. This disparity in their perception of violence is directly linked to their relationship with the victim of the violence. For them, violence is manifested in two opposing ways. It is acceptable to use violence for the cause of justice and blood-vengeance but it is wrong to use violence to kill their family member for any reason. Like the divine characters in the story, the human characters’ relationship with the victim of the violence strongly influences their point of view on the acts of violence in the story. All the major human characters in the story, Dan’il, Pughat, and Aqhat are portrayed as full-fledged characters with their own thoughts, actions, and emotions. By portraying the characters of Dan’il and Pughat in a positive light and by emphasizing the effect of Aqhat’s death upon them, the author encourages the audience to identify with them. The fact that the author withholds the information from Dan’il and Pughat regarding Aqhat’s arrogance but reveals it to the audience of the story is suggestive. It shows that the human characters’ point of view is dependent upon their knowledge of the situation in which the violence takes place. The elevation of the position of the audience on the one hand helps the audience to identify with Dan’il and Pughat’s feelings of loss and the need to avenge. On the other hand, the audience knows that it is also

152

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

Aqhat’s fault that contributes to his death. By presenting these two points of view and by remaining reticent, the author invites the audience to further ponder the ethics of Anat’s violence.

CONCLUSION TO PART TWO If the Story of Aqhat followed the sequence of human rebellion, divine permission to kill the rebel, ending with divine killing of the human rebel, the story would present a clear case of human rebellion and divine punishment. However, the text includes episodes such as a killer who fails to attain her goal, a divine protestation, and a human vengeance blessed by another human agent. These inclusions present the story’s ethical portrayal of Anat’s violence in a multiperspectival fashion. Two ideological points of view appear in the story: (1) Aqhat’s death is unjust, and (2) Aqhat’s death is justified by his arrogance and rebellion. Those who take the first ideology include the divine character Baal and the human characters, Dan’il and Pughat. Those who take the second ideology include the divine character El, Anat, and Yatpan. The second ideology is not shared by any of the human characters in the story. The author does not present these two opposing ideologies as a reflection of the dichotomy between the divine point of view and the human point of view. Instead, he places Baal in the first category, identifying with the human characters of the story. This creates a sense of disharmony in the divine sphere – the gods do not share the same point of view on Anat’s violence in the story. Thus, the two ideologies direct the audience’s focus from divine dissonance to human uniformity. Which ideological point of view serves as the normative point of view of the story? By portraying the human characters Dan’il and Pughat positively, the author seems to encourage the audience to identify with them, to take their point of view as the normative point of view. Yet, the audience knows that the human characters’ point of view is marred by their lack of knowledge of the cause for the death of Aqhat which is made known to the audience. This lack of knowledge on the part of the human characters undermines the accuracy and validity of the human characters’ point of view. Baal shares the same ideological point of view with the human characters of the story. Although he expresses his point of view through actions, the fact that he remains silent points to his impotence. His actions only help Dan’il to bury Aqhat but are unable to remedy the death of Aqhat. Baal does not avenge Aqhat by attempting to kill Yatpan. Therefore, his point of view is not presented as the normative point of view.

HUMAN CHARACTERS’ POINTS OF VIEW

153

On the other hand, because of El’s position in the pantheon, his point of view seems to be the normative point of view on Anat’s violence. However, the author also casts doubt on his authority by allowing Anat to threaten El with violence if the latter refuses to comply with her request. His supposed “normative” point of view is weakened by Anat’s attitude toward him. In addition, although Anat is portrayed as a fearless goddess who takes extreme measures to get what she wants, her weeping and the losing of the bow after resorting to violence reflect her inability and ineffectiveness in accomplishing her goal. This unfulfilling outcome of her violence disqualifies her point of view as the normative point of view. Therefore, the two ideological points of view expressed in the story: unjust murder and deserved death, exist in tension with one another. Since the implied audiences are human beings, and not deities, and since the author places great emphasis on the human characters’ grief and on their positive characterization, it is likely that the author intends his implied audiences to identify and to take the human characters’ point of view. Yet, at the same time, he wants the audiences to be aware of the subjective and the limited aspect of the human characters’ point of view. By influencing the audience to identify with the human characters’ point of view and by disclosing the human characters’ limited point of view on Aqhat’s death, the author allows room for ambiguity and openness. This ambiguity in the author’s narration of the story forces the audience to struggle to establish his or her own ethical judgment of Anat’s violence. Each audience’s response varies according to his or her particular context and experience.

PART THREE: RELIABILITY CHECK

6 THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE’S POINT OF VIEW Part Two illustrates how the author of the story uses ambiguity in his presentation of points of view to invite his implied audience to make his or her own ethical judgment of Anat’s violence. The purpose of this chapter is to investigate how the hypothetical actual audience would view the two acts of violence in the Story of Aqhat. We will determine which character’s point of view would have the most effect upon the ancient audiences. Would they take El’s point of view or Baal’s? Would they take Anat’s point of view or Dan’il and Pughat’s point of view? We will first reconstruct the hypothetical actual audiences by compiling a profile of their thought world, namely, their conception of deities, of death and afterlife, of family and its values, and of authority. We will then use three different categories of people who occupy different tiers in the Ugaritic society to explore their respective points of view regarding the violence in the story. These three categories include an Ugaritic king, an ordinary male Ugaritian, and an ordinary female Ugaritian.

A PROFILE OF THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE This profile is not exhaustive but representative. It highlights several significant concepts in the historical audience’s thought world pertaining to the themes in the Story of Aqhat, thereby gaining understanding into their worldview and values. We will use texts other than the Story of Aqhat. The Conception of Deities The Story of Aqhat contains many interactions between the deities and the human beings. The large number of rituals present in the story testifies to the close connection between the two realms.1 An understanding of how 1 82% of the surviving Aqhat story involves ritual element. Wright, Ritual in Narrative, 6. For a brief summary and conclusion of the functions of rituals in the Story of Aqhat, see 223-29.

157

158

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

the Ugaritians perceive the deities in their world influences much of their point of view on the two acts of violence in the story. The Ugaritians worship multiple deities. Based on the evidence provided by the religious texts, we summarize the Ugaritians’ conception of deities into two broad categories: deities as benefactors to humanity, and deities as troublemakers to humanity. Although the notion of the deities as benefactors and troublemakers to humanity applies to other ancient Near Eastern literature and not just to the Ugaritic tradition, we are limiting this analysis to the Ugaritic texts. Deities as Benefactors to Humanity The Ugaritic deities control all aspects of human activity from birth to death.2 There are two major aspects of these benefits to humanity: provision and protection. As Providers. In various genres within the Ugaritic texts, such as the mythological texts, the ritual texts,3 the letters and the personal names depict the Ugaritians as dependent on the deities for their lives and well-being. In the mythological texts, the gods control the destinies of human beings. El is the Father of Humanity. He grants progeny to king Kirtu.4 He creates healers to cure Kirtu’s disease.5 Baal often functions as an intercessor for human beings. For example, he intercedes to El for king Kirtu to have progeny. Baal is also a storm god who sends rain to the earth and brings nourishment to vegetation and to the land.6 In the Baal Cycle, Anat redeems Baal by killing the god of death, Mot, thus restoring rain to the land.7 Thus, her action is beneficial to humanity. In a prayer for well-being, the poet invokes multiple gods including El, Baal, Yarih, and Reshep (KTU 1.123). 8 In another Akkadian letter from Ugarit (RS 19.070), the king and the queen of Ugarit write to a man of lower rank, greeting him with a blessing, “May the gods keep you in good health.”9 Ashley, “The ‘Epic,’” 368. Del Olmo Lete defines the ritual texts as the structured sequence of rites as written text. See Del Olmo Lete, CR, 87. 4 KTU 1.15 II:16-28. 5 KTU 1.16 V:19-28. 6 KTU 1.6 IV: 12-16. 7 KTU 1.6 II:30-37 - III:1-9. 8 Dennis Pardee, Ritual and Cult at Ugarit (SBLWAW; Atlanta: SBL, 2002), 15052. 9 John Huehnergard, “The Akkadian Letters,” in HUS, 377. 2 3

THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE’S POINT OF VIEW

159

As Protectors. The Ugaritic prayers and hymns portray the deities as protectors of human beings. For instance, in KTU 1.6 VI:45-53, the Ugaritians praise the sun goddess Shapshu for watching over the boundaries between night and day, and between the worlds of the living and the dead.10 In a hymn to Anat, the poet asks Anat to hear his voice because she has bound up evil (KTU 1.13). 11 In another hymn (KTU 1.101), the author praises Baal’s power and enthronement. 12 One prayer invokes Rapiu’s strength, help, power, rule and splendor to be in the midst of Ugarit (KTU 1.108). 13 The Ugaritians also invoke the gods to protect their city (KTU 1.65).14 In a ritual text, the author includes a prayer to Baal to drive the enemy from the gate of Ugarit (KTU 1.119).15 These prayers, hymns, and incantations all consider the gods as the means of the Ugaritians’ rescue. In the letters, a typical greeting formula often includes the phrase “May the gods guard (nÇr) you and grant your well being/peace (šlm).16 This formula and its variant forms appear eleven times in the seventeen letters that contain greeting formulas. 17 One letter (KTU 2.16) specifically indicates that it is the gods of Ugarit whom the writer of the letter invoked to protect the addressee.18 Aside from the mythological texts and letters, theophoric personal names also bear an important witness to the gods as benefactors to Uga-

Klaas Spronk, “Incantations,” in HUS, 272. For translations, see de Moor, ARTU, 137-141; Caquot and Tarragon, TO II, 19-27; Wyatt, RTU, 148-151. 12 For translations, see de Moor, ARTU, 1-2; Caquot and Tarragon, TO II, 4550; Wyatt, RTU, 388-390. 13 The identity of Rapi’u, however, is uncertain. L’Heureux and Avishur think that El is Rapi’u. Dietrich and Loretz think it is Baal. For translations, see Dietrich and Loretz, “Baal RPU ,” 171-82; de Moor (who sees the text as an incantation), ARTU, 187-190; Good, “On RS,” 155-60; Avishur, Studies in Hebrew, 280-81; Wyatt, RTU, 395-398. 14 For translations, see Wyatt, RTU, 363-365; Del Olmo Lete, CR, 341-342. 15 For translation, see de Moor, ARTU, 171-174; Wyatt, RTU, 416-422. 16 E.g. KTU 2.4 lines 4-6, 2.11 lines 7-9, 2:13 lines 7-8, 2.14 lines 4-5, 2.16 lines 5-6, 2.30 lines 6-7, 2.38 lines 4-5. KTU 5.9 lines 2-6 has an extended version of this greeting formula: “May the gods protect you, keep you healthy, keep you hardy for a thousand days and ten thousand years forever!” See Jesus-Luis Cunchillos, “The Correspondence of Ugarit,” in HUS, 364. For formulae in letters, see Cunchillos, “Correspondence” in TO II, 244-263. 17 Ansgar L. Kristensen, “Ugaritic Epistolary Formulas,” UF 9 (1977): 150. 18 Kristensen, “Ugaritic,” 152. 10 11

160

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

ritians.19 El and Baal appear frequently in the personal names of Ugarit. El’s activities in these personal names include “creates,” “judges,” “decrees” and “the granting” of what is requested. Baal’s activities include “creates,” “gives perfection,” “bestows with generosity,” “guides,” “helps” and “saves.”20 Some deities, when functioning as patrons of one group, may bring trouble to the destruction of another group. For example, El supports king Kirtu in his campaign against king Pabuli from the kingdom of Udum.21 King Kirtu invokes Horon and Astarte to break the head of his rebellious son when the latter attempts to usurp his throne.22 Smith thinks that these cases can be understood as “expressions of blessing for humans, because they aid some people at the expense of others.”23 From these diverse genres of the Ugaritic materials, the role of the deities as providers and protectors is evident in many aspects of the Ugaritians’ lives. The deities are the dominant power in the course of human lives. The Ugaritians trust that their gods can guarantee the basics of their existence, well-being, long life, and good health by exerting power to intervene in their favor.24 Deities as Troublemakers to Humanity The majority of the Ugaritic deities such as El, Athirat, Baal, and Anat not only bring benefit to the Ugaritians but can also cause them trouble. The account of king Kirtu invoking Horon and Astarte to break his son’s neck is a case in point. Although this curse aids Kirtu, it brings trouble to Kirtu’s son. Thus, from the hypothetical actual audience’s point of view, many deities are a mixture of benefactor and troublemaker, rather than exclusively one or the other. From the information provided by the mythological texts, the deities can bring trouble to the audience in at least two ways: As punishers and as predators. Several deities in the Ugaritic texts such as Reshep and Yamm function as troublemakers to human beings.25 However, there is a lack of a 19 For a survey and critique of the previous study on Ugaritic personal names, see Richard S. Hess, “The Onomastics of Ugarit,” in HUS, 499-514. 20 Del Olmo Lete, CR, 339. 21 KTU 1.14-1.15. 22 KTU 1.16 VI:54-57. 23 Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism, 31-31. 24 Del Olmo Lete, CR, 337-8. Cunchillos, “The Correspondence,” 364. Cf. Nicolas Wyatt, “The Religion of Ugarit: An Overview,” in HUS, 529-562. 25 Reshep and the Lad of Yamm are responsible for the death of Kirtu’s wives.

THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE’S POINT OF VIEW

161

clear context for their respective stories, making it difficult to put them into either category. Here we will only explore the deities whose stories have a clear context. As Punishers. As punishers, the Ugaritic deities can bring trouble to a human being as a way to punish the offence he or she has committed. This offense is usually manifested in the violation of a divine-human order (i.e. human beings disobey the divine will). The purpose of punishment is to assert the deities’ authority and to bring the appropriate order back to the divine-human relationship. These kinds of deities can both give benefit and cause trouble to human beings. Their punishment also does not aim to bring any material benefit to the deities. In the Story of Kirtu, we have a case of divine punishment for a human offense. Athirat is the wife of El and the mother of the Ugaritic pantheon. The heir to king Kirtu’s throne will “drink the milk of Athirat.”26 This divine suckling enables human kings to share in the divine nature.27 However, when king Kirtu fails to pay his vow to the goddess Athirat, she inflicts a fatal illness upon him.28 For Kirtu and his family, the act of Athirat is malevolent because it threatens Kirtu’s life. The wailing and mourning of Kirtu’s children at his death bed indicates their perspective on the act of Athirat. From Athirat’s point of view, however, her act serves as a punishment to Kirtu’s irreverence. It not only reinforces her divinity but also warns Kirtu and the human audience of the story not to cross a deity. As a goddess, Athirat demands obedience from human beings and whoever violates this demand suffers punishment. As Predators. As predators, the Ugaritic deities can bring trouble to a human being not because of the latter’s offense, but because of the deity’s self-interest. In fact, the “predator” deities seek to destroy and seldom bring benefit to human beings. The textual and the archaeological finds do not support the audience’s worship of the “predator” deities.29 One of the primary characteristics of a predator deity is that he or she preys on a defenseless weaker being and takes advantage of that weaker being. In the Ugaritic texts, the most prominent example of a predatory See KTU 1.14 I:18-20. The arrows of Reshep need to be stopped in order to save a “possessed” girl in KTU 1.82:3. Anat kills human soldiers in KTU 1.3 II. 26 KTU 1.15 II:27. 27 Wyatt, “Asherah,” in DDD, 100. 28 KTU 1.15 III:25-30. 29 See KTU 1.39, 1.41, 1.43, 1.46, 1.102, 1.104, 1.109, 1.119, 1.130, 1.148, 1.162, 1.168.

162

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

deity is Mot, the god of death. Mot devours human beings, not because these human beings violate him or transgress an order, but because of his self-interest – he wants to satisfy his own appetite. In the Ugaritic texts, Mot personifies and embodies the reality of death.30 For instance, in KTU 1.6 II: 15-19, Mot says to Anat, (15) ’an . ’itlk . w ’aṣd .

(15) I went and I hunt

kl (16) Çr . l kbd . ’arṣ.

in (16) every mountain in the heart31 of the earth,

ûl . gb‘ (17) l kbd . šdm .

in every hill (17) in the heart of the fields.

npš. Æsrt (18) bn nšm

My appetite was lacking (18) humans,

npš hmlt (19) ’arṣ

my appetite, the multitudes of (19) the earth.32

Such descriptions portray Mot as a hungry and an insatiable monster who always preys on humans. In KTU 1.23, Mot is portrayed as a demonic force to be feared. In this text, the ritual destruction of Mot needs to be carried out in order to protect the soon-to-be-born deities. Mot not only carries a double epithet: “Death and Dissolution” (mt wšr) but also holds a double scepter: “The Scepter of Sterility” (Æṭ ¨kl) and “The Scepter of Widowhood” (Æṭ ’ulmn).33 All four epithets reflect the meaning of his name: Death. KTU 1.127:30-32 also attests Mot’s threat to human lives. (30) ḥm qrt tuÆd .

(30) If the city is taken,

ḥm mt y‘l bnš

if Mot attacks human (lit. man),

(31) bt bn bnš yqḥ

(31) the house of the son(s) of humankind will take

‘z (32) w yḥdy mrḥqm

a goat (32) and will look afar.

It is no surprise that the audience does not worship Mot nor include him in the offering lists.34 N. Wyatt, “The Religion,” 546. Lit. “liver.” 32 Cf. KTU 1.133. 33 Healey, “Mot,” in DDD, 600. KTU 1.23: 8-9. 34 Wyatt, “The Religion,” 546. Healey, “Mot,” 598; Ted J. Lewis, “Mot,” in ABD, vol. 4, 923. 30 31

THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE’S POINT OF VIEW

163

In summary, the audience perceives the deities as able to bring benefit and also cause trouble for human beings. Most of the deities such as El and Baal are perceived as benevolent deities. The purpose in which the deities bring trouble is either to punish a human offense or for self-interest only. By being both a benefactor and a troublemaker, the deities control all aspects of human existence from birth to life to death. Human beings depend on the deities for granting progeny, curing diseases, protecting their lives, and driving away their enemies. At the same time, the deities are also seen as the causes for their trouble and pain. Seeing Anat’s violence in this light, she can be perceived as a mixture: a predator and a punisher. Anat first covets the bow of Aqhat. When Aqhat refuses to surrender the bow, Anat kills him for it. The motive of her killing is first to get the bow and second to punish Aqhat for his rebellion. Thus, Anat, the deity, creates a category of her own. She is not like any other deity at Ugarit. In some texts such as the Baal Cycle, she is even perceived as a protector. The Conception of the Status of El And Baal El and Baal play significant roles in the Story of Aqhat. Their points of view on Anat’s violence diverge significantly as we have analyzed in chapter three. An understanding of their respective positions in the divine world would help to delineate the influence of their respective point of view upon the hypothetical actual audience of the story. Since many scholars have devoted their attention to the status of El and Baal, we will only briefly summarize the past argument and assert our own position. Pope maintains that, “the controversy concerning perception of the character and role of El in the Ugaritic mythological poems is one among the most provocative and intriguing issues raised by the exhumation of these documents in modern times.”35 El’s status is directly linked to his relationship with Baal. This relationship has invited much discussion in past scholarship. Two opposing views emerge from the discussion: One view holds that El is a nominal head of the pantheon and his position is gradually replaced by Baal. Another view holds that El remains the supreme head of the pantheon and Baal is subordinate to him.36 An analysis of the Ugaritic mythological texts suggests that both views can be true. El may be on the way to retirement since he is not active in the center of the stage, yet he is still the supreme god of the pantheon and Baal 35 36

Marvin H. Pope, “The Status of El at Ugarit,” UF 19 (1987): 230. See chapter 3, note 1.

164

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

is subordinate to him. For example, in the Baal Cycle, El has the authority to grant or to remove kingship.37 Anat has to come to El for building a house for Baal and for permission to kill Aqhat.38 Smith’s study on body gesture as rank symbolism reveals El’s supremacy. El never did obeisance to anyone in the Ugaritic texts. Only the gods in the lower rank pay homage to their superiors. El also never travels to any other gods. Other gods must travel to El’s abode to see him.39 El remains the supreme head of the pantheon and his decisions are final and undisputable. On the other hand, Baal stays in a subordinate position to El. For example, in the “Baal-Yamm” section of the Baal Cycle, El favors Yamm for kingship and despite Baal’s strong objection with force, he is unable to revoke El’s verdict at the moment.40 El Declared Yamm’s Kingship (KTU 1.2 I:36b-41) (36)‘bdk . b‘l . y ymm .

(36) “Your slave is Baal, O Yamm,

‘bdk . b‘l (37) [nhr]m .

(37) your slave is Baal, [O River].

See KTU 1.3 V:19-25; 1.17 VI:46-1.18 I:1-19. See KTU 1.2 II:36-38; 1.6 I:43-55; VI:23-29. 39 For example, KTU 1.4 IV:20-30; 1.6 I:34-8; 1.17 VI:48-51. Mark S. Smith, “Divine Travel as a Token of Divine Rank,” UF 16 (1984): 359. See also Paul A. Kruger, “Rank Symbolism in the Baal Epic: Some Further Indicators,” UF 27 (1995): 169-175. This is not to say that Baal never replaces El in a later period after the destruction of Ugarit. The process of replacement of El by Baal may have taken place sometime between the destruction of Ugarit (around 1200 BCE) and the Elijah stories (735 BCE when Ahaz, king of Judah reigns). In the Elijah stories, we find Baal, not El, to be the major “Canaanite” deity whom Elijah contends with. The replacement of Baal over El may even occur in an earlier stage. As early as the Book of Judges, after the death of Joshua, the Israelites turned to other gods including Baal and Ashtaroth (Judg 2:11-13). The names of Saul’s family members have “Baal” components such as Eshbaal and Meribbaal that indicates the influence and popularity of Baal worship even in the royal house (1 Chron 9:39-40). However, it is in the eighth century that the Baal-worship finds its culmination with its promotion by Ahab’s wife, Jezebel. The eighth century prophet Hosea condemns the apostate Israel of following Baal and regarding Baal as her source of abundance. See Hosea 2:8, 16. For a survey among the relationship of El, Yahweh, and Baal in Israel, see Mark S. Smith, The Early History of God: Yahweh and Other Deities in Ancient Israel (2nd ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Dearborn: Dove, 2002), 32-107. For the distinction between “Canaanite” and “Ugaritian,” see A. F. Rainey, “A Canaanite at Ugarit,” IEJ 13 (1963): 45; idem. “Ugarit and the Canaanite Again,” IEJ 14 (1964): 101. 40 KTU 1.2 II:38b-44. 37 38

THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE’S POINT OF VIEW bn . dgn . ’asrkm . hw . ybl .

’argmnk41

165

The Son of Dagan is your captive. . k ’ilm

He will bring you tribute, like the gods;

(38) [xxxx ]ybl .

(38) [xxxx ] he will bring

k bn . qdš . mnḥyk.42

like the sons of the Holy One, your offerings.”

’ap . ’anš . zbl . b‘l

Then Prince Baal is enraged.

(39) [w yuJ]d . b yd . mšÆt . bm . ymn . mÆṣ .

(39) [And he seiz]ed with his hand a striker, in his right hand a slayer,

Çlmm . yš[u]

the boys, he att[acked(?)].

(40) [xxx . ‘]nt . tuÆd .

(40) [xxx . A]nat seized,

šmalh . tuÆd . ‘¨trt .

his left hand, Astarte seized.

’ik . mÆ[ṣt] (41) [xxx .

“How could you slay (41) [xxx .

t‘]dt . ¨pt . nhr .

the lega[tion] of Judge River?”

Not only is Baal not able to revoke El’s verdict at the moment, the goddesses Anat and Astarte have to restrain Baal from challenging El and Yamm’s messengers. However, at the end of the story, Baal does succeed in claiming the kingship, with the help of Anat. This result reflects the dynamic development in the struggle of power between El and Baal. In the “House of Baal” section of the cycle, Baal cries to El for he has no house like the gods.43 This fact suggests that Baal needs El’s approval for building a house for him. Baal has no authority to build one for himself. Later, after Athirat’s intercession, El decrees to have a house built for Baal. Baal’s role as a petitioner reflects El’s supreme position and authority in the pantheon.44 In the Story of Kirtu, Baal’s subservient nature becomes more evident. In this text, Baal functions as an intercessor between human beings and El. Baal requests El to bless king Kirtu with progeny. El subsequently responds

Smith observes that the treaty document in KTU 3.1 bears the languages of lines 36-38. The phrase, ybl ’argmn “to send tribute” is common to both 1.2 I: 37 and 3.1 24-25. See Smith, UBL, 308. 42 Ugaritic mnḥ occurs as political tribute in KTU 4.91.1, just as it appears in KTU 1.2 II: 38. Smith, UBC, 308. 43 KTU 1.3 V:35-9; 1.4 I:4-11; IV:47-51. 44 KTU 1.4 V:1. 41

166

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

to his prayer.45 There is a clear distinction between the rank of an intercessor and the granter. This again reflects the dynamics of the pantheon.46 The shorter mythological texts such as the Rapiuma texts (KTU 1.2022) are too fragmentary to elucidate the relationship between El and Baal. Based on the three major myths described above, El is superior in rank and authority to Baal at both divine and human levels: in granting kingship and in declaring Aqhat’s fate. Although in the Baal Cycle, Baal appears frequently in action, it is El who holds the ultimate authority. However, Baal’s eventual exaltation in the pantheon suggests that El’s authority may be declining. The difference between the status of El and Baal can be explained by their differences in the nature of their divinity. Cross distinguishes between two types of gods in two types of myths: the theogonic myth and the cosmogonic myth. The former type of myth represents the old gods who are associated with the birth of the gods. These gods usually have no temples or cults. The latter type of myth is characterized by the conflict between the older god(s) and the young gods out of which emerge victory for the young god and the establishment of kingship in the cosmos.47 Cross states that the characterization of El as the creator of the gods and humanity suggests that he belongs to the realm of theogonic myth, whereas Baal belongs to the sphere of cosmogonic myth. Yet these two spheres are typically not so distinct in the Ugaritic texts.48 Smith also proposes that the tension between El and Baal lies in the conflict between two competing forms of divinity: El is an astral deity whereas Baal is a sky god.49 El’s astral status is hinted by the names of his children associated with celestial figures such as Shahar and Shalim (Dawn and Dusk), Yarih (moon), Shapshu (sun), Athtar (stars), Astarte (stars), and Reshef (Mars?). On the other hand, Baal’s designations as the “son of

KTU 1.15 II:13-6. A term borrowed from Prof. Longman. 47 Cross, “The ‘Olden Gods,’” 329, 332; and Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epics: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel (Mass. and London: Harvard University Press, 1973), 120. 48 Longman, written communication. 49 Smith also adds that El’s cult did not exist in Iron Age Israel except as part of an identification with Yahweh. Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism, 136-7, 140. For various historical and political views on the relationship between El and Baal, see Smith, UBC, 87-114. 45 46

THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE’S POINT OF VIEW

167

Dagon”50 and as “the storm-god” clearly reveal his “outsider” status to El’s family.51 These considerable differences between El and Baal reflect their respective rank differentiation in the divine world. El stays in a higher position than Baal. This follows that in the divine realm, El’s decisions in the pantheon are also weightier than Baal’s. However, despite El’s prestigious status, he is a far more remote god than Baal to the hypothetical actual audience. KTU 1.65 is a rare prayer that invokes El’s protection for the city of Ugarit. In most other prayers, people consider Baal the patron god of Ugarit. In these prayers, people address Baal with his epithet “Baal of Ugarit” (b‘l ’ugrt)52 They call upon Baal to protect them from the attack of snakes or from the threat of other enemies.53 Baal’s role as an intercessor in the stories of Kirtu also demonstrates his close relationship with humanity. A modern analogy of El and Baal’s function may be viewed as: El is a king whereas Baal is a prime minister.54 The king has the ultimate authority yet he often stays behind the scenes. The prime minister is the “action hero” who participates actively in public affairs. People respect the king, yet it is the prime minister who does the job for the interest of the people and whom the people would most likely identify with. This brief analysis of the audience’s conception of the deities reveal several facts: (1) The audience considers the deities as the dominant power in peoples’ lives. They are the sources of their well-being as well as their calamities. Thus, Anat’s violence against Aqhat should not be seen as an exception, but as a part of human experience. (2) The audience may perceive Anat in the story as a predator who kills for self-interest. Yet at the same time, the audience also perceives Anat’s violence as an act of divine punishment for Aqhat’s rebellion. This mixture places Anat in a different category from all the rest of the pantheon. (3) The status of El and Baal shows that the audience may identify with Baal’s actions more than with El’s permission, since Baal is their patron god and tends to take the side of human beings.

KTU 1.2 I:19; 1.5 V:23-24. Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism, 61-64. 52 KTU 1.27:4; 1.65:10-11; 1.105:19; 1.109:11, 16, 35-36; 1.119:3, 12, 21, 31. 53 KTU 1.107:39; 1.119:28-34; 1.169:1. 54 Goldingay, verbal communication. 50 51

168

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

The Conception of Death And Afterlife As mentioned in chapter five, the character Aqhat is the central figure whom all the other characters, both divine and human, hinge upon. Although his presence in the story occupies less than a half column (KTU 1.17 VI:20-41), his significance to the plot of the story and to the other characters in the story cannot be overlooked. Both acts of violence in the story are directly linked to Aqhat. Since the major content of the speech of Aqhat is concerned with death and his mortality, an understanding of how the audience conceives these concepts influences his or her perception of the character Aqhat and his or her point of view of the acts of violence in the story. Does Aqhat really rebel against Anat? Does he deserve to be killed? What does death mean to the surviving members of Aqhat’s family? Do they expect Aqhat to be revived? An investigation of the audience’s conception of death and afterlife would help to shed light on these questions. Death No text discovered at Ugarit directly and systematically expresses theological interest in the concepts of death such as in the case of the Egyptians’ “The Book of the Dead.”55 Yet both the archaeological and the textual evidence reflect the reality that the hypothetical actual audience is deeply and consciously interested in the phenomenon of death. According to Xella, death is one of their primary ideological interests.56 The most prominent example of the ancient audiences’ preoccupation with death is that all major mythological texts involve the theme of death: In the Baal Cycle, we have the death of Yamm, the death of Baal, and the death of Mot.57 In the Story of Kirtu, we have Kirtu’s impending death.58 Thus, for the audience of the Story of Aqhat, the death of Aqhat must have caught their attention. In these texts, the death of the deities such as Yamm, Baal, and Mot is only temporary, not permanent. Yamm is clearly pronounced dead in KTU 1.2 IV:32, 34 after Baal defeats him with the two weapons made by the craftsman god. Yet, later in the text, Yamm reappears and resumes another Xella, “Death,” 2059. For literature regarding death and afterlife, see Spronk, Beatific Afterlife; Lewis, Cults of the Dead; K. Van der Toorn, Family Religion, 151-77; Del Olmo Lete, CR, 213-53; Spronk, “The Incantations,” 282-84. 56 Xella, “Death,” 2061. 57 KTU 1.2 IV:23-27, 32, 34; 1.5 VI:3-10; 1.6 II:30-37. 58 KTU 1.15 V:17-1.16 I:45. 55

THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE’S POINT OF VIEW

169

fight with Baal.59 Baal not only is announced dead in KTU 1.5 VI: 9-10 but also mourned and buried.60 However, he soon reappears upon Anat’s defeat of Mot.61 Mot also is described as being split (bq‘), winnowed (dry), burned (šrp), grinded (ṭḥ), and sowed (dr‘) by Anat.62 Besides, even the birds have consumed his remains.63 It would seem impossible for Mot to return to life, yet he reappears after seven years and resumes his challenge against the kingship of Baal.64 On the contrary, the fate of human beings is to die a permanent death. This is reflected in words of the children of Kirtu spoken at his deathbed. Because of Kirtu’s status as king, his children consider him as being exempt from death. Yet, Kirtu’s impending death proves them wrong. Kirtu’s Daughter Lamented for His Mortality (KTU 1.16 II:36-49)

(36) b ḥyk [.] ’abn (37) nṣmÆ.

(36) In your living, O father, (37) we rejoice.

bl mtk . ngln

In your not-dying, we are happy.

(38) k klb . b btk . n‘tq

(38) Like a dog, you pass into your tomb;

(39) k ’inr . ’ap . Æštk

(39) Like a cur, even into your grave.

(40) ’ap ’ab . k mtm . tmtn

(40) But, father, how can you die like mortal men?

(41) ’u Æšk . l bky . ‘tq

(41) Or will your grave pass into weeping?

(42) bd . ’a¨t ’ab . ṣrry

(42) In the hands of women, father ṣrry

(43) ’u ’ilm . tmtn .

(43) Or do the gods die?

špḥ (44) l¨pn . l yḥ .

The progeny of (44) the Kind One not live?

The audience considers human kings as deified beings after their death.65 Yet, Kirtu’s fatal disease unveils the reality of death as a common fate for all human beings, even including the kings. In the light of the con59 The mention of the name Yamm in KTU 1.4 VI:12 and the broken beginning of 1.4 VII hint at this possibility. See Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism, 98. 60 KTU 1.5 VI:11-25; 1.6 I:2-31. 61 KTU 1.6 V:1-8. 62 KTU 1.6 II:30-35. 63 KTU 1.6 II:35-37. 64 KTU 1.6 V:8-VI:22. 65 Xella, “Death,” 2060; Del Olmo Lete, CR, 185-6.

170

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

ception of divine immortality and human mortality, Aqhat’s assertion of his own mortality and his charge that Anat is a liar are warranted. This understanding of the irreversibility of death is also reflected in the Hebrew Bible. For instance, when the first son of David conceived through Bathsheba is on the verge of death, David laments, “I shall go to him, but he will not return to me” (2 Sam 12:23). Job also testifies “as the cloud fades and vanishes, so those who go down to Sheol do not come up” (Job 7:9); “As waters fail from a lake, and a river wastes away and dries up, so mortals lie down and do not rise again” (Job 14:11).66 In this sense, it is not Aqhat’s realism that contributes to his death, but his attitude of arrogance that causes his downfall. The mourning and grief for the death of one’s family member demonstrates the devastating effect of death upon the surviving members of the family. Death arouses deep emotions. When Baal dies, both El and Anat mourn for him.67 When Kirtu is about to die, his children mourn for him.68 In a ritual text, people are called to mourn the deceased king, Niqmaddu.69 In this text, death is associated with desolation. A Call to Mourn King Niqmaddu (KTU 1.161:13-17)

(13) ksi . nqmd . ’ibky

(13) O throne of Niqmaddu, may you be mourned!

(14) w . ydm‘ . hdm . p‘nh

(14) And may tears be shed (over) the footstool of his feet.

(15) l pnh . ybky . ¨lḥn . mlk

(15) Before him, let the table of the king be mourned.

(16) w . ybl‘ . ’udm‘th

(16) And let his tears be swallowed.

(17) ‘dmt . w . ‘dmt . ‘dmt

(17) Desolation and desolation of desolations.

In the Story of Aqhat, there appears an extensive period of mourning for the death of Aqhat. The text emphasizes the emotional distress experi-

For more on the irreversibility of death in the Hebrew Bible, see Philip S. Johnston, Shades of Sheol: Death and Afterlife in the Old Testament (Downer Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2002), 32. 67 KTU 1.5 VI:23-25; 1.6 I:1-9. 68 KTU 1.16 I:6-12. 69 Recent study suggested that Niqmaddu III is the king mentioned in KTU 1.161. See Pardee, Ritual and Cult, 85-86. 66

THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE’S POINT OF VIEW

171

enced by Dan’il and Pughat in vivid terms.70 The mourning, sadness, and grief suggest that in the ancient world of Ugarit, the audience does not welcome death, especially the death of the loved ones. The mourning customs such as weeping, sitting on the ground, pouring ash on the head, and putting on sackcloth described in these texts are similar to those in the Hebrew Bible.71 It is worth noting that in all the above cases of death, the cause of death is not as much a focus as the mourning for death itself. For instance, when Baal dies, El immediately carries out a mourning rite. El Mourned for Baal (KTU 1.5 VI:11-25)

(11) ’apnk . l¨pn . ’il[[xx]]

(11) Then the Kind One, El [ ]

(12) d pid . yrd . l ksi .

(12) the Good-Natured descended from his throne,

y¨b (13) l hdm .

sat (13) on his footstool.

w l . hdm .

then from his footstool,

y¨b (14) l ’arṣ .

sat (14) on the ground.72

yṣq . ‘mr (15) ’un l rišh .

He poured ash (15) on his head,

‘pr . pl¨t (16) l . qdqdh .

dirt of sprinkling (16) on his skull.

lpš . yks (17) mizrtm .

For clothing, he put on (17) sackcloth.

Çr . b ’abn (18) ydy .

(His) skin with a stone (18) he scraped,

psltm . b y‘r

sideburns with a razor.

(19) yhdy . lḥm . w dqn

(19) He cut cheeks and chin.

(20) y¨l¨ . qn . Är‘h [.]

(20) He plowed (his) upper arm.

yḥr¨ (21) k gn . ’ap lb .

He plowed (21) his chest like a garden,

k ‘mq . y¨l¨ (22) bmt .

like a valley, he plowed (22) (his) back.

yšu . gh [.] w yṣḥ

He raised his voice and cried,

KTU 1.19 I:34-35; II:8-11; IV:11-17. For example, Gen 37:34; 2 Sam 1:11; 13:31. For more information on mourning customs in Israel, see Roland de Vaux, Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions (tran. John McHugh; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1961), 59; Johnston, Shades of Sheol, 47-8. 72 Or “the underworld.” 70 71

172

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

(23) b‘l . mt .

“Baal is dead!

my . lim . bn (24) dgn .

What happened to LIM, son of (24) Dagon?

my . hmlt .

What happened to the Peoples?

’a¨r (25) b‘l . ’ard . b ’arṣ

After (25) Baal, we shall descend to the underworld.”

In El’s word, he laments the death of Baal and inquires into the cause for his death (lines 23-24). This latter inquiry is more of an expression of mourning than an actual inquiry for the cause of Baal’s death since, as the story unfolds, El does not seek to find out the cause. Similarly, when Anat carries out her mourning rite, she repeats what El has said earlier. Anat Mourned for Baal (KTU 1.6 I:6-8)

(6) b‘l . mt .

(6) Baal is dead!

my . lim . bndgn .

What happened to LIM, son of Dagon?

(7) my . hmlt .

(7) What happened to the Peoples?

’a¨r . b‘l . ’ard . (8) b ’arṣ

After Baal, we shall descend (8) to the underworld.

This repetition of language suggests that El and Anat’s way of mourning is a formulaic expression in the Ugaritic texts. The difference between El and Anat’s mourning is that even though the text does not indicate Anat’s inquiry into the cause for Baal’s death, her action proves that she is well aware of the cause for his death because later in the story Anat asks Mot to give up Baal and, when the latter refuses, Anat crushes him to pieces.73 This is the same situation with Kirtu’s death. His family members mourn for his death yet Kirtu’s rebellion against Athirat is not mentioned. This suggests that to the audience, death itself is worth mourning and the cause of death, whether due to the dead person’s own fault, remains secondary. Viewing death in this light, Dan’il and Pughat’s mourning for Aqhat’s death points to their grief for the loss of a loved one and the cause for his death does not warrant inquiry.

73

KTU 1.6 II:11-37.

THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE’S POINT OF VIEW

173

Afterlife In the previous section, we saw the devastating effect of death upon the living. When the audience hears the part of the story where Dan’il and Pughat mourn and weep for Aqhat, they can sense the depth of their grief. However, is this grief a reflection of their despair that Aqhat would not return to life again? For this question, we need to explore the audience’s concept of afterlife. The ancients generally believe in a three-tiered universe: heavens for the gods, the earth for the human beings, and the underworld for the dead.74 The offering of food to the dead testifies the belief of the afterlife. Both the archeological and textual evidence from Ugarit attest to the offering of food and drink to the deceased ancestors.75 For instance, in the text we mentioned earlier, KTU 1.161, it describes a ritual in honor of the deceased king of Ugarit, Niqmaddu III.76 In this text, the phrase “making offerings to the dead” appears seven times (lines 27-30) accompanying the official invitation to the deceased king Niqmaddu III to descend among his ancestors.77 This sevenfold offering to the deceased king stresses its significance and completion. The Ugaritians, through the care of the deceased, assure the living the aid of their dead in healing, granting of fertility and predicting the future through divination.78 The practice of this rite suggests the belief in an afterlife at Ugarit. However, this seems to contradict Aqhat’s ridiculing Anat for offering him an afterlife. A further examination of the evidence suggests that there exists a tension between the general belief in the afterlife and the rejection of it. For instance, the spirits of the deceased ancestors are called Rapiuma (meaning “Saviors” or “Healers”). They might vary in their social status while they were alive.79 In KTU 1.20-1.22, Dan’il invites the Rapiuma to Johnston, Shades of Sheol, 69. For other textual evidence, see Xella, “Death,” 2060-61. Spronk, Beatific Afterlife, 139; Van Selms, Marriage & Family, 131. 76 See Lewis, Cults of the Dead, 5-46. Pardee, Ritual and Cult, 86. For more information on royal funerary cult, see Del Olmo Lete, CR, 213-53. 77 Pardee, Ritual and Cult, 86. For Pardee’s translation of this text, see 87-8. The seven-fold descent of the king may refer to the ritual lowering of the deceased king seven times into the depths of the earth. See Pardee, “Marziḥu, Kispu, and the Ugaritic Funerary Cult,” in Ugarit, Religion and Culture (Edited by N. Wyatt, W.G.E. Watson and J.B. Lloyd; Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996), 275. 78 Xella “Death,” 2061. 79 The Rapiuma have been viewed as minor deities, heroic warriors, a tribal group, the shades of the dead or some combination of the above. See Ted J. Lewis, 74 75

174

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

come and feast at his place. The text describes the Rapiuma as active beings who mount on their chariots and come on their stallions to Dan’il’s residence. For six days, they feast. The text unfortunately breaks off when it starts to describe the events of the seventh day. The epithet “Rapiuma” itself expresses the dead ancestors’ benevolent role to the world of the living. The root rp’ means “to heal.” The name Rapiuma denotes their ability to help the living. The Rapiuma serve a variety of functions for the living. They intervene on behalf of the living, healing their diseases, providing oracular responses, protecting them on a personal and communal level, and fostering fertility.80 They are perceived as benefactors. Moreover, archaeological evidence attests to the fact that the Ugaritians have a custom of living alongside the tombs of their ancestors. Archaeologists discover the underground burial vaults beneath each house at the city of Ugarit.81 People usually build the family tomb at the same time they build their houses.82 A house, therefore, is a place to shelter and to join both the living and the dead. This planning of tombs reflects the desire of the living to maintain permanent communication with the deceased. This relationship with the dead serves a commemorative function.83 It also ensures the living of their collective identity in their lineage and their place of origin.84 The audience does not believe that death is the end of everything. There is an afterlife in Ugaritian’s thought. However, death is not welcomed as shown by the grief of the living upon the dead. This grief suggests that the audience does not envision the afterlife as a “beatific” one. Thus, the effect of the death of Aqhat upon his family members is a tragic and devastating one. Their grief suggests that they do not anticipate Aqhat returning to life again. The Conception of Family The Story of Aqhat centers on a human family: the family of Dan’il. The story revolves around the three major characters in this family: the father “The Rapiuma,” in UNP, 196. Van Selms notes that the Rapiuma occur in parallelism with the warriors of Baal and Anat. This points more to a certain class of minor gods than to the ghosts of the dead. See Van Selms, Marriage & Family, 130. 80 Xella, “Death,” 2065. Cf. Spronk, Beatific Afterlife, 196. 81 Pope, “The Cult of the Dead,” 158; Spronk, Beatific Afterlife, 142; Van der Toorn, Family Religion, 161. 82 Xella, “Death,” 2061. 83 J. C. De Moor, “Standing Stones and Ancestral Worship,” UF 27 (1995), 19. 84 Van der Toorn, Family Religion, 177.

THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE’S POINT OF VIEW

175

Dan’il, the son Aqhat, and the daughter Pughat. The need for a son, the death of the son, and the consequence of his death comprise the major plot of the story. The author places significant emphasis on the subsequent actions of Dan’il and Pughat after the death of Aqhat. The whole story provides the audience a glimpse of their family structure, their relationship with one another, and their family values. However, do these areas correspond to the world of the hypothetical audience? How would they perceive the characters’ interactions in the story in the light of their own family structure and values? Since Pughat’s vengeance for Aqhat constitutes one of the focal points in this study, it is helpful to discover how the hypothetical audience perceives her violence. Does her act of vengeance conform to the role of daughters in those times? Or is her act of vengeance exceptional? Below we will categorize the audience’s conception of family into two broad categories: family structure and values, and the role of a daughter within the family. Other subjects related to family values such as the daughter’s right of inheritance, her religious function, and the role of a mother within the family are excluded from this discussion because they are not the focus in the Story of Aqhat. Family Structure and Values. The Ugaritic family is patriarchal in nature. The father is the head of the household who exercises authority over his wife and children. Families are listed under the name of the husband or father. KTU 4.360, for instance, lists a number of families headed the patriarch and his sons.85 The Ugaritians view the family as a unit. For example, when king Kirtu loses his family, the text describes the loss as “in its entirety” (bpÆyrh).86 The entire family can be sold into slavery or be ransomed from it.87 In some cases, the family includes other relatives such as a future daughter-in-law and son-in-law.88 The average number of members in a family is between five and six persons and more if it includes the servants. The archaeological finds on houses at Ugarit demonstrates polygamy

85 Other examples include KTU 4.295, 4.339, 4.519, 4.644. See also Anson F. Rainey, “The Social Stratification of Ugarit.” Ph. D. diss. Brandais University, 1962; I. Mendelsohn, “The Family in the Ancient Near East,” BA 11 (1948), 24-5; Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism, 58. 86 KTU 1.14 I: 25. See also Anson F. Rainey, “Family Relationships in Ugarit,” Or 34 (1965), 11. 87 RS 34.179 in RSO VII, 15-6; RS 17.130:29 in PRU IV, 103-5; RS 17.244:11 in PRU IV, 231-2; Iwrkl redeemed the whole family in KTU 3.4. 88 KTU 4.80. See J. P. Vita, “The Society of Ugarit,” in HUS, 478, and n. 162.

176

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

or a high number of dwellers in some houses.89 Adoption and divorce were possible ways to change family units.90 A successful marriage is one that will produce children. King Kirtu, for example, must marry a woman in order to beget a lawful heir. The blessing of El to Kirtu also centers on the procreation of children.91 In general, parents at Ugarit value sons more than daughters, but they welcome daughters along with sons. The preference for sons is shown in Kirtu’s specific request for sons (bnm).92 Marsman points out two other texts that express the preference for sons over daughters. The first one is RS 15.010:1-9.93 Another text is an omen text (KTU 1.141). It further testifies to the preference for sons. The text reads: l ’agp¨r k yqny Çzr b ’al¨yy For Agp¨r, (that) he will beget a son in Al¨yy (a woman’s name).

This preference for sons is largely due to the patrilineal structure of Ugaritic society since sons are the ones responsible for carrying the family line and inherit the family land whereas daughters marry off and belong to their husbands’ family. 94 In light of this preference for sons, it is understandable why Dan’il specifically prays for a son (bn).95 Other texts give evidence that a balanced family with sons and daughters is desirable. For instance, KTU 2.2 is a letter where the sender wishes the addressee well and blesses the latter with both sons (bnm) and daughters (bnt).96 In a census list (KTU 4.102), both sons (bn, Çzr, n‘rm) and daughters (pÇt, bt, n‘rt) are counted.97 KTU 4.360 lists several families. Daughters are counted along with the sons.98 Vita, “The Society,” 479. The objects of adoption are always adults. For adoption at Ugarit, see Vita, “The Society,” 479-80. Cf. Gary Beckman, “Family Values on the Middle Euphrates in the Thirteenth Century BCE,” in Emar: the History, Religion, and Culture of a Syrian Town in Late Bronze Age (Edited by M. W. Chavalas; Bethesda: CDL, 1996), 60-68. One of the best documented divorce case at Ugarit is concerned with king Ammittamru II and a daughter of king of Amurru. See Vita, “The Society,” 477-78. 91 KTU 1.15 II: 18-28. 92 KTU 1.14 II:4-5. 93 Ug V: 147-149. 94 Marsman, Women in Ugarit, 289, 715. 95 KTU 1.17 I:18, 20, 25. 96 KTU 2.2:9-10. 97 Marsman indicates that these terms used to designate sons and daughters, 89 90

THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE’S POINT OF VIEW

177

Based on the Story of Kirtu, daughters can be designated as the firstborn. Kirtu’s wife Lady Huraya is described as the first-born (bkr) of her family and his daughter Thatmanatu is designated by El as the first-born (bkr) of Kirtu’s family.99 This high status of women appearing in the mythological texts, however, is not reflected in the legal and administration texts from Ugarit. Marsman’s study has shown that the legal texts point to the subordinate position of most women in Ugarit. In these texts, men are the contracting parties and function as witnesses, but not women. 100 The administrative texts also testify to the fact that men are more important to the economic life of Ugarit than women. For example, the names of women are rarely mentioned in the administrative texts. The activities of men are recorded meticulously whereas the activities of women are ignored. Apart from the queen, hardly any reference to women is made in the administrative texts.101 Therefore, it is safe to say that in the Ugaritic society, sons are highly preferred over daughters and men generally play a more prominent role than women in the society. The Role of a Daughter within the Family. Although the following categories emphasize the roles of the daughter within the family in relation to her father and to her brother, they are in fact interconnected with one another. The role of the daughter is also closely linked to the conception of authority. In Relation to Her Father. Based on the Ugaritic mythological texts, it is the daughter’s duty to take care of her father in his physical weakness. Kirtu’s daughter, Thatmanatu attends Kirtu by refreshing him with wine when he lies on his sickbed.102 Baal’s daughter, Tallayu strokes his head and rubs his legs and horns when he comes back from his journey.103 During a banquet scene, El’s daughters Anat and Astarte goes out to seek remedy to which do not seem to differentiate the age difference. All could refer to young adults. See Marsman, Women in Ugarit, 681. 98 Lines 3 and 5. 99 KTU 1.14 III:39-40; 1.15 III:16. 100 Marsman, Women in Ugarit, 659-676. 101 Marsman, Women in Ugarit, 679-687. 102 KTU 1.16 II:14-16. This understanding is based on the reconstruction of the cuneiform text by de Moor and K. Spronk. See Johannes C. de Moor and Klaas Spronk, A Cuneiform Anthology of Religious Texts from Ugarit (Leiden, New York, Kobenhavn, Koln: E. J. Brill, 1987), 96. The transliteration of their reconstructed text reads: (14) tšqy [krt >abh] (15) trḥt[kh yn] (16) w msk tr[il]. 103 KTU 1.101:5-7.

178

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

cure their father’s hangover.104 Obedient and dutiful daughters are valued highly at Ugarit. An exception to this obedient daughter image is Anat’s attitude toward her father, El. In the Baal Cycle, Anat threatens El with violence if he refuses to grant a house for Baal. The responsibility of a daughter within a family aside from obeying her father also includes performing menial tasks and domestic chores such as cooking. In the Story of Kirtu, Kirtu’s daughter Thatmanatu draws water at the well.105 KTU 1.92:15 describes Astarte preparing a meal for her father El. In Relation to Her Brother. Generally speaking, there exists a close relationship between sisters and brothers as reflected in the Ugaritic texts. In the Baal Cycle, when Baal is swallowed by Mot and descends to the underworld, Anat mourns for him, buries him and then takes vengeance against Mot to enable Baal to return to his throne.106 In the Story of Kirtu, Kirtu asks his son Ilha’u to find his daughter Thatmanatu to mourn for him. Ilha’u does not show any trace of jealousy in view of his father’s preference for her to attend him and willingly follows his father’s instruction to summon her.107 The letters from Ugarit also testify to the close relationship between sisters and brothers. In RS 20.232, a brother requests news about his sister.108 RS 17.063 is another letter from a brother to a sister. The brother sends a piece of linen to his sister and requests her to have another third party bringing back some oil to him. RS 92.2005 is a double letter from a brother to his parents and to his sister inquiring of their well-being. In KTU 2.11, the brother, along with his sister, write a letter to their mother and inquire of her well-being. An exception to this general close relationship between siblings appears in Anat’s threat toward El that if El does not comply with her request, she would seize his children (bnm) and strike them.109 The word “children” (bnm) refer to Anat’s siblings. We can also interpret this threat as an indication that Anat’s loyalty to Baal takes precedence over her loyalty to her other brothers and sisters.

KTU 1.114:26-28. KTU 1.16 I:51. 106 KTU 1.6 I-II:4-37. 107 KTU 1.16 I:25-45. 108 Ug V: 154-55. 109 KTU 1.3 V:19-23. This point is inspired by Marsman, Women in Ugarit, 244245. 104 105

THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE’S POINT OF VIEW

179

In summary, the Ugaritic texts testify to the honoring of family values. An obedient daughter is respected. Viewing the Story of Aqhat in this light, Pughat indeed is portrayed as an ideal daughter, who attends her father during his physical weakness,110 does menial tasks such as drawing water,111 and has a close relationship with her brother as shown by her mourning and by taking vengeance for him.112 On the contrary, Anat’s image as a daughter who threatens not only her father but also her siblings places her outside of the normal expectation for a daughter and a sister in the Ugaritic texts. The Conception of Authority In a patrilinial society such as Ugarit, authority resides in the hands of men. As Frymer-Kensky maintains, “Power is a male monopoly in the world of deities and humankind.”113 Within a family, the father has the final authority. Thus, Kirtu gives order to his son Ilha’u to summon the latter’s sister Thatmanatu to mourn for him.114 Although the brother instructs his sister to execute a certain task, it is the father who delegates this authority to him. 115 In the Baal Cycle, El orders Shapshu to seek Baal in the underworld.116 Similarly, Anat needs her father El’s permission to build a house for Baal. These examples show El’s authority within his divine family. In the Ugaritic royal houses, the queen and the queen mother have considerable power compared to the ordinary women in the society. In letters, they are addressed with the prostration formulae. For example, in KTU 2.11:5-7, the sender writes, (5) l . p‘n . ’adtny (6) mrḥqtm (7) ’alny . (5) Before the feet of our lady, (6) from a distance, (7) we fall.

This prostration formula is used elsewhere in addressing the kings.117 The queen plays prominent roles in politics, in cultic matters, and in economic lives of Ugarit. Yet, even though she is powerful, she is still under KTU 1.19 II:8-11. KTU 1.19 II:1-3, 5-7, IV:36-38. 112 KTU 1.19 IV:28-35. 113 T. Frymer-Kensky, In the Wake of the Goddesses: Women, Culture, and the Biblical Transformation of Pagan Myth (New York: The Free Press, 1992), 46-7. FrymerKensky’s focus is on the ancient Sumero-Akkadian texts, yet this predominance of male over female is a common phenomenon in ancient cultures including Ugarit. 114 KTU 1.16 I:24-31. 115 Marsman, Women in Ugarit, 246. 116 KTU 1.6 IV:1-20. 117 For example, RS 18.040:5-8, RS 18.113:4-6, RS 94.2391:4-7, RS 92.2010:4-9 110 111

180

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

the authority of her husband, the king. The extent of her power depends on how much her husband delegates to her.118 Obedience to authority and to the status quo seems to be the expected norm at Ugarit. Yet, in the mythological texts, we have a few incidents where the children rebel against the authority of their fathers. In the Baal Cycle, Anat challenges El’s authority by threatening him with violence if he does not give in to her request. In the Story of Kirtu, Kirtu’s son Yassib rebels against his father by criticizing his reign and by attempting to usurp his throne before his death. His challenge provokes Kirtu’s violent curse.119 This challenge of authorities is not limited to the mythological texts but also reflected in the letters. In the latter days of Ugarit, rebellion against the Hittite overlord characterizes the reign of the last kings of Ugarit, especially king Ammurapi (1225-1180 BCE). During his reign, the reprimands that he receives from the overlords are far more than his predecessors.120 KTU 2.39 and RS 34.136 serve as two of the examples. In the former text, the “Sun” (i.e. the overlord of Ugarit) has a message for king Ammurapi. Lines 9-16 capture the reprimands of the “Sun.” 121 The “Sun” Reproved King Ammurapi

(9) w. Ä[r‘ . l.]’adny . l . yÆsr

(9) Now, (there is) no [grain] lacking [to] my Lord.

(10) w. [xx . y]d‘ . l. yd‘t

(10) But [ ] you have not recognized.

(11) ht [. šxx]. l . špš . b‘lk

(11) Now [ ] to the Sun, your master,

(12) ‘b[dm .]sglth . ’at

(12) a ser[vant], his possession you are.

(13) ht[. xxx] . špš . b‘lk

(13) Now [

(14) yd‘m . l . yd‘t

(14) you have not recognized.

(15) ‘my . špš . b‘lk

(15) To me, the Sun, your master,

(16) šnt . šntm . lm .{.} l . tlk

(16) one year, two years, why do you not come?

], the Sun, your master,

In the latter case, the king of Carchemish writes to Ammurapi and reprimands him for offering insufficient gifts. Below is a portion of the letter:

Marsman, Women in Ugarit, 697. KTU 1.16 VI:40-58. 120 I. Singer, “A Political History of Ugarit,” in HUS, 707. 121 Cf. D. Pardee, “A Further Note on PRU V, No. 60,” UF 13 (1981): 152. 118 119

THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE’S POINT OF VIEW

181

Thus says to the king. Speak to the king of Ugarit: may you be well. As to your messenger whom you sent to Hatti and the gifts which you sent to the high officials, they are much too few!….. Now, perhaps because of me they (the high officials) did not do anything against your servants (but) don’t do like this ever again!122

These incidents of rebellion are not constrained to female rebelling against male authorities but include male rebelling against another male authority. This suggests that the challenge of authorities is not just a matter related to gender, but also a matter related to one’s perception of the nature of the authorities. In the few accounts of rebellion mentioned in the mythological texts and in the letters, all the aforementioned rebels have problem with the nature of their respective authorities. The existence of cases of rebellions in both the mythological texts and the letters suggest that obedience to authorities and challenge of authorities are in constant tension with one another. Challenging of authority is not construed as a rare phenomenon in the Ugaritic texts, both in the mythological texts and letters. This challenge of authorities forms an interesting parallel to the theme of challenging order in the Story of Aqhat. In this story, Baal challenges El and Anat’s violence by his actions of protestation. Anat challenges El’s authority by threatening him with violence. Aqhat challenges Anat by refusing to surrender the bow and by insulting her gender. Dan’il challenges Anat by cursing the birds and the towns. Pughat challenges Anat by killing Yatpan. On the other hand, obedience is also a theme stressed in the Story of Aqhat. For example, the List of Ideal Sonship stresses the need for an obedient son. The wife of Dan’il is portrayed as an obedient wife who obeys his husband. Pughat is also described as an obedient daughter who listens to her father, attends him, and does house chores. Obedience to authority and challenge of authority reflects the dynamics and the tension existed among the characters in the story.

SUMMARY OF THE PROFILE In summary, the profile of the hypothetical actual audience shows that the audience views the deities as able to bring both benefit and trouble to human beings. They control the course of human life. Therefore, it should not be a surprise to the audience that both El and Anat determine the fate of Aqhat. The audience views El as the remote god, who has the authority to For the transliteration and the translation of this text, see W. H. Van Soldt, “Tbṣr, Queen of Ugarit?” UF 21 (1989): 390. 122

182

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

decree their destinies and Baal as their patron god who acts in their interest. Yet, the reality is that although Baal stays on their side, he is unable to save Aqhat from his death. The audience views death as the common fate for all mankind. Although there seems to be a tension between Aqhat’s rejection of the idea of afterlife and the evidence provided by the Rapiuma and the burial practices, it is certain that death is not welcomed by the audience. The audience values traditional patriarchal family values and respects a dutiful submissive daughter. The audience generally displays an obedient attitude toward authorities, yet there is evidence attested both in the mythological texts and in the actual letters, which show the challenging of authorities at Ugarit. Having reconstructed the concepts of the hypothetical actual audience regarding deities, death and afterlife, family values, and authorities, we now turn the focus to their possible point of view on the violence in the Story of Aqhat.

HOW WOULD THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE VIEW THE TWO ACTS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT? An Ugaritic King How would an Ugaritic king view the violence in the Story of Aqhat? Here we suppose this Ugaritic king is a typical king who occupies the top tier in the social hierarchy, who represents the kingdom of Ugarit, and who holds the highest authority over the state religion and its cult. At Ugarit, religion and state are one. The major function of the state cult is to maintain the liturgical contact with the deity which is foundational for establishing the well-being of the deity’s dominion.123 Various liturgical texts testify to the role of the king played in the state cult.124 Thus, the tasks of the king within his kingdom include being the commander-in-chief, the chief justice in the Supreme Court, and the high priest.125 Externally, since the king is subject to foreign powers such as Egypt and Hatti, his authority is a limited one. He

Gosta W. Ahlstrom, “Administration of the State in Canaan and Ancient Israel,” in CANE, vol I, 597. 124 For example, KTU 1.105, 1.109, 1.112, 1.115. For recent monographs on the liturgical texts of Ugarit and the role of the king in the cults, see Del Olmo Lete, CR, and Pardee, Ritual and Cult. 125 Ahlstrom, “Administration of the State,” 592. 123

THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE’S POINT OF VIEW

183

may at times rebel against his overlords by sending insufficient tribute and by refusing to appear before the overlords. Since in the Story of Aqhat, Dan’il is a king, and since the author portrays Dan’il as a positive figure, it is very likely that this hypothetical king might identify with Dan’il and with his plight of losing a son. To deprive a king of his progeny is a devastating situation in the ancient world. This is also depicted in the Story of Kirtu. Sons are especially important for the king. The king needs his son to succeed him and to perpetuate his kingdom beyond his living years. Although the Ugaritians welcome both sons and daughters, sons are preferred over daughters as indicated in our reconstructed profile of the audience. Therefore, the king would likely take Dan’il’s point of view and perceive Anat’s violence as a malevolent act. Since the king knows that it is also Aqhat’s arrogance that contributes to his death, this might raise his awareness to pay attention to his own son. He might want to teach him not to offend any deity by disobedience. He might teach him to be wise in knowing his place in the hierarchical order of the world. He might want to have more sons, just in case some of them encounter misfortune like Aqhat. How would the king view Pughat’s violence? First of all, the king might be surprised at the courage and the role of woman in general. He might view the females in his family such as his mother, his wife, and his daughters differently. For him, any of these women can rise to the occasion and serve as a powerful heroine on his behalf. He might even consider the possibility of having one of his daughters take the throne in case none of his sons are eligible to succeed him.126 How would the king view the roles of El and Baal in the story? As a king at Ugarit, he participates in various cultic events and sacrifices to both El and Baal. It would be to his advantage to have all the gods’ blessings upon him to support his reign. He might even sacrifice to the demon gods just in case he offends them and incurs trouble upon himself. Since El and Baal do not share the same point of view on Anat’s violence, it might be difficult for the king to choose whose side to take. The disharmony in the divine world, however, might not be an unusual phenomenon for the king

Korpel’s study on the work of Ilimilku provides insight into the role of female in both Aqhat and Kirtu stories. She also draws from de Moor’s study and suggests that in the very same period when Ilimilku wrote Kirtu and Aqhat, a female Pharaoh Tausret took power in Egypt because no male descendent of the 19th dynasty was able to claim the throne. See Korpel, “Exegesis,” 105-108. Marsman also discusses Korpel’s suggestion. See Marsman, Women in Ugarit, 351, 359. 126

184

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

because as the king of Ugarit, he must have experienced conflicting powers in his reign, both within and without. As the person with the highest authority and power in his kingdom, the theme of power and the challenge of that power must have left an impression in the king’s mind. Aqhat’s rebellion against Anat might inspire the king to reconsider whether he should rebel against his overlord since the story sends the message: the consequence of rebellion is deadly. Additionally, the fact that Pughat’s object of vengeance is Yatpan and not Anat might help the king realize the limitation of human power in the whim of the greater forces such as the forces of the divine world and the force of the overlord(s). After reading the story, the king might struggle to establish his own view as to whether to obey or disobey his overlord. He might also ponder his own place and power in his world. An Ordinary Ugaritic Man Here we suppose that an ordinary Ugaritic man is someone who is neither associated with the royal house nor occupies a leadership position in his community nor someone who is a slave or a social outcast. He is simply a typical middle-aged man who lives in Ugarit, who upholds the traditional values regarding the hierarchical order between the deities and human beings, who participates in religious rituals, who observes the civil obligations, who is the head of his household, who has a wife and several children, and who has enough means to make a living in his days. If the Story of Aqhat was read and circulated in his community, how would this kind of man view the two acts of violence in the story? Since the author of the story portrays the human character Dan’il in such a positive way and describes his emotional response after the death of Aqhat, and since this ordinary Ugaritic man is the head of his household, just like Dan’il, it is very likely that this man would identify with Dan’il and with his point of view and emotion regarding the two acts of violence in the story. Therefore, he would disapprove of Anat’s violence since it deprives Dan’il of his only son. Although he realizes that El permits Anat to do so and Aqhat’s pride and arrogance contributes to his death, he might not view the death of Aqhat as a justified death if he takes Dan’il’s point of view. Thus, he might view Aqhat’s refusal to give up the bow as a transgression, but not a sufficient transgression to deserve the death penalty. He might also view El and Anat as the controlling powers in humans’ lives, powers who can bring trouble and calamity to human beings. He might view Anat’s violence as a manifestation of evil and Anat, the goddess, as a threat to the patriarchal society and value.

THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE’S POINT OF VIEW

185

Since this man has grown up in a patriarchal society and is the head of his household, Pughat’s role as a blood-avenger might inspire him to discover the potential of his own daughter whose potential goes beyond doing domestic chores and attending his needs. In a sense, he might realize that to have a daughter is really not a liability but an asset. An Ordinary Ugaritic Woman Here we assume that an ordinary Ugaritic woman is a typical young, unmarried house girl who adheres to the traditional patriarchal values, who is obedient to her parents, who does household chores and fulfills her responsibility as a daughter and a sister. If a woman like this read the Story of Aqhat, how would she view the two acts of violence in the story? The closest resemblance of this girl in relation to the story is the character Pughat. Pughat is a young, unmarried house girl who obeys her father, attends his needs, and who takes the responsibility as the blood-avenger for her brother. Because of Pughat’s background, her positive portrayal, and the description of the emotional impact of the death of Aqhat upon her, it is most likely that this ordinary Ugaritic woman would identify with Pughat and with her point of view in the story. This ordinary Ugaritic girl might view Anat’s violence as an evil act since the depiction of Anat in this story is the direct opposite, or the antithesis of what this ordinary Ugaritic girl is. Anat is assertive, threatening, violent, disrespectful of parental authority, not conforming to any traditional values of the patriarchal scheme. On the contrary, Pughat is the ideal daughter who conforms to the traditional family values of an obedient daughter. Her vengeance against Yatpan might cause a sense of inspiration and hope on the part of this ordinary Ugaritic woman. She might view Pughat as her role model. There might be a paradigm shift in her way of thinking. She might reconsider her own role and potential as a female living in a patriarchal family and society.

CONCLUSION TO PART THREE The three categories of audience, the Ugaritic king, the ordinary Ugaritic man, and the ordinary Ugaritic woman, all view the violence in the Story of Aqhat from their own vantage point, from their different background, and from their own gender, age, and social status. Because of this diversity in their background, they tend to identify with different human characters in the story and actualize the story in their own ways. Three observations can be made from this chapter:

186

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

(1) The audiences tend to identify with the human characters in the story rather than with the divine characters in the story because the audiences share the same humanity as the human characters in the story. They are able to understand the human characters’ emotions and their points of view on the two acts of violence in the story. (2) The audiences’ points of view are greatly shaped and influenced by the author’s presentation and representation of the characters in the story and by his manipulation of the characters’ respective points of view. Thus, the positive portrayals of the human characters in the story, the vivid descriptions of their emotions of anger, distress, and grief gain the audiences’ sympathy and identification. The audiences perceive these characters as “real-life” characters and they tend to wrestle with them concerning the perplexities of life as the characters encounter in the story.127 (3) Because of this identification with the human characters’ points of view and because of their own distinctive background and social status, the audiences’ points of view are “biased.” They can no longer view the two acts of violence in an “objective” manner. Thus, the violence depicted in the story becomes a subjective personal matter rather than an objective analysis of right and wrong. Like the human characters, Dan’il and Pughat, what matters to them is the death of their close family member, and not so much of the cause behind it. In the conclusion to Part Two, we mentioned that the two ideological points of view expressed in the story: unjust murder and deserved death, exist in tension with one another. The author, by placing great emphasis on the human characters’ grief and on their positive characterization, intends to move his implied audience to identify with the human characters’ point of view. Meanwhile, by disclosing El’s permission and Aqhat’s rebellion, he intends his implied audience to be aware of the subjective and the limited aspect of their point of view. Thus, he creates a sense of ambiguity and leaves room for the audience to struggle to establish his or her ethical assessment of Anat’s violence. In this chapter, we see that the three categories of the hypothetical actual audiences all tend to identify with the human characters’ points of view: Anat’s violence is an evil act and Pughat’s violence is a heroic act. Therefore, the author’s intention for his implied audience to identify with the human characters, Dan’il and Pughat’s, point of view succeeds. It shows the power of using characterization and points of view to influence the audience’s perception of the violence in the story. However, how the audience 127

Drawing upon Culpepper, Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel, 101.

THE HYPOTHETICAL ACTUAL AUDIENCE’S POINT OF VIEW

187

applies different elements of the story to his or her life goes beyond the control of the author and belongs to the realm of conjecture.

CONCLUSION The goal of this dissertation is to discover the ethical understanding of violence in the Story of Aqhat by attempting to answer two questions: (1) How did the author of the story use characterization and point of view to influence his implied audience regarding the two acts of violence in the story. And (2) How would the hypothetical actual audience view the two acts of violence in the story? In Part Two (chapters 3-5) of this study, we observe that the author casts some characters in a positive light and others in a negative light, thereby encouraging the implied audience to choose the point of view of the positive characters. Part Two also demonstrates the author’s use of point of view as a literary technique to portray Anat’s violence in a multiperspectival fashion with depth and sophistication, which cannot be reduced to any one-dimensional interpretation on the part of the audience or reader. By using both characterization and point of view, the author intends to influence his implied audience to perceive Anat’s violence as a negative act, an unjustified murder, and Pughat’s violence as a positive act, a vengeance against a deceased family member, yet he also leaves room for ambiguity and openness in his portrayal of the two acts of violence, thereby forcing the audience to wrestle with their own ethical conclusions. In Part Three (chapter 6), the hypothetical actual audience’s identification with the human characters in the story confirms the effectiveness of using characterization and point of view as means to shape the audience’s perception of violence. However, the way in which each individual audience actualizes and applies the various elements in the story goes beyond the control of the author. Therefore, the impact and the significance of the violence in the story for the historical audience remain in the sphere of conjecture. Several observations can be drawn from this study: the power of characterization, the dynamic of point of view, the ethics of violence, and the purpose of ambiguity and openness in the story. 189

190

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

THE POWER OF CHARACTERIZATION Each character in the story is the creation of the author, who carefully designs the characters and fashions them in order to serve the purpose of the plot and for the message of the story. In this sense, there is no accident in the author’s presentation and representation of the characters. By presenting Dan’il as a righteous king and Pughat as an obedient daughter, the author invites the audience to perceive them as the “good guys.” On the contrary, by presenting Anat as a killer who fails to achieve her ends through violence and by portraying Yatpan as an arrogant villain, the author influences the audience’s perception of them as the “bad guys.” Yet, the characterization of El and Baal leaves the audience with a sense of ambiguity. El is presented as the god of supreme authority as reflected by his epithets and by his remoteness. However, Anat’s violent threat against him casts his authority in doubt. Since the story does not explicitly portray El as the “nasty guy,” or the “nice guy” the audience is left with ambiguity regarding El’s character. The same may be said of the characterization of Baal. Baal is portrayed as a patron god of Dan’il, who takes the standpoint of the human characters, Dan’il and Pughat, rather than with his fellow divine beings, El and Anat. However, Baal is unable to alter El’s permission and can only protest with silence. Baal is presented as the “nice guy,” yet his seeming powerlessness and speechlessness undermine his authority and creates a sense of ambiguity in the audience’s perception of him. The characterization of Aqhat is also full of ambiguity. On the one hand, he is portrayed as an inexperienced and prideful young man who pays the price of his pride with his life. On the other hand, he is portrayed as an innocent human being who suffers unjustly for his reaction against the goddess. In this sense, his judgment does not seem to fit the crime. Because of this ambiguity in the author’s depiction of the characters, El, Baal, and Aqhat, Anat’s violence against Aqhat involves ambiguity. The ethical assessment of Anat’s violence depends on whose and which point of view the audience takes.

THE DYNAMICS OF POINT OF VIEW As Part Two (chapters 3 to 5) illustrates, we can deduce the author’s probable point of view on the two acts of violence in the story by exploring the various points of view of the characters in the story. These various points of view on Anat’s violence depict her violence as a complex act that excludes any one-sided evaluations on the part of the audience.

CONCLUSION

191

Regarding Anat’s violence, the author deliberately includes El’s permission for Anat to harm Aqhat and reveals Aqhat’s arrogant attitude toward Anat. These two inclusions offer a counter perspective contrary to Dan’il and Pughat’s point of view. Regarding Pughat’s violence, the author designs to keep Dan’il and Pughat “in the dark” by concealing the information of El’s permission and Aqhat’s arrogance but disclosing that information to the audience of the story. This concealing and disclosing of information elevates the audience’s position by making him or her know more than the human characters, Dan’il and Pughat. Because the audience knows more, the burden of interpretation falls on the audience. One way the author of the story encourages the audience to identify with Dan’il and Pughat’s point of view is through the description of their emotion. Emotion is one of the major literary devices the author employs to influence the audience’s response toward the acts of violence in the story. The author describes Dan’il’s distress, grief, and anger and draws attention to the weeping of Pughat after the death of Aqhat. These emotional descriptions help to move the audience’s emotions to empathize with them. In this way, the audience feels what Dan’il and Pughat feel. The multiplicity of points of view inherent in the story may not help the audience to make ethical judgments easily. Yet, the emotional point of view can overshadow the plain facts, and moves the audience to make a judgment based on his or her identification with the emotions of the human characters in the story. By manipulating characterization and point of view, and by allowing room for ambiguity and openness, the author forces the audience to struggle to establish his or her own ethical assessment on the acts of violence portrayed in the story. Three observations can be made on the point of view of the characters in the story about Anat’s violence: (1) The character’s point of view regarding Anat’s violence is dependent upon the character’s relationship with the perpetrator and with the victim, i.e. Anat and Aqhat. El gives in to Anat’s threat and permits her to kill because he fears Anat more than Aqhat. Dan’il perceives Anat’s violence as an unjust murder because the victim is his son. Baal sides with Dan’il because Dan’il is his devotee. Pughat takes vengeance against Yatpan because the victim is her brother. Yatpan takes Anat’s point of view because Anat is his superior. Both Dan’il and Pughat do not bother to inquire into the reasons behind Aqhat’s death. They take the act of vengeance simply because Aqhat is their close family member. In this sense, their vengeance has more to do with relationship than with the concern of right and wrong. For them, their relationship with the victim justifies their point of view.

192

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

(2) Each character’s point of view regarding Anat’s violence is dependent upon his or her knowledge of the situation in which the act of violence takes place. El permits Anat to kill because he not only knows that Aqhat rebels against Anat but he also knows “to offend Anat is to be crushed.” Both Dan’il and Pughat’s perceive Anat’s violence as an evil act because they are unaware of the encounter between Anat and Aqhat and are ignorant of Aqhat’s rebellious attitude toward Anat. Yatpan takes Anat’s point of view because he is unaware of Anat’s weeping and her losing of the bow. (3) Each character’s point of view regarding Anat’s violence is also dependent upon his or her self-interest factor. Does the act of violence serve one’s interest or act against it? El permits Anat to kill because it saves him from being crushed by Anat. Baal protests silently because he wants to make a statement that he disapproves Anat’s act of violence. Anat kills because she wants the bow of Aqhat. Dan’il and Pughat take vengeance against Anat’s violence because her violence apparently goes against the interest of Dan’il and Pughat.

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE Each character views Anat’s violence from his or her vantage point and justifies it according to this vantage point. In this sense, the ethics of violence is an issue of point of view. Where one stands influences how one views the violence in the story. Anat’s violence may be perceived as an evil act if one stands on Dan’il and Pughat’s side and ignores other points of view. On the contrary, Anat’s violence may be perceived as a divine punishment of a human rebel if one takes the stand of El and neglects other points of view. As we observed above, point of view is closely bound up with one’s relationship with the perpetrator and with the victim, one’s knowledge of the situation in which the violence takes place, and one’s selfinterest factor. Thus, the ethics of violence is contingent upon these three factors. Other observations regarding the nature of violence can be drawn from this study: (1) In the Story of Aqhat, the taking of a human life is considered seriously by the family members of the victim and by the author of the story since the death of Aqhat and the subsequent vengeance stays at the center of the plot. (2) Violence is manifested in two opposing ways. From the human characters’ perspective, Anat’s violence is an unjust murder whereas Pughat’s violence is a heroic act of vengeance. In this sense, there is a place

CONCLUSION

193

for violence, as in the context of exacting blood-vengeance, but killing for personal gain is indirectly denounced. (3) For both Anat and Pughat, violence is a means to their ends. Anat uses violence to get the bow. Pughat uses violence to kill the killer of her brother. Both cases show the power of violence as a means to serve selfinterest. (4) Violence begets violence. The killing of a person needs the killing of the killer to restore some kind of wholeness to the family of the victim. This concept is analogous to the concept of “an eye for an eye” in the Hebrew Bible.

THE PURPOSE OF AMBIGUITY AND OPENNESS As this study shows, the characterization of the major players in the story invites ambiguity and openness. The various points of view of the characters also include ambiguity and openness. Thus, the ethics of Anat’s violence is portrayed with ambiguity and openness. This prompts us to ask the question: what is the purpose of allowing aspects of ambiguity and openness to be present in the portrayal of Anat’s violence in the story? In other words, what is the intention of the author when he remains reticent regarding the moral evaluation of Anat’s violence? The question is related to the function of ambiguity and openness in stories. One of the ways in which stories influence the audience is by leaving questions and unresolved issues for the audience to answer or to resolve. 1 One example from the Hebrew Bible is the Book of Jonah. The book ends with God’s question to Jonah but leaves the reader in suspense as to how Jonah responds to the question God poses. This apparent withholding of the response from Jonah encourages the reader to ponder the message of the book. Similarly, the lack of explicit evaluation of Anat’s violence on the part of the author of the Story of Aqhat forces the audience to wrestle with the issue and to strive to come to terms with it. Another function of ambiguity and openness in stories is dynamic adaptability. By leaving unanswered elements in the story, the story becomes adaptable to each succeeding generation and meets specific needs in different periods of time.2 Different readers and audiences in different generations and cultures can apply the story in their own ways based on their own contexts.

1 2

Goldingay, Models for Interpretation, 39. Drawn from McAfee, “The Patriarch’s Longed-for Son,” 306.

194

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

CONCLUSION To answer the question: what is the text’s implicit understanding of violence in the Story of Aqhat? Based on the author’s employment of characterization and point of view, the text portrays violence as a complex matter. On the surface, the text disapproves of violence for material gain and approves using violence for the sake of blood-vengeance. However, beneath the surface, many questions arise: Does the one in a higher social hierarchy have the authority to demand something from the one who is in a lower rank? What constitutes an unjustified death and a justified death? How does one decide whether a particular punishment fits a particular crime? Is ignorance of the whole matter a means to justify one’s point of view on violence? These questions arise precisely from the ambiguity and openness left in the story. Through investigation of characterization and point of view, the ethics of violence in the Story of Aqhat is not simply a matter of right and wrong, but more a matter of point of view. This point of view is strongly influenced by one’s relationship with the perpetrator and with the victim of the violence, one’s knowledge of the situation in which the violence takes place, and one’s self-interest factor. Therefore, the author of the Story of Aqhat composes the story with artistry and sophistication, which not only enhances the modern reader’s appreciation of his employment of the literary techniques but also invites us to ponder the story’s inherent moral message.

AREAS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH This study focuses on the literary aspects of characterization and point of view as means to recover the understanding of violence implicit in the Story of Aqhat. Because of these two foci, we have not inquired into other subject matters and exploration of other methods to approach the issue of the ethics of violence in the ancient texts in general and in the Story of Aqhat in particular. The purpose of this section is to raise areas for further research in connection with the study of the ethics of violence in the Story of Aqhat and to explore the possible use of the conclusion of this study as a hermeneutical key for the study of the ethics of violence in other contexts.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

195

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE OTHER UGARITIC TEXTS The present study chooses one ancient text as its focus. The conclusion derived from this text needs further collaboration with other Ugaritic texts of the same genre such as the Baal Cycle and the Story of Kirtu and with other genres such as prayers, incantations, and letters in order to present a comprehensive view of the ethics of violence as conceived by the ancient Ugaritians. Clear distinctions need to be made concerning the nature of violence, the type of violence, and the subject and the object of violence. How do characterization and point of view play in these texts? Is the concept of violence portrayed in these texts clear or ambiguous? What other approaches can we employ to discover the ancient Ugaritian’s understanding of violence? What are the significance and implications of this study for the study of other related subject matters such as war and peace, order and chaos?

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN OTHER ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN TEXTS To study the concept of violence in the other ancient Near Eastern texts requires the use of the comparative method. Past scholarship tends to either emphasize the similarities among the various ancient texts or repudiate the validity of the comparative method. A contextual method seems to be a more appropriate method for the comparative study. Hallo proposes the “contextual method” for the comparative study. This method involves the drawing of similarities and differences between traits of two or more cultures, rather than strictly looking for the similarities between these cultures or rejecting the comparative study.1 Longman notes that, generally speaking, the closer the two cultures are geographically, temporally, and linguistically, the more likely it is that the comparison is valid.2 When comparing various ancient Near Eastern texts, the comparison is between two or more ancient cultures such as the study of the ethics of violence in Ugarit and in Mesopotamia. 1 William W. Hallo, “Biblical History in Its Ancient Near Eastern Setting: The Contextual Approach,” in Scripture in Context: Essays on the Comparative Method (PTMS 34; Edited by Carl D. Evans, William W. Hallo, and John B. White; Pittsburgh, Penn.: The Pickwick Press, 1980), 1-26. 2 Tremper Longman III, Fictional Akkadian Autobiography: A Generic and Comparative Study (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1991), 31. For the basic approaches to the comparative method, its validity and benefits, see Longman, Fictional Akkadian Autobiography, 24-36.

196

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

Precautions need to be taken in comparing texts from different genres and in comparing texts that differ in context.3 A fundamental issue that is intrinsic to the study of the ethics of violence is its function and place in these ancient texts. The theme of violence is predominant in the divine realm such as in the Baal Cycle and in Enuma Elish. Does the function of violence simply describe moral or ethical behavior or does it prescribe ethical models for conducting violence? What methodologies should we employ to deduce the moral understanding of violence in these texts?

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE HEBREW BIBLE Numerous works in the studies of the Hebrew Bible have been devoted to the subjects of war, holy war or just war, divine warfare, and God as a divine warrior. 4 Several of these works have adopted the comparative method and have drawn their parallels from both the Ugaritic and the Mesopotamian sources.5 These works demonstrate the close affinity between the diLongman, Fictional Akkadian Autobiography, 31-32. For example, Miller, The Divine; Peter C. Craigie, The Problem of War in the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1978); Willard M. Swartley, Slavery, Sabbath, War, and Women: Case Issues in Biblical Interpretation (Scottsdale, Penn.: Herald Press, 1983); 97-149; Kang, Divine War; Charles Sherlock, The God Who Fights: The War Tradition in Holy Scripture (Edinburgh: Rutherford House, 1993); Susan Niditch, War in the Hebrew Bible: A Study in the Ethics of Violence (New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993); A. C. Winn, Ain’t Gonna Study War No More (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1993); Longman and Reid, God is a Warrior. 5 For instance, P. C. Craigie compares and contrasts the Israelite practice of war with the ancient Near Eastern practices. He points out the religious dimension of the conduct of war in Mesopotamia, which is in common with the Israelites understanding of divine warfare. Yet no other ancient Near Eastern nation has a vision of peace and an anticipation of the redemption of all mankind as reflected in the Israelite tradition. See Craigie, The Problem of War, 115-122. Miller notes that Israel’s understanding of God is developed through interaction with other ancient Near Eastern cultures. He explores the nature and role of the Ugaritic divine assembly as well as investigates the roles of Baal, Anat, and El as the divine warriors. He then uses these findings as the backdrop for his study of war and warfare in ancient Israel. See Miller, The Divine Warrior, 12-63. Kang presents a comprehensive overview of divine war in the different contexts of the ancient Near East as a means to shed light on Yahweh’s war in the Hebrew Bible. His approach is both exegetical and comparative. He compares the structure of divine war in the ancient Near East with that of Yahweh war, examines the form and function of the various literary texts and genres including inscriptions, epic, hymnic, annalistic, ritual texts, and graphic sources. See Kang, Divine War, 6, 3 4

BIBLIOGRAPHY

197

vine warfare and the divine warrior motifs in the Hebrew Bible and in the ancient Near Eastern tradition, which lend support to the validity of the comparative method.6 Since the “contextual method” of the comparative approach takes account of both similarities and differences between two or more cultures, it is interesting to note that there is no exact parallel between the plot of the Story of Aqhat and any of the narrative texts found in the Hebrew Bible. In the Story of Aqhat, a deity kills a human being for self-interest (i.e. for a material gain) and then another human being takes vengence against the henchman of the deity. In the Hebrew Bible, Yahweh seldom kills a human being for any material gain. However, there are several incidents in which Yahweh kills human beings for self-regard, to safeguard his name, glory, and holiness.7 The distinction between killing human beings for self-interest as in the cases of the Ugaritic deities and the killing of human beings for self-regard as in the cases of Yahweh deserve further inquiry.8 In what way does Yahweh share similarities with the Ugaritic deities in terms of committing violence against human beings and in what way is Yahweh different from the Ugaritic deities? Based on the conclusion of this study, the ethics of violence is strongly influenced by one’s relationship with the perpetrator and with the victim of the violence, one’s knowledge of the situation in which the violence takes place, and one’s self-interest factor. This conclusion throws light on the interpretation of violence in the Hebrew Bible.9 (1) From the standpoint of the interpreter of the Hebrew Bible: The interpretation of God’s character and his acts of violence against human 11-110. Longman and Reid use two divine warrior myths (the Baal Cycle from Ugarit and Enuma Elish from Mesopotamia) to demonstrate the analogous pattern appeared in the divine warfare of the Hebrew Bible. See Longman and Reid, God is a Warrior, 83-88. 6 A comparative study preserves scholars from the danger of isolating one culture from another and helps to dispute false antithesis and establish correct ones. See Longman, Fictional Akkadian Autobiography, 36. 7 For example, Yahweh kills Uzzah in 2 Sam 6 and the two sons of Aaron in Lev 10. 8 I pointed out this distinction in my paper “How Does the Portrayal of Ugaritic Deities Shed Light on the ‘Dark Side’ of God in the Hebrew Scriptures?” (paper presented at the annual meeting of the SBL. San Antonio, Tex., 20 November, 2004). 9 For a recent bibliography on the issue of violence in the Hebrew Bible, See Collins, Does the Bible, 53-56.

198

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

beings in the Hebrew Bible is strongly influenced by the interpreter’s relationship with God, the “perpetrator,” his or her knowledge of God’s character and actions, and his or her self-interest factor. It is impossible to reach a uniform interpretation of God’s acts of violence if the interpreters stand in different vantage points in their relationships with God. The point of view of an atheist regarding God’s acts of violence would significantly differ from the point of view of an evangelical scholar. (2) From the standpoint of the author of the Hebrew Bible: The interpretation of God’s character and his acts of violence against human beings in the Hebrew Bible is strongly influenced by the author’s (the one who wrote the particular text of God’s violent acts against human beings, such as the author of Lev 10 about God killing the two sons of Aaron) relationship with God, his knowledge of God and his character, and his selfinterest (or group-interest) factor. The vantage point of a Deuteronomist would significantly vary from the vantage point of a priestly writer. (3) From the standpoint of the human character in the Hebrew Bible: The interpretation of God’s character and his acts of violence is also strongly influenced by the character’s relationship with God, his or her knowledge of God, and his or her self-interest factor.10 The various acts of violence portrayed in the Hebrew Bible pose a great challenge to the biblical scholars and ethicists. Many groups and individuals including the crusaders, the Puritans, and the abolitionists used the violence depicted in the Hebrew Bible to justify their use of violence. 11 Questions arise: Does the Hebrew Bible describe or prescribe violence? Is 10 For instance, in the same example we mentioned above (Lev 10:1), God causes fire to consume the two sons of Aaron when they offer incense, which God has not commanded. As a result, Aaron remains silent (‫( )דמם‬Lev 10:3b). We can interpret the silence of Aaron in the light of his relationship with God, his knowledge of God, and his self-interest factor. On the one hand, Aaron is a priest and has full knowledge of how to approach God in a proper manner, therefore, he fully understood the cause for the death of his sons. His silence is not due to his ignorance of the situation. Aaron’s relationship with God, the “perpetrator,” is not a hostile but a reverent one. Thus, he cannot conceive God as an enemy, or the object of vengeance. On the other hand, the victims of the violence are his two sons. Their death deprives him of two loved ones, which goes against his self-interest. Thus, Aaron could have protest with anger and rage, yet his relationship and knowledge of God prevents him from doing so. Caught in this dilemma, Aaron cannot express anything verbally but to remain silent. Cf. Goldingay thinks that it is possible that the word “silent” can mean “wailing.” See John Goldingay, Old Testament Theology: Israel’s Gospel (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 2003), 425. 11 Collins, Does the Bible, 1-27.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

199

violence considered the last resort or the only means to an end? Is “violence” the right terminology to use when we speak about the killing of human beings by the divine agent(s)? In what context do we justify divine violence? What kind of questions should we ask regarding the ethics of violence without imposing modern or western concepts and ideologies into the ancient text and thought? Is the study of violence in the Hebrew Bible by focusing on the Hebrew Bible itself adequate to address the various issues involved or should we adopt a cross-disciplinary approaches to the issue of violence in the Hebrew Bible? These questions await further reflections and studies.

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN MODERN MIDDLE EAST The history of Middle East is characterized by violence. The perpetual violence between the Palestinians and the Israelis is a case in point. Both sides claim to have the right to the ownership of the land.12 Many Jewish people believe God has granted them the land as their possession forever. Many Christians and Muslims also believe that a land that was under their occupancy remains theirs forever. This apparent paradox is foundational for the cause of violence between the two parties.13 The different points of view between the Palestinians and the Israelis concerning the land are directly related to their respective relationship to God, their knowledge of God and his promises, and their self-interest factor. An investigation of these three areas may shed light on their varied points of view. The war on Iraq is also a reflection of point of view. For example, our perception of the war on Iraq is laragely dependent upon our relationship with Saddam Hussein and with the victim of the violence. If someone’s son was fighting in the war against Iraq and died, he or she would view the war significantly different from someone whose son did not fight or die in the war against Iraq.

12 For the recent revised edition on the issue of land, see Walter Brueggemann, The Land: Place as Gift, Promise, and Challenge in Biblical Faith (2nd ed. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2002). For the recent argument on the moral problem concerning the conquest of Canaan, see Stanley N. Gundry, ed., Show Them No Mercy: 4 Views on God and Canaanite Genocide (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 2003); and Wright’s appendix and his bibliography for further reading in Christopher J. H. Wright, Old Testament Ethics for the People of God (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 2004), 472480. 13 A newsletter by Tony Higton, the Director of Christ Church Ministires in Jerusalem. Issue 1 November, 2004.

200

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

Our perception of the war is also determined by our knowledge of the situation. In this sense, the media strongly shapes our perception since it controls and manipulates the point of view it communicates to the audience. The media discloses information and images of the war and may withhold certain information and images from the audience. Thus, we are unable to see what is outside of the public media. From the interest point of view, if the war serves one’s self-interest such as the oil company who purchases oil from the Iraqis, the oil company would perceive the war differently from those who do not need to purchase oil from the Iraqis. A study of these aspects of relationship, knowledge, and self-interest will enhance our understanding of war in general and our perception of particular wars. At the same time, we acknowledge that the hermeneutical key of using point of view as a means to understand various kinds of violence, past and present, does not aid in resolving the various problems involved in the various manifestations of violence. In summary, the questions raised in this section are by no means simple and facile. Further research on discovering the hermeneutics of violence in the ancient texts in general and the Hebrew Bible in particular await scholars and students. To establish the means to reach a resolution of peace and reconciliation among the conflicting parties in the modern Middle East and the rest of the world seem to be the more pressing issue at hand.

BIBLIOGRAPHY PRIMARY SOURCES Ugaritic Bordreuil, Pierre. Une Bibliotheque Au Sud De La Ville. Ras Shamra-Ougarit VII. Paris: Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations, 1991. De Moor, J. C. and K. Spronk. A Cuneiform Anthology of Religious Texts from Ugarit. Autographed Texts and Glossaries. SSS 6. Leiden: Brill, 1987. Dietrich, Manfried, O. Loretz, J. Sanmartin. The Cuneiform Alphabetic Texts from Ugarit, Ras Ibn Hani and Other Places. Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1995. J. Nougayrol, ed. Le Palais Royal D’Ugarit IV. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, Klincksieck, 1956. J. Nougayrol, et al. eds., Ugaritica V. Paris: Geuthner, 1968. Hebrew Elliger, K. and W. Rudolph. Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. 5th ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1997.

SECONDARY LITERATURE Abusch, T. “Ishtar’s Proposal and Gilgamesh’s Refusal: An Interpretation of the Gilgamesh Epic, Tab. 6, Lines 1-79.” HR 26 (1986): 143-187. Ackerman, Susan. Warrior, Dancer, Seductress, Queen. New York, London, Toronto, Sydney, Auckland: Doubleday, 1998. Ahlstrom, Gosta W. “Administration of the State in Canaan and Ancient Israel.” Pages 587-603 in vol. 1 of Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Edited by Jack M. Sasson. 4 vols. Peabody, Mass.: Hendricksons, 1995. Aitken, Kenneth T. “Formulaic Patterns for the Passing of Time in Ugaritic Narrative.” UF 19 (1987): 1-10. ———. “Oral Formulaic Composition and Theme in the Aqhat Narrative.” UF 21 (1989a): 1-16. ———. “Word Pairs and Tradition in an Ugaritic Tale.” UF 21 (1989b): 17-38. ———. The Aqhat Narrative. JSS Monograph. Manchester: University of Manchester, 1990. 201

202

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

Albright, W. F. and George E. Mendenhall. “The Creation of the Composite Bow in Canaanite Mythology.” JNES 1 (1942): 227-9. Alter, Robert. The Art of Biblical Narrative. New York: Basic Books, 1981. Amico, Eleanor A. “The Status of Women at Ugarit.” Ph. D. diss., University of Michigan, 1989. Ashley, E. “The ‘Epic of Aqht’ and the ‘Rpum Texts’: A Critical Interpretation (Parts One and Two).” Ph. D. diss., New York University, 1977. Audi, Robert et al. Violence: Award-Winning Essays in the Council for Philosophical Studies Competition. New York: David McKay Company, 1971. Avishur, Yitzhak. “The ‘Duties of the Son’ in the ‘Story of Aqhat’ and Ezekiel’s Prophecy on Idolatry (Ch. 8).” UF 17 (1985): 49-60. ———. Studies in Hebrew and Ugaritic Psalms. Jerusalem: The Magnes Press, 1994. Bar-Efrat, Shimon. Narrative Art in the Bible. Sheffield: Almond Press, 1989. Barton, George A. “Danel, A Pre-Israelite Hero of Galilee.” JBL 60 (1941): 213-225. Beckman, Gary. “Family Values on the Middle Euphrates in the Thirteenth Century BCE.” Pages 57-79 in Emar: the History, Religion, and Culture of a Syrian Town in Late Bronze Age. Edited by M.W. Chavalas. Bethesda: CDL, 1996. Berlin, Adele. Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative. Sheffield: Almond Press, 1983. Boda, M. J. “Ideal Sonship in Ugarit.” UF 25 (1993): 9-24. Booth, Wayne. The Rhetoric of Fiction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961. Bowman, Charles. H. “The Goddess ‘Anatu in the Ancient Near East.” Ph. D. diss., Graduate Theological Union, 1978. Brandon, S. G. F. Creation Legends of the Ancient Near East. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1963. Braun Joachim. Music in Ancient Israel/Palestine: Archaeological, Written, and Comparative Sources. Trans. Douglas W. Stott. Grand Rapids, Mich., Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2002. Brueggemann, Walter. The Land: Place as Gift, Promise, and Challenge in Biblical Faith. 2nd ed. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2002. Buccellati, Giorgio. “On Poetry – Theirs and Ours.” Pages 105-134 in Lingering Over Words: Studies in Ancient Near Eastern Literature in Honor of William L. Moran. Edited by Tzvi Abusch, John Huehnergard and Piotr Steinkeller. Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1990.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

203

———. “Ethics and Piety in the Ancient Near East.” Pages 1685-96 in vol. 3 of Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Edited by Jack M. Sasson. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1995. Caquot, Andre and M. Sznycer. Textes Ougaritiques. Tome I. Paris: Les Editions du Cerf, 1974. ———. Ugaritic Religion. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1980. ——— and J-M de Tarragon. Textes Ougaritiques: Textes Religieux et Rituels. Tome II. Paris: Les Editions du Cerf, 1989. Caquot, Andre and Sznycer, M. Ugaritic Religion. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1980. Cassuto, U. The Goddess Anath: Canaanite Epics of the Patriarchal Age. Translated by Israel Abraham. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1971. Caubet, Annie. “La Musique à Ougarit: nouveaux témoignages matériels.” Pages 9-31 in Ugarit, Religion and Culture: Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Ugarit, Religion and Culture, Edinburghm July 1994: Essays Presented in Honour of Professor John C. L. Gibson. Edited by N. Wyatt, W.G.E. Watson and J.B. Lloyd. UBL 12. Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996. Chatman, Seymour. Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film. Ithaca and London: Cornell University, 1978. Collins, John J. Does the Bible Justify Violence? Minneapolis: Fortress, 2004. Coogan, Michael D. Stories from Ancient Canaan. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978. Cooper, Alan. “Two Exegetical Notes on AQHT.” UF 20 (1988): 19-26. Cornelius, Izak. The Iconography of the Canaanite Gods Reshef and Ba‘al: Late Bronze and Iron Age I Periods (c 1500-1000 BCE). OBO 140. Switzerland: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht Gottingen, 1994. Craigie, Peter C. The Problem of War in the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1978. Cross, Frank Moore. Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel. Massachusetts and London: Harvard University Press, 1973. ———. “The ‘Olden Gods’ in Ancient Near Eastern Creation Myths.” Pages 329-338 in Magnalia Dei: The Mighty Acts of God - Essays on the Bible and Archaeology in Memory of G. Ernest Wright. Edited by F. M. Cross, W. E. Lemke, P. D. Miller. Garden City: Doubleday, 1976. Culpepper, R. Allen. Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel: A Study in Literary Design. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983. Cunchillos, Jesus-Luis. “The Correspondence of Ugarit.” Pages 359-374 in Handbook of Ugaritic Studies. Edited by Wilfred G. E. Watson and Nicolas Wyatt. Leiden-Boston-Koln: Brill, 1999.

204

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

Dalley, Stephanie. Myths from Mesopotamia: Creation, the Flood, Gilgamesh and Others. Oxford/New York: Oxford University, 1989. Day, John. “Daniel of Ugarit and Ezekiel and the Hero of the Book of Daniel.” VT 30 (1980): 174-84. Day, Peggy L. “Why is Anat a Warrior and Hunter?” Pages 141-6 in The Bible and the Politics of Exegesis: Essays in Honor of Norman K. Gottward on His Sixty-Fifth Birthday. Edited by D. Jobling et al. Ohio: Pilgrim Press, 1991. ———. “Anat: Ugarit’s “Mistress of Animals.” JNES 51 (1992): 181-90. Dietrich Manfried and Oswald Loretz. “ANŠ(T) Und (M)INŠ(T) im Ugaritischen.” UF 9 (1977): 47-50. ———. “Baal RPU in KTU 1.108; 1.113 Und Nach 1.17 VI 225-33.” UF 12 (1980a): 171-82. ———. “Amter und Titel des Schreibers Ilimlk von Ugarit.” UF 12 (1980b): 387-89. ———. “Die Ba‘al-Titel B‘l Arṣ und Aliy Qrdm.” UF 12 (1980c):391-93. ———. Word-List of the Cuneiform Alphabetic Texts from Ugarit, Ras Ibn Hani and Other Places (KTU: Second, enlarged edition). Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996. Dijkstra, Meindert. “Some Reflections on the Legend of Aqhat.” UF 11 (1979): 199-210 ———, and J.C. de Moor. “Problematic Passages in the Legend of Aqhatu.” UF 7 (1975): 171-215. Dressler, Harold H. P. “Is the Bow of Aqhat a Symbol of Verility?” UF 7 (1975): 217-20. ———. “The Metamorphosis of a Lacuna: Is at.aJ.wan... a Proposal of Marriage?” UF 11 (1979a): 211-17. ———. “The Identification of the Ugaritic Dnil with the Daniel of Ezekiel.” VT 29 (1979b): 152-61. Driver, G. R. “Confused Hebrew Roots.” Pages 73-82 in Occident and Orient: Beginning Studies in Semitic Philology and Literature, Jewish History and Philosophy and Folklore in the Widest Sense in Honour of Haham Dr. M. Gaster’s 80th Birthday. Edited by Bruno Schindler and A. Marmorstein. London: W. C. L., 1936. Eaton, A. W. “The Goddess Anat: The History of Her Cult, Her Mythology and Her Iconography.” Ph. D. diss., Yale University, 1964. Eissfeldt, O. “Sohnespflichten im Alten Orient.” Pages 268-9 in Kleine Schriften. Edited by Otto Eissfeldt. Tubingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1968. Engnell, Ivan. Studies in Divine Kingship in the Ancient Near East. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1967.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

205

Frymer-Kensky, T. In the Wake of the Goddesses: Women, Culture, and the Biblical Transformation of Pagan Myth. New York: The Free Press, 1992. Gaster, Theodor H. Thespis, Ritual, Myth and Drama in the Ancient Near East. New York: Henry Schuman, 1950. Gibson, John C. L. “Myth, Legend and Folk-Lore in the Ugaritic Keret and Aqhat Texts.” VTS (1975): 60-8. ———. Canaanite Myth and Legends. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1977. ———. “The Theology of the Ugaritic Baal Cycle.” Or 53 (1984): 202-219. Ginsberg, H. L. “The North-Canaanite Myth of Anath and Aqhat, I.” BASOR 97 (1945): 3-10. ———. “The North-Canaanite Myth of Anath and Aqhat, II.” BASOR 98 (1945):15-23. ———. “The Tale of Aqhat.” Pages 118-132 in The Ancient Near East: An Anthology of Texts and Pictures. Edited by James B. Pritchard. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1958. Girard, René. Violence and the Sacred. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, 1977. Goldingay, John. Models for Interpretation of Scripture. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1995. ———. Old Testament Theology: Israel’s Gospel. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 2003. Good, Robert M. “Metaphorical Gleanings from Ugarit.” JJS 33 (1982): 5559. ———. “On RS 24.252.” UF 23 (1991): 155-60. Gordon, Cyrus H. Ugaritic Textbook. Analecta Orientalia 38. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1965. ———. “Marriage in the Guise of Siblingship” UF 20 (1988): 53-56. Gray, John. The Legacy of Canaan. VTSup 5. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1965. ———. “The Bloodbath of the Goddess Anat.” UF 11 (1979): 315-24. Green, Alberto R. W. The Storm-God in the Ancient Near East. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2003. Gundry, Stanley W. ed. Show Them No Mercy: 4 Views on God and Canaanite Genocide. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 2003. Hallo, William W. “Biblical History in Its Near Eastern Setting: The Contextual Approach.” Pages 1-26 in Scripture in Context: Essays on the Comparative Method. Edited by Carl D. Evans, William W. Hallo, and John B. White. PTMS 34. Pittsburgh, Penn.: The Pickwick Press, 1980. ———. ed. Canonical Compositions from the Biblical World. Vol. 1 of The Context of Scripture. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1997.

206

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

———. Canonical Compositions from the Biblical World. Vol. 2 of The Context of Scripture. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2003. Handy, L. K. Among the Host of Heaven. The Syro-Palestinian Pantheon as Bureaucracy. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1994. Healey, J. F. “The Pietas of an Ideal Son in Ugarit.” UF 11 (1979): 353-356. ———. “Mot.” Pages 598-603 in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible. Edited by Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst. Rev. and enl. ed. Leiden, New York, Koln: Brill, 1999. Hendel, Ronald S. The Epic of the Patriarch: The Jacob Cycle and the Narrative Traditions of Canaan and Israel. Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1987. Herrmann, W. “El.” Pages 293-96 in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible. Edited by Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst. Rev. and enl. ed. Leiden, New York, Koln: Brill, 1999. Hess, Richard S. “The Onomastics of Ugarit.” Pages 499-528 in Handbook of Ugaritic Studies. Edited by Wilfred G. E. Watson and Nicolas Wyatt. Leiden-Boston-Koln: Brill, 1999. Hillers, Delbert R. “The Bow of Aqhat: The Meaning of a Mythological Theme.” AOAT 22 (1973): 71-80. Hoffner, H. A. Jr. “Symbols for Masculinity and Femininity.” JBL 85 (1966): 326-34. Huehnergard, John. “The Akkadian Letters.” Pages 375-389 in Handbook of Ugaritic Studies. Edited by Wilfred G. E. Watson and Nicolas Wyatt. Leiden-Boston-Koln: Brill, 1999. Husser, Jean-M. “The Birth of a Hero: Form and Meaning of KTU 1.17 iii.” Pages 85-98 in Ugarit, Religion and Culture: Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Ugarit, Religion and Culture. Edinburgh, July 1994. Festschrift J. C. L. Gibson: UBL 12. Edited by N. Wyatt, W. G. E. Watson and J. B. Lloyd. Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996. Iser, Wolfgang. The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response. Translated by Der Akt des Lesens. Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978. Jacobsen, Thorkild. “Primitive Democracy in Ancient Mesopotamia.” Pages 157-172 in Toward the Image of Tammuz and Other Essays on Mesopotamian History and Culture. Edited by William L. Moran. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1970. Johnston, Philip S. Shades of Sheol: Death and Afterlife in the Old Testament. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 2002. Kang, Sa-Moon. Divine War in the Old Testament and in the Ancient Near East. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1989.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

207

Kapelrud, Arvid S. Baal in the Ras Shamra Texts. Copenhagen: G. E. C. Gad, 1952. ———. The Violent Goddess Anat in the Ras Shamra Texts. Copenhagen: Universitets-Forlaget, 1969.

———. “The Relationship between El and Baal in the Ras Shamra Texts.” Pages 79-85 in The Bible World: Essays in Honor of Cyrus H. Gordon. Edited by Gary A. Rendsburg et al. New York: KTAV, 1980. Kautzsch, E. Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar. 2nd Eng. ed. Translated by A. W. Cowley. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910. Keel, Othmar and Christopher Uehlinger. Gods, Goddesses, and Images of God in Ancient Israel. Translated by Thomas H. Trapp. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998. Koehler, Ludwig and Walter Baumgartner. The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Translated by M. E. J. Richardson. Vol. 1. Leiden, New York, Koln: E. J. Brill, 1994. Koitabashi, Matahisa. “Significance of Ugaritic mSltm “Cymbals” in the Anat Text.” Pages 1-5 in Cult and Ritual in the Ancient Near East. Edited by H.I.H. Prince Takahito Mikasa. Otto Harrassowitz: Wiesbaden, 1992. Korpel, Marjo Christina Annette. A Rift in the Clouds. Munster: UgaritVerlag, 1990. ———. “Exegesis in the Work of Ilimilku of Ugarit.” Pages 86-111 in Intertextuality in Ugarit and Israel. Edited by Jonannes C. de Moor. Leiden: Brill, 1998. Kristensen, Ansgar L. “Ugaritic epistolary Formulas: A comparative Study of the Ugaritic Epistolary Formulas in the Context of the Contemporary Akkadian Formulas in the Letters from Ugarit and Amarna.” UF 9 (1977): 143-158. Kruger, P. “Rank Symbolism in the Baal Epic: Some Further Indicators.” UF 27 (1995): 169-75. Kutsch, Ernst. “‘Trauerbrauche’ und ‘Selbstminderungsriten’ im Alten Testament.” Pages 25-37 in Drei Wiener Antrittsreden. Edited by Kurt Luthu et al. Zurich: EVZ-Verlag, 1965. L’Heureux, E. Rank Among the Canaanite Gods: El, Ba‘al, and the Repha’im. HSM 21. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1979. Landy, Francis. The Tale of AQHAT. London: Menard, 1981. Lanser, Susan Sniader. The Narrative Act: Point of View in Prose Fiction. Princeton, Princeton University, 1981.

208

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

Lete, Gregorio del. Olmo. Mitos y leyendas de Canaan segun la tradicion de Ugarit. Madrid: Ediciones Christiandad, 1981. ———. Canaanite Religion: According to the Liturgical Texts of Ugarit. Translated by Wilfred G. E. Watson. Maryland: CDL, 1999. Lewis, Theodore. J. Cults of the Dead in Ancient Israel and Ugarit. HSM 39. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989. ———. “Mot.” Pages 923-24 in Anchor Bible Dictionary. vol 4. New York: Doubleday, 1992. Lloyd, J. B. “Anat and the ‘Double’ Massacre of KTU 1.3 ii.” Pages 151165 in Ugarit, Religion and Culture: Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Ugarit, Religion and Culture, Edinburgh, July 1994: Essays Presented in Honour of Professor John C.L. Gibson. Edited by Wyatt, N. W. G. E. Watson, and J. B. Lloyd. UBL 12; Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996. Loewenstamm, Samuel E. Comparative Studies in Biblical and Ancient Oriental Literatures. AOAT 204. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Verlag Butzon & Bercker Kevelaer, 1980. ———. “Did the Goddess Anat Wear Side-Whiskers and a Beard? A Reconsideration.” UF 14 (1982): 119-22. Longman III, Tremper. Literary Approaches to Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1987. ———. Fictional Akkadian Autobiography: A Generic and Comparative Study. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1991. ———. “Literary Appraches to Old Testament Study.” Pages 97-115 in The Face of Old Testament Studies. Edited by David W. Baker and Bill T. Arnold. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 1999. Longman III, Tremper, and Daniel G. Reid. God is a Warrior. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1995. Lotman, J. M. “Point of View in a Text.” New Literary Theory 6 (1975): 339352. Margalit, Baruch. A Matter of Life and Death: A Study of the Baal-Mot Epic (CTA 4-5-6). AOAT 206; Kevekaer: Butzon & Bercker/ NeukirchenVluyn: Neukircherner Verlag, 1980a. ———. “Death and Dying in the Ugaritic Epics.” Pages 243-54 in Death in Mesopotamia. Edited by B. Alster. CRRAI 26. Copenhagen: 1980b. ———. The Ugaritic Poem of Aqhat. Berlin-New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1989. Marks, J. H. and Good, R. M., eds. Love and Death in the Ancient Near East: Essays in Honor of Marvin H. Pope. Guilford: Four Quarters, 1987. Marsman, Hennie J. Women in Ugarit and Israel: Their Social and Religious Position in the Context of the Ancient Near East. Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2003.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

209

McAfee, Eugene Clifford. “The Patriarch’s Longed-for Son: Biological and Social Reproduction in Ugaritic and Hebrew Epic.” Ph. D. diss., Harvard University, 1996. McClendon, James Wm. Jr. Systematic Theology: Ethics. Nashville: Abingdon, 1986. Mendelsohn, I. “The Family in the Ancient Near East.” BA 11 (1948): 2440. Mendenhall, George E. Law and Covenant in Israel and the Ancient Near East. Pittsburgh: The Presbyterian Board of Colportage of Western Pennsylvania, 1955. Miller, Patrick D. Jr. “El the Warrior.” HTR 60 (1967): 411-431. ———. The Divine Warrior in Early Israel. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973. de Moor, J. C. The Seasonal Pattern in the Ugaritic Myth of Ba‘lu According to the Version of Ilimilku. AOAT 16. Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1971. ———. “El, The Creator.” Pages 171-187 in The Bible World: Essays in Honor of Cyrus H. Gordon. Edited by Gary Rendsburg et al; New York: KTAV Publishing House, 1980. ———. An Anthology of Religious Texts from Ugarit. Nisaba 16. Leiden: Brill, 1987. ———. “The Seasonal Pattern in the Legend of Aqhatu.” SEL 5 (1988): 61-77. ———. The Rise of Yahwism: The Roots of Israelite Monotheism. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1990. ———. “Standing Stones and Ancestor Worship.” UF 27 (1995): 3-10. Mullen, E. Theodore. The Assembly of the Gods: The Divine Council in Canaanite and Early Hebrew Literature. HSM 24. Calif.: Scholars Press, 1980. Negbi, Ora. Canaanite Gods in Metal: An Archaeological Study of Ancient SyroPalestinian Figurines. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, 1976. Niditch, Susan. War in the Hebrew Bible: A Study in the Ethics of Violence. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993. Oldenburg, U. The Conflict between El and Ba‘al in Canaanite Religion. Leiden: Brill, 1969. Pardee, Dennis. “A Further Note on PRU 5, no. 60.” UF 13 (1981): 151-6. ———. “Marziḥu, Kispu, and the Ugaritic Funerary Cult: A Minimalist View.” in Ugarit, Religion and Culture: Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Ugarit, Religion and Culture, Edinburgh, July 1994: Essays Presented in Honour of Professor John C.L. Gibson. Edited by N. Wyatt, W. G. E. Watson and J. B. Lloyd. Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996.

210

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

———. Ritual and Cult at Ugarit. SBLWAW. Atlanta, Ga: Scholars Press, 2002. Parker, Simon B. “Death and Devotion: The Composition and Theme of Aqhat.” Pages 71-83 in Love & Death in the Ancient Near East: Essays in Honor of Marvin H. Pope. Edited by John H. Marks and Robert M. Good. Connecticut: Four Quarters, 1987. ———. “The Birth Announcement” Pages 133-49 in Ascribe to the Lord: Biblical and Other Studies in Memory of Peter C. Craigie. Edited by L. Eslinger and G. Taylor. JSOTSup 67; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1988. ———. The Pre-Biblical Narrative Tradition: Essays on the Ugaritic Poems Keret and Aqhat. Atlanta, Ga: Scholars Press, 1989. ———. “The Literature of Canaan, Ancient Israel, and Phoenicia: An Overview.” Pages 2399-2410 in vol. 4 of Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Edited by Jack M. Sasson. 4 vols. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1995. ———. ed. Ugaritic Narrative Poetry. Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1997. Paul, Shalom. Amos: A Commentary on the Book of Amos. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991. Peels, H. G. L. The Vengeance of God: The Meaning of the Root NQM and the Function of the NQM-Texts in the Context of Divine Revelation in the Old Testament. Leiden, New York, Koln: E.J. Brill, 1995. Pope, M. El in the Ugaritic Texts. VTSup 2. Leiden: Brill, 1955. ———. “The Cult of the Dead at Ugarit.” Pages 159-79 in Ugarit in Retrospect: Fifty Years of Ugarit and Ugaritic. Edited by Gordon D. Young. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1981. ———. “The Status of El at Ugarit.” UF 19 (1987): 219-230. ———. “Rezensionen: Klaas Spronk, Beatific Afterlife in Ancient Israel and in the Ancient Near East.” UF 19 (1989): 452-63. Pritchard, James B. ed. The Ancient Near East: An Anthology of Texts and Pictures. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1958. ———. ed. The Ancient Near East: An Anthology of Texts and Pictures. vol. II. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1975. Raniey, A. F. “The Social Stratification of Ugarit.” Ph. D. diss., Brandeis University, 1962. ———. “A Canaanite at Ugarit.” Israel Exploration Journal 13 (1963): 43-45. ———. “Ugarit and Canaanite Again.” Israel Exploration Journal 14 (1964): 101. ———. “Family Relationships in Ugarit.” Or 34 (1965): 11-22. Reiner, Erica. Your Thwarts in Pieces, Your Moorings Rope Cut. Michigan: Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies, 1985.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

211

Rhoads, David and Donald Michie. Mark as Story: An Introduction to the Narrative of a Gospel. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1982. Robins, Gay. Women in Ancient Egypt. Cambridge: Harvard University, 1993. Ryken, Leland. How To Read the Bible as Literature. Grand Rapids, Mich..: Zondervan, 1984. Sasson, Jack M. ed. Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Vol I & II. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1995. Segert, Stanislav. A Basic Grammar of the Ugaritic Language. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California, 1984. Sherlock, Charles. The God Who Fights: The War Tradition in Holy Scripture. Edinburgh: Rutherford House, 1993. Singer, Itamar. “A Political History of Ugarit.” Pages 603-733 in Handbook of Ugaritic Studies. Edited by Wilfred G. E. Watson and Nicolas Wyatt. Leiden-Boston-Koln: Brill, 1999. Sivan, Daniel. A Grammar of the Ugaritic Language. Leiden. New York. Koln: Brill, 1997. Smith, Mark S. “Divine Travel as a Token of Divine Rank.” UF 16 (1984): 359. ———. The Ugaritic Baal Cycle. vol 1. Leiden, NewYork, Koln: E. J. Brill, 1994. ———. “Anat’s Warfare Cannibalism and the West Semitic Ban.” Pages 368-386 in The Pitcher is Broken. Edited by Steven W. Holloway and Lowell K. Handy. JSOTSup 190, 1995. ———. “The Baal Cycle.” Pages 81-176 in Ugaritic Narrative Poetry. Edited by Simon B. Parker. Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1997. ———. The Origins of Biblical Monotheism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001. ———. The Early History of God. 2nd Ed. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2002. Smith, Morton. “The Common Theology in the Ancient Near East.” JBL 71 (1952): 135-47. Spronk, Klaas. Beatific Afterlife in Ancient Israel and in the Ancient Near East. AOAT 219. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener and Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker, 1986. ———. “The Incantations.” Pages 270-286 in Handbook of Ugaritic Studies. Edited by Wilfred G. E. Watson and Nicolas Wyatt. Leiden-BostonKoln: Brill, 1999. Sternberg, Meir. The Poetics of Biblical Narrative: Ideological Literature and the Drama of Reading. Bloomington: Indiana University, 1985.

212

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

Swartley, Willard M. Slavery, Sabbath, War, and Women: Case Issues in Biblical Interpretation. Scottsdale, Penn.: Herald Press, 1983. Sukenik, Yigael. “The Composite Bow of the Canaanite Goddess Anath.” BASOR 107 (1947): 11-15. Sun, Chloe. “How Ethical is Anat and How Do We Know It? A Teleological View at Anat’s Violence in the Story of Aqhat.” Paper presented at the Pacific Coast Region of the SBL. Whitter, Calif., March 22, 2004. ———. “How Does the Portrayal of Ugaritic Deities Shed Light on the ‘Dark Side’ of God in the Hebrew Scriptures?” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the SBL. San Antonio, Tex., November 20, 2004. ______ “Ethical Disparity of El and Baal in the Story of Aqhat.” Paper presented at the annual Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature, Philadelphia, Penn., November, 21st, 2005. Thiselton, Anthony C. New Horizons in Hermenutics: The Theory and Practices of Transforming Biblical Reading. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1992. Tropper, Josef. “‘Anat Kriegsgeschrei (KTU 1.3 II 23).” UF 33 (2001): 567571. Tullock, John Harrison. “Blood-Vengeance Among the Israelites in the Light of Its Near Eastern Background.” Ph. D. diss., Vanderbilt University, 1966. Uspensky, Boris. A Poetics of Composition: The Structure of the Artistic Text and Typology of a Compositional Form. Translated by Valentina Zavarin and Susan Wittig. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California, 1973. Van der Toorn, Karel. Family Religion in Babylonia, Syria and Israel. Continuity and Change in the forms of Religious Life. Leiden: Brill, 1996. Van Rooy, H. F. “The Relation between Anat and Baal in the Ugaritic Texts.” JNSL 7 (1979): 85-95. Van Selms, A. Marriage & Family Life in Ugaritic Literature. London: Luzac & Co., 1954. Van Soldt, W. H. “Tbṣr, Queen of Ugarit?” UF 21 (1989): 389-92. ———. “Ugarit: A Second-Millennium Kingdom on the Mediterrannean Coast.” Pages 1255-1266 in vol. II of Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Edited by Jack M. Sasson. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1995. Van Zijl, Peter J. Baal: A Study of Texts in Connection with Baal in the Ugaritic Epics. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Verlag Butzon & Bercker Kevelaer, 1972. Vanhoozer, Kevin J. Is There a Meaning in This Text? Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1998. Vaux, Roland de. Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions. Translated by John McHugh. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1961.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

213

Virolleaud, Charles. La Legende Phenicienne de Danel. Paris: Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1936. Vita, J. P. “The Society of Ugarit.” Pages 455-498 in Handbook of Ugaritic Studies. Edited by Wilfred G. E. Watson and Nicolas Wyatt. LeidenBoston-Koln: Brill, 1999. Walls, Neal H. The Goddess Anat in Ugaritic Myth. Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1992. Waltke, Bruce K. and M. O’Connor. An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1990. Walzer, Michael. Thick and Thin: Moral Argument at Home and Abroad. Notre Dame and London: University of Notre Dame, 1994. Watson, W.G. E. “Puzzling Passages in the Tale of Aqhat.” UF 8 (1976): 371-8. ——— and Nicolas Wyatt. eds. Handbook of Ugaritic Studies. Leiden, Boston, Koln: Brill, 1999. Weimann, Robert. Structure and Society in Literary History: Studies in the History and Theory of Historical Criticism. Charlottesville: University of Virginia, 1976. Whitaker, Richard E. A Concordance of the Ugaritic Literature. Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1972. Wink, Walter. Engaging the Powers. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992. Winn, A. C. Ain’t Study War No More. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1993. Winter, Urs. Frau und Gottin: Exegetische und ikonographische Studien zum weiblichen Gottesbild im Alten Israel und in dessen Umwelt. OBO 53. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht Gottingen: Universitatsverlag Freiburg Schweiz, 1983. Wright, Christopher J. H. Old Testament Ethics for the People of God. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 2004. Wright, David P. Ritual in Narrative: The Dynamics of Feasting, Mourning, and Retaliation Rites in the Ugaritic Tale of Aqhat. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2001. Wyatt, Nicolas. “The ‘Anat Stela from Ugarit and Its Ramifications.” UF 16 (1984): 327-337. ———. “The Titles of the Ugaritic Storm-God.” UF 24 (1992): 403-424. ———. Myths of Power: A Study of Royal Myth and Ideology in Ugaritic and Biblical Tradition. UBL 13. Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996. ———. “Ilimilku’s Ideological Programme.” UF 29 (1997): 775-96.

214

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

———. “The Story of Aqhat (KTU 1.17-19).” Pages 234-258 in Handbook of Ugaritic Studies. Edited by Wilfred G. E. Watson and Nicolas Wyatt. Leiden-Boston-Koln: Brill, 1999a. ———. “The Religion of Ugarit: An Overview.” Pages 529-585 in Handbook of Ugaritic Studies. Edited by Wilfred G. E. Watson and Nicolas Wyatt. Leiden-Boston-Koln: Brill, 1999b. ———. “Asherah.” Pages 99-105 in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible. Edited by Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst. Rev. and enl.ed. Leiden, New York, Koln: Brill, 1999c. ———. Religious Texts from Ugarit. 2nd ed. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002. Wyatt, N., W. G. E. Watson and J. B. Lloyd. eds. Ugarit, Religion and Culture: Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Ugarit, Religion and Culture. Edinburgh, July 1994. UBL 12; Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1996. Xella, Paolo. “Death and the Afterlife in Canaanite and Hebrew Thought.” Pages 2059-2070 in vol. 3 of Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Edited by Jack M. Sasson. 4 vols. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1995.

INDEX a pantheon of disillusion, 39 ambiguity, 3, 15, 16, 32, 39, 44, 55, 59, 70, 71, 90, 117, 155, 159, 188, 191, 192, 193, 195, 196 an eye for an eye, 148, 195 Anat’s autonomy, 60, 64 Anat’s violence, 1, 2, 3, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 27, 30, 34, 35, 36, 37, 39, 41, 42, 43, 44, 50, 53, 55, 59, 60, 61, 62, 65, 68, 70, 71, 72, 77, 78, 79, 83, 84, 85, 89, 90, 91, 92, 97, 98, 100, 101, 102, 106, 110, 111, 114, 115, 117, 119, 120, 125, 126, 127, 128, 130, 131, 133, 135, 137, 140, 143, 144, 149, 153, 154, 155, 159, 165, 169, 183, 185, 186, 187, 188, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195 Aqhat’s epithet, 17 aside, 12, 20, 70, 77, 78, 79, 180 Athirat, 42, 44, 65, 68, 74, 80, 84, 88, 106, 110, 139, 162, 163, 167, 174 Atrahasis, 65 authority, 3, 19, 40, 54, 55, 58, 59, 64, 65, 90, 96, 98, 107, 110, 116, 155, 159, 163, 166, 167, 168, 169, 177, 179, 181, 182, 183, 184, 186, 187, 192, 196 Baal Cycle, xii, 19, 28, 35, 36, 39, 40, 44, 53, 57, 59, 63, 67, 69, 73, 76, 84, 85, 89, 104, 106, 108, 110, 128, 131, 139, 143, 144, 160, 165, 166, 168, 170, 180, 181, 182, 197, 198, 199, 207, 213 Baal’s epithet, 17, 87 Baal’s protestation, 77, 85

behind-the-text-oriented approach, 2, 7, 22, 25, 50 biological reproduction, 32 bipolar interpretations, 35 birds of prey, 49, 71 blood-guilt, 126 blood-vengeance, 23, 144, 145, 147, 148, 153, 195, 196 bow, 1, 15, 27, 28, 29, 31, 34, 47, 49, 55, 56, 75, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 105, 106, 109, 110, 112, 113, 115, 116, 117, 120, 127, 150, 151, 152, 155, 165, 183, 186, 194, 195 Bull of Heaven, 64, 65, 68 burial rite, 126 challenge of authorities, 182, 183 characterization, 1, 3, 7, 8, 11, 14, 16, 18, 21, 30, 34, 36, 45, 50, 53, 55, 70, 71, 90, 91, 119, 155, 168, 188, 191, 192, 193, 195, 196, 197 Characterization of El, 54 characters’ emotions, 15, 18, 188 Code of Hammurabi, 76 conception of authority, 24 conception of deities, 3, 24, 159, 160 conception of violence, 2, 25, 45, 135, 148, 149 contextual point of view, 66 Contextualization, 15 Dan’il’s epithets, 17 death and afterlife, 3, 24, 159, 170, 184 deities as protectors, 161 deities as providers, 162 215

216

THE ETHICS OF VIOLENCE IN THE STORY OF AQHAT

development of characters, 18 diminishing of nature, 20, 78, 79, 89, 138 disguise, 112, 140, 142 divine punishment, 37, 44, 89, 90, 96, 97, 100, 115, 116, 154, 163, 169, 194 divine-human order, 61, 62, 64, 65, 89, 90, 96, 97, 163 Ea, ix, xi, xii, 9, 14, 19, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 35, 37, 45, 48, 53, 60, 65, 69, 73, 74, 82, 85, 94, 95, 96, 97, 102, 109, 124, 127, 133, 143, 155, 160, 166, 177, 192, 194, 197, 198, 199, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 216 El’s authority, 54, 55, 168, 181, 182 El’s epithets, 17, 69 El’s permission, 54, 59, 60, 61, 66, 79, 84, 111, 132, 149, 169, 181, 188, 192, 193 emotional distance, 13, 66, 84 Enkidu, 64, 68, 138 Enuma Elish, 44, 65, 69, 123, 147, 198, 199 Erra Epic, 76 ethical norms, 35 ethical understanding, 1, 2, 3, 10, 14, 34, 44, 50, 191 family values, 3, 177, 181, 184, 187 full-fledged character, 16, 18, 71, 114, 120, 137, 150, 153 gender role, 1, 32, 95, 96 gender stereotype, 95 Gilgamesh, 64, 65, 68, 95, 138, 143, 203, 206 Gilgamesh Epic, 64, 65, 68, 95, 138, 143, 203 hypothetical actual audience, 1, 3, 7, 21, 22, 23, 25, 45, 50, 159, 162, 165, 169, 170, 183, 184, 188, 191 ideological point of view, 20, 55, 154

Ilimilku, 18, 19, 21, 45, 53, 59, 72, 128, 185, 209, 211, 215 immortality, 1, 47, 55, 64, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 151, 152, 172 implied audience, 1, 3, 7, 20, 21, 50, 53, 54, 70, 90, 91, 119, 155, 159, 188, 191 implied author, 18 Job, 13, 29, 63, 130, 172, 206 king Ammurapi, 182 king Kirtu, 42, 44, 60, 65, 66, 67, 68, 75, 80, 84, 121, 128, 136, 143, 160, 162, 163, 167, 177 Kothar wa-Khasis, 67 Mot, 38, 41, 67, 84, 85, 88, 97, 107, 108, 109, 110, 143, 147, 160, 164, 170, 174, 180, 208, 210 mourning rite, 33, 49, 173, 174 mourning rites, 33 Naboth’s vineyard, 94 narrative poetics, 10, 11, 14, 34 points of view, 1, 3, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 20, 34, 36, 37, 44, 50, 53, 80, 89, 90, 91, 116, 119, 120, 135, 154, 155, 159, 165, 188, 192, 193, 194, 195, 201 predator deity, 163 preference for sons, 178 Pughat’s role, 38, 139, 187 Pughat’s threefold epithet, 17, 137 Pughat’s vengeance, 2, 30, 32, 120, 133, 139, 140, 141, 143, 145, 146, 147, 149, 177 Rapiuma texts, 35, 36, 87, 129, 168 reader-elevating, 20 reticence of the author, 1 ritual infelicity, 34 rituals in the story, 33, 34, 97, 132 self-interest, 4, 66, 153, 163, 164, 165, 169, 194, 195, 196, 199, 200, 201, 202 Shapshu, 67, 74, 89, 131, 141, 161, 168, 181 social reproduction, 32

INDEX socio-scientific point of view, 39 Story of Attis, 65 Story of Kirtu, 32, 42, 65, 66, 74, 80, 84, 163, 167, 170, 179, 180, 182, 185, 197 structural analysis, 14, 31, 32 suffering of nature, 73, 77, 138 text-oriented approach, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 15, 18, 22, 25, 27, 29, 42, 50 the agent, 16 The Descent of Ishtar to the Underworld, 68 The Doomed Prince, 29 the ethics of violence, 2, 3, 191, 194, 196, 197, 198, 199, 201 the historical audience, 21, 22, 24, 70, 159, 191 the interest point of view, 80, 116, 202

217 the list of Ideal Sonship, 27, 28, 122, 123, 124 the modern audience, 21 the normative point of view, 55, 66, 80, 84, 90, 154, 155 the reticent author, 20 the type, 16, 197 underworld, 76, 82, 88, 108, 131, 173, 174, 175, 180, 181 vegetation and fertility, 35 Yamm, 60, 67, 84, 85, 106, 107, 108, 132, 162, 166, 167, 170, 171 Yatpan, 3, 12, 17, 18, 20, 32, 48, 50, 69, 91, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 137, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 154, 183, 186, 187, 192, 193, 194