Frank Moore Cross Research Articles

Colonizing Frank Moore Cross: The Dead Sea Scrolls in 1950s Popular Media

Abstract Early presentations of the Dead Sea Scrolls in popular media relied on orientalist tropes and a narrow Christian horizon to create relevance and prestige for the scrolls, which contributed to strong religious interest in them and a market for unprovenanced Dead Sea Scrolls fragments and forgeries. Such a strategy also constructed public authority for the Bible scholars working on the scrolls. This article treats the colonialist approach in the earliest popular works on the scrolls in the United States, written by Edmund Wilson, Frank Moore Cross, and Alex Small, and shows how the stories they tell set the stage for religious veneration of the scrolls and popular acclaim of the scholars.

On Comparisons with Ancient Greek Traditions: Lessons from the Mid-Century

In the twentieth century, at two crucial instances, comparisons with ancient Greek traditions played an important role in forwarding the argument in favor of the early origins of the pentateuchal narrative: Martin Noth’s “amphictyonic hypothesis” and Frank Moore Cross’s account of the Israelite “epic.” This article argues that success of these arguments owes to a hidden “parallelomania” at work in the mid-century, which successfully made the evidence of ancient Greek phenomena seem like something that it was not in service to desirable arguments. Finally, it explores how contemporary approaches can avoid repeating past mistakes.

Bedouin Culture in the Bible by Clinton Bailey

Reviewed by: Bedouin Culture in the Bible by Clinton Bailey Michael S. Moore clinton bailey, Bedouin Culture in the Bible (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2018). Pp. 278. $55. This book is a fascinating, well-meaning response from a layman admittedly "unfamiliar with the Hebrew Bible, which I had never formally studied" (p. ix) to the theories of George Mendenhall ("The Hebrew Conquest of Palestine," BA 25 [1962] 66-87) and Norman K. Gottwald ("Were the Early Israelites Pastoral Nomads?," BARev 4 [1978] 4) that the earliest Israelites were not desert-dwelling nomads but disgruntled Canaanite proletarians (p. 204). Concerned that the "nomadic origins" argument stands on a "sparse data base," B. here tries to shore it up by (a) providing "an in-depth ethnographic dimension" based on "observations acquired from firsthand contact with the Bedouin during forty-five years of research among them" (p. 205); and (b) juxtaposing these observations with the well-known proposal of Frank Moore Cross (From Epic to Canon: History and Literature in Ancient Israel [Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998] 51) that earliest Israel consisted of a Moses-led group of escapees from the Sinai desert joining up with other עברים (1 Sam 14:21) among the ḫabirū already populating second-millennium Canaan. Methodologically, the book's primary presumption is that the "materials collected here constitute a cultural document that supplements material learned from other fields such as ancient Near Eastern history, biblical studies, archaeology, and anthropology" (p. 10). Adhering closely and consistently to this presumption, the bulk of the volume presents B.'s personal observations on contemporary Bedouin traditions about water, rainfall, livestock, migration, herding, agriculture, domiciles, food, locusts, quail, plants, stars, flint-stone, leather usage, nose rings, hospitality, kinship behavior, tribal behavior, clan behavior, the roles of women, matrimony, laws about vengeance/deterrence, revenge for the shedding of blood, revenge for the violation of women, conflict resolution, judges, witnesses, oaths, sentences, reconciliation, religious sacrifices involving blood, and related questions. The book's greatest strength is its absorbing discussion of Bedouin oral tradition— [End Page 302] poetry, prose, proverbs, and genealogies—much of it recycled from B.'s earlier book (A Culture of Desert Survival: Bedouin Proverbs from Sinai and the Negev [New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004]). The Bedouin stories published on pp. 173-79, for example, constitute a rich resource for comparison not just with biblical stories but with Egyptian, Anatolian, Canaanite, and Mesopotamian stories preserved in epic myth. Analyzing Bedouin poetry in terms of expression, communication, and entertainment, B. first lays out the Bedouin tradition, then compares it with what the author considers to be the obvious parallels in Tanak. Nowhere, however, is any attempt made to compare or contrast these ad hoc observations with contemporary analyses of ancient Hebrew poetry such as those of James L. Kugel (The Idea of Biblical Poetry: Parallelism and Its History [Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998]) or W. P. Brown (Seeing the Psalms: A Theology of Metaphor [Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002]). Nor is anything said about that species of poetry called هجا ("satirical lampoon") which the nineteenth-century Arabist I. Goldziher intuitively compares to Balaam's משלים (Abhandlungen zur arabischen Philologie, vol. 1[Leiden, 1896] 41-44). This is B.'s third volume with Yale University Press, the first two being A Culture of Desert Survival (mentioned above) and Bedouin Law in Sinai and the Negev: Justice without Government (2009), volumes generally well received by Arabists and other colleagues in Middle Eastern studies departments familiar with B.'s efforts to champion the needs of Bedouin trying to eke out a living in the Sinai and the Negev. Yet the problems in this third volume cannot be ignored, arising as they do from well-meaning but naive attempts to correlate contemporary Arabic observation with ancient Hebrew literature. Blissfully unaware of current debate, traditionalist commentary here replaces the academic discipline of articulating conflicting viewpoints before one's conclusions, one example being the unsubstantiated claim that "most of the Bible is written in stages somewhere between the tenth and sixth centuries BCE" (pp. 7-8), followed by Abraham Malamat's early dating of "the patriarchal narratives" (Mari and the Bible [SHCANE 12; Leiden: Brill, 1989] 4) as "proof...

“An Eye for Form”: Epigraphic Essays in Honor of Frank Moore Cross, Edited by Jo Ann Hackett and Walter E. Aufrecht. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2014. v–xl + 383 pp., 84 figures, 11 tables. Paper. $59.50.

Previous articleNext article FreeBook Reviews“An Eye for Form”: Epigraphic Essays in Honor of Frank Moore Cross, Edited by Jo Ann Hackett and Walter E. Aufrecht. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2014. v–xl + 383 pp., 84 figures, 11 tables. Paper. $59.50.Anat Mendel-GeberovichAnat Mendel-GeberovichTel Aviv University, [email protected] Search for more articles by this author Tel Aviv University, [email protected] PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Bulletin of the American Society of Overseas Research Volume 379May 2018 A journal of the American Schools of Oriental Research Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.5615/bullamerschoorie.379.0231 Views: 105Total views on this site Journal History This article was published in the Bulletin of the American School of Oriental Research (1921-2021), which is continued by the Bulletin of the American Schools of Overseas Research (2022-present). Copyright 2018 American Schools of Oriental ResearchPDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.

Friendship in the Hebrew Bible by Saul M. Olyan

Reviewed by: Friendship in the Hebrew Bible by Saul M. Olyan Michael R. Simone saul m. olyan, Friendship in the Hebrew Bible (AYBRL; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017). Pp. xiii + 191. $50. The topic of friendship in the Hebrew Bible is easily overlooked. Stories from many cultures speak of unrelated individuals who share relationships of trust, support, reciprocity, and adventure. The Hebrew Bible, however, has few relationships comparable to the friendships of Achilles and Patroclus or Gilgamesh and Enkidu. Strong relationships do appear in the Hebrew Bible, but they are primarily among family members, like Moses, Aaron, and Miriam, or between masters and disciples like Elijah and Elisha. As a result, friendship has generated comparatively little research. [End Page 321] This book reveals the surprising number of references to and accounts of friendship throughout the Hebrew Scriptures. Olyan begins with an investigation of the terms and phrases used to describe friendship and the context in which those terms are used. This initial analysis reveals that friends are people who are not closely related but who display "behavioral parity" toward each other (p. 36). Even when friends in the Hebrew Bible do not share the same social status, as in the case of David and Jonathan, they expect each other to reciprocate the good they do for each other (p. 73). Friends often share a warm emotional bond; they are nonrelatives who "cling" to each other (pp. 30-31). In short, a friend's loyalty can be trusted. A friend pays back good for good. Friends stand near even during times of trouble, and in exceptional cases one can be even more intimate with a friend than with a relative. Olyan, the Samuel Ungerleider Jr. Professor of Judaic Studies and Professor of Religious Studies at Brown University, is especially well poised to investigate this topic. A student of Frank Moore Cross, O. has written several books on the social milieu of the Hebrew Bible, including studies of social inequality and hierarchy, disability, mourning rites, and violence. He is the primary editor of Social Theory and the Study of Israelite Religion: Essays in Retrospect and Prospect (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2012), a collection of essays on biblical society that engage the work of social theorists like Karl Marx, Pierre Bourdieu, and Michel Foucault. Olyan's dual expertise in biblical studies and social theory allows him to offer both material and theoretical insights. The notes to the introductory chapter (pp. 117-34) provide a wide array of studies of friendship both in theory and in its ancient Near Eastern context. O. makes use of extensive secondary literature from outside the English-speaking world. Ancient sources include texts from Mesopotamia, the Levant, Egypt, and the Greco-Roman world. Among these, O. relies most on Ahiqar, Hammurabi, Sefire, Aristotle, and Cicero, although references to the Hebrew Bible greatly outnumber these cognate sources. Recognizing that he is breaking new ground, O. approaches his topic carefully. The introduction concentrates on the words and phrases that describe friends and friendship. O. catalogues their use, their context, and their range of meaning. In the first chapter, he uses these insights to compare friends and family members, while in the second chapter he investigates failed relationships between friends. In the third chapter, he covers friendship in narrative, focusing on Ruth and Naomi, David and Jonathan, Job and his comforters, Jephthah's daughter and her companions, and Amnon and Jonadab. In the final chapter, O. reviews descriptions of friendship from Ben Sira, seeking in this second-century b.c.e. text the innovations and continuities of Hellenistic Judaism. In each case, "friendship" is a relationship of behavioral parity and reciprocity. This reciprocity is expected even in relationships between individuals of unequal social status, like David and Jonathan. This is a remarkable study on several levels. Foremost is its readability. O. maintains tight control over a wide-ranging topic. He uses the introductory chapter to generate a series of research questions that he then follows systematically in subsequent chapters. The careful analysis of terms in the introduction is especially helpful to the questions that follow. For example, O.'s study of terms reveals the paradigmatic nature of family relationships. Friends...

The Qubur al-Walaydah Bowl: New Images and Old Readings

Discovered in the late 1970s and first published in the Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research by Frank Moore Cross in 1980, the Qubur al-Walaydah Bowl has become the object of more recent inspection by the current excavation team at the site. In 2010, Angelika Berlejung proposed new readings for parts of the inscription. This article seeks to analyze Berlejung's proposed readings against Cross's readings from his editio princeps. Furthermore, the present study utilizes reflectance transformation imaging in order to draw its conclusions. Ultimately, Berlejung's proposed readings are not supported by reflectance transformation imaging.

The Contribution of Frank Moore Cross to Northwest Semitic Epigraphy

Frank Moore Cross was a transformational figure in Northwest Semitic epigraphy. His work on the Jewish Scripts of the post-exilic period, beginning in the 1950s with the Dead Sea Scrolls, is still the definitive palaeographic statement for the history and dating of Jewish Scripts of the period. His work on Northwest Semitic inscriptions had significant repercussions on the study of the chronology of ancient Judah, and moved that field forward in important ways. Cross was one of the seminal figures in epigraphy in the 20th century.

Frank Moore Cross's Contribution to the Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls

This paper examines the impact of Frank Moore Cross on the study of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Since Cross was a member of the original editorial team responsible for publishing the Cave 4 materials, his influence on the field was vast. The article is limited to those areas of Scrolls study not covered in other articles; the reader is referred especially to the articles on palaeography and textual criticism for further discussion of Cross's work on the Scrolls.

Frank Moore Cross and the History of Ancient Israel

This essay examines Frank Moore Cross's reconstructions of ancient Israelite history, focusing on his essays on the tribe of Reuben and on the Judaean restoration, with attention both to his method...

The Contributions of Frank Moore Cross to Semitic and Hebrew Philology

Frank Moore Cross's contributions to Semitic and Hebrew philology were both direct and indirect: direct, in his publications on aspects of Hebrew, Phoenician, and Aramaic grammar; and indirect, in ...

Frank Moore Cross and Archaeology

This paper studies the contributions of Frank Moore Cross to the field of archaeology in the southern Levant. It looks at his archaeological publications and editorial activities; the interest he m...

The Contribution of Frank Moore Cross to the Study of the Religion of Israel

The Contribution of Frank Moore Cross to the Study of the Religion of Israel

A Symposium on the Legacy of Frank Moore Cross—Introduction

Previous articleNext article No AccessThe Legacy of Frank Moore CrossA Symposium on the Legacy of Frank Moore Cross—IntroductionWalter E. Aufrecht and Sidnie White CrawfordWalter E. Aufrecht Search for more articles by this author and Sidnie White Crawford Search for more articles by this author Walter E. Aufrecht: Department of Geography, The University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, AB T1K 3M4, Canada, [email protected]Sidnie White Crawford: Department of Classics and Religious Studies, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 233 Andrews Hall, Lincoln, NE 68588–0337, [email protected]PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Bulletin of the American Society of Overseas Research Volume 372November 2014 A journal of the American Schools of Oriental Research Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.5615/bullamerschoorie.372.0159 Views: 5Total views on this site Journal History This article was published in the Bulletin of the American School of Oriental Research (1921-2021), which is continued by the Bulletin of the American Schools of Overseas Research (2022-present). Copyright 2014 American Schools of Oriental ResearchPDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.

The Contribution of Frank Moore Cross to Ugaritic Studies

This essay examines Cross's use of Ugaritic in five areas of research: philology, names of alphabet letters, poetry, myth, and religious worldview. Some reflections are offered more broadly on his theorizing and method.

The Contribution of Frank Moore Cross to Textual Criticism

The Contribution of Frank Moore Cross to Textual Criticism

Orthography, Textual Criticism, and the Poetry of Job

In an article published in Eretz Israel in 1969, David Noel Freedman called attention to the great number of forms in the book of Job that are spelled without internal vowel markers ( matres lectionis ) where one might expect them.1 This is particularly remarkable in cases where diphthongs are contracted and unmarked by matres. Thus, we have JN instead of JIN (18:12; 40:16), HQN instead of nQ'NK (9:34; 13:21; 20:25; 33:7), JHK instead of jrTK (12:19; 33:19), ^jnn instead of' UpTIH (13:23; 1JTT in 32:7), NSH instead of (10:18; 15:13; Nim in 12:22; N3T in 28:11), Tin instead of Tim (34:32; Tin in 12:7, 8; Tin in 30:19), b^ instead of b^V (30:13; 35:3), jnn instead of JQTl (9:9; flDn in 22:1), and so forth. By Freedmans count, there are forty-two such forms with contracted and unmarked diphthongs in the book, though one might also add conservative spellings like nip (2:2), nD (2:9), OVDQ (11:3), p*D (11:15), n£)pn (11:17), (18:16), )bp (37:2; nftp in 28:26), T1 (29:16; nirn in 13:6; Din in 31:13), and on^N (29:24).2 Moreover, there are a number of Ketiv readings that suggest a conservative orthography: IT for IT (5:18), innn for innn (9:13), lurrp for uznp (15: 15), imty for mby (20: 11), irp for iry (21:20), 1JTP for 1PT (24:1), mte for lTIW (27:15), lifcn for vfon (31:20), irftlinn for inSnnn (37:12), rfr for rfr (38:41), n£DJr> for (39:26), inn£DN for in hflN (39:30), and lins for nna (40:17). Drawing on the results of his joint dissertation with Frank Moore Cross, which argued in part that such spellings typified epigraphic Hebrew of the

Abraham as Paradigm in the Priestly History in Genesis

The intent of this essay is to argue that the story of Abraham, an important segment of the Priestly History in the Hexateuch (Genesis to Joshua),1 was composed with the purpose of providing those who survived the disaster of 586 b.c.e. with religious basis on which they could rebuild their lives. More specifically, the component of the History dealing with Abraham was intended to provide paradigm or model for those who aspired to return, or actually did return, to Judah once this became possible after the fall of the Babylonian empire in 539 b.c.e. I am aware that the considerable amount of ritual law in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers associated with or in secondary derivation from this narrative source is an important aspect of the theological profile of P. But since all biblical law is presented in the context of an unfolding historical process, an understanding of the function and intent of the legal material will require, or at least be greatly facilitated by, prior understanding of the History. I therefore propose to deal with the legal material only where it impinges directly on the understanding of the History and the Abraham segment of the History in particular. I. THE P HISTORY A critical consensus now exists that the P History was composed after the fall of Jerusalem in 586 and subsequent deportations. This preliminary conclusion, which will call for further definition in due course, goes back to the early pioneers of the critical study of the Pentateuch- Eduard Reuss, Karl Heinrich Graf, A. Kuenen, and Julius Wellhausen, in particular- and will be confirmed by glance at the standard introductions.2 The task of disengaging this source from the other narrative strands with which it has been combined is rendered less arduous than it might otherwise be on account of P's distinctive style, idiom, vocabulary, and theological orientation. The P historian makes generous use of lists and genealogies, which generate narrative in their own way, and for the most part the narrative itself is succinct and descriptively economical. The author has no great interest either in populating his narrative with an abundance of minor characters, is the case, for example, in the account of intrigues at the court of David in 2 Samuel, or in developing the characters of the principal dramatis personae- Sarah, Lot, Hagar, Ishmael, and Abraham himself. The focus throughout is on the unfolding drama of divine-human interaction and the destiny of Abraham.3 All the more striking, then, are the two junctures in the Abraham narrative at which we are given an extensive account complete with human interest and dialogue: the covenant of circumcision (Gen 17:1-27) and Abraham's purchase of burial plot (23:1-20). Here and elsewhere in P- the dispositions for the new world following the deluge (Gen 9:1-27) and the call of Moses (Exod 6:2-7:7) - such expansive accounts mark defining moments in the History with notable consequences for the future. The further question, which has proved not so easy to answer, is whether the History is an independent source or redactional layer added to existing narrative; whether, in other words, it is meant to be read together with an existing narrative line to which it has been added, or is fully intelligible when read on its own self-standing text. In his Prolegomena, Wellhausen described P (for which he used the siglum Q) concerned primarily with narrative links and articulations rather than content. It is, he continued, as if Q were the scarlet thread on which the pearls of JE (the Yahwist and Elohist sources combined) are hung. It is, therefore, little more than a genealogy with explanations.4 This reading was accepted by many scholars, often without argument. One of these was Frank Moore Cross, who read P systematic reworking of traditional source material available at the time of writing. If, therefore, we find no explicit reference to Sinai covenant in P, the reason must be - since it is incredible that P would not have covenant at Sinai-that the author assumed it to be known from the JE form of the Sinai story which P took over. …

Is There a Redactor in the House?: Two Views on Biblical Authorship

Is There a Redactor in the House? Two Views on Biblical Authorship William S. Morrow (bio) Raymond F. Person . The Deuteronomic School: History, Social Setting, and Literature. Society of Biblical Literature Studies in Biblical Literature2. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2002. Pp. x + 175. John Van Seters . A Law Book for the Diaspora: Revision in the Study of the Covenant Code. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003. Pp. xii + 236. It is not long before a student introduced to the critical study of the Bible encounters the shadowy figure of the "redactor." Ubiquitous and anonymous, apparently the redactor is capable of everything from a small change in wording to the organization of whole books. The authors of both monographs reviewed here question common presuppositions about the activity of biblical redactors. The study of such literary activity is called "redaction criticism," although the connotations of the term "redaction" have changed over time. Originally, redaction referred to editorial processes related to preparing received texts for publication. As applied to the Pentateuch, for example, redaction criticism was once concerned with distinguishing the original documentary sources from editorial revisions that had combined them into their final form. Latterly, redaction has been used to indicate a wide range of revisional activities, in some cases virtually synonymous with authorship. 1If there is a common thread between the earlier meaning of the term and later developments, it consists in the belief that the result of redactional activity is the production of a particular text. Redaction criticism remains interested in discerning evidence that the text transmitted is a revision of an earlier document. [End Page 113] The works of Person and Van Seters raise significant questions about connections between authorship and redaction. In different ways, both challenge what they consider to be improper projections of modern practices onto ancient book-making. Person claims that the concept of authorship is actually unhelpful in describing the development of the Deuteronomistic History (DtrH). Van Seters denies the necessity of using redaction criticism to discern a history of composition in the law code found in Ex 20.23–23.33, the so-called Covenant Code (CC). In 1943, the German biblical scholar Martin Noth proposed that a single writer (to some extent relying on preexisting sources) composed a work of historiography comprising Joshua–2 Kings that was dependent on the theology and rhetoric of Deuteronomy: the DtrH. He believed the author of the DtrH produced this monumental opus in the exilic period of biblical history. Noth's own scholarship presupposed critical discussions about the composition of the books of Joshua–2 Kings that had taken place since the nineteenth century. At that time, scholars had already noted that the books of the former prophets showed significant use of phraseology and theology that resonated with the book of Deuteronomy. 2 Since Noth's time, the DtrH hypothesis has been subject to two significant modifications. Following the work of Harvard-based Frank Moore Cross, many scholars believe that a first edition (or block) was composed in the late preexilic period with a second completed during the exile. Another influential view, associated with Rudolf Smend of Göttingen, thinks that redaction criticism can expose three or more different layers (or strata) of the DtrH composed during the exilic and postexilic periods. The brief sketch above, of course, paints a picture of postwar scholarship with a very broad brush. In fact, intensive work on the DtrH in the last decade has raised searching questions about the validity of either the block model or the strata model. Some have even gone so far as to question the existence of the DtrH altogether. But, typically, the scholars concerned have used techniques of redaction criticism to obtain their results. 3 A major point of Person's book is to raise serious questions about the competence of redaction criticism to discern different versions of the [End Page 114]DtrH. Person eschews the common distinction between "deuteronomic" and "deuteronomistic" styles in favor of the adjective "deuteronomic." One reason for simplifying the terminology is that the distinction suggests a unitary movement of influence from Deuteronomy to the DtrH, when influences probably ran both ways (p. 6). Behind this judgment is also...

Leaves from an Epigrapher’s Notebook: Collected Papers in Hebrew and West Semitic Palaeography and Epigraphy. By Frank Moore Cross. Harvard Semitic Studies, no. 51. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 2003. Pp. xx + 371 + figs. $69.95.

Previous articleNext article No AccessBook ReviewLeaves from an Epigrapher’s Notebook: Collected Papers in Hebrew and West Semitic Palaeography and Epigraphy. By Frank Moore Cross. Harvard Semitic Studies, no. 51. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 2003. Pp. xx + 371 + figs. $69.95.Dennis PardeeDennis PardeeThe University of Chicago Search for more articles by this author The University of ChicagoPDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Journal of Near Eastern Studies Volume 67, Number 1January 2008 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/586678 Views: 7Total views on this site * Permission to reprint a book review in this section may be obtained only from the author.PDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.

Leaves from an Epigrapher's Notebook: Collected Papers in Hebrew and West Semitic Palaeography and Epigraphy. Frank Moore Cross.

<i>Leaves from an Epigrapher's Notebook: Collected Papers in Hebrew and West Semitic Palaeography and Epigraphy</i>. Frank Moore Cross.