‘SACRIFICE. IN THE OLD TESTAMENT "Tes Theory and Practice ay GEORGE BUCHANAN GRAY, D.Lirz. Pafacr of Het an OM Pada Ese oe Mold igen Gig Eater on the Seagal Ske Let, Oafrd: Haw. DD Abert PROLEGOMENON BY BARUCH A. LEVINE KTAV PUBLISHING HOUSE, Ine. NEW YORK . 1971 VII ALTARS: LITERARY AND ARCHABOLOGICAL EVIDENCE, fs previous lectures I have dealt amainly with che amaterals and occasions of sacrifice, the difference of cxscom whieh they vunderwent, aod the relation of custom and modification of custom ea belief or theory. There still remain for consideration the alar and the ministrints of sacrifice and more immediately the alae” Like the material and oaasiony of sacrifice, the altar Undertent modifications ; but variety ia the alae, and miodica. on oF practice in respect tn it, belong mare largely 1a ibe sadlier péliods, and astracied lesa interest apd provoked less Geory ar a liter period For example, Phifo, wha coneibutes many observations and Josephus. few, la regard wo the meaning. ‘of che material and oczasion of sacrifice, have but litde to sy fon the meaning of special features of the altar. Our present inquiry, therefore, takes us more Largely into the origins aad early history of Jewish, or rather Hebrew, sacriGvial ewtiom and belie “The tee ‘alae! would ar Gest appat tobe sufcfenly precise; yevasa water of fact oo Tinle discussion affecting some landa- mena questions of saciicial curiam and ica meaning has sven a5 to the scope of the term, as ta whac is and that is oot an altar; to fake a single instance, dae queition has aren whether the auazeetad, the pillar’ of ELY., was originally itll an alan, tot, aa it appears ia Hebrew literature, simply am appertenance cof an altar, Tee fviless in auch a caxe staring out with a definition, but it i important « define aut juatiy the range, bf inquiry, Tn one seapect she teem ‘altar in relation co Koglish description of Hebted? mage, is much less contiging than the term ‘sacrifice the term ‘eueifige'in ¥.V. encrespbnds to several Hebrew terms, anl i the consist rendering of one; an the bother hand, ara’ always corespondste se, Aram. Row except LUERARY in Bx, sf (ANG Ry iemalian, 2 Ch. gol Glee (RY, Myr.“ vessls'} of incense = miasyon) and Ts. 65%, where it corre. sponds to anthing in MT and & omitted in SAV, and thrice in Buel, 432"; in these three casa ‘afc’ (A.V), and the com- frund expression ‘upper alr’, or ‘alr hearth (RV) render the Hebrew Wine, aed in NT. taltar* regularly renders duore: ‘enfpusy, once only (Acts 17") corresponding to Bayér. Tf then We could define the Hebresr term Tare to our sarstaction, we sigoll also be defining the term ‘alter as weed in almost every josianee in the IY. of the O.T, ° Exymologieally the Hebrew term is pevfecty clear, buc ite very ckarness, unless we are on four gwar, may become misleading? the term means ‘the place Of slaughter’, but, even though we lint thls aa the place of Slaughter of sacrificial victims, the exymological meaning. is 00 rarraw to cover the wie oF the tara; in urage the altar became the place here ected victims were durné rather thaw where they were alain, and even the place where inanimate offerings, that never could Bave been slai, were buret, No doubt the ceymological meaning casts an important light on 28 origin of Susiice; but regard for this fact muse oot limit aur inquiry fn auch a way as to excise from consideration other factors intimately and essencally eoncected, thac may cas Tight on ftder origins of racrifice and persaung cloments inthe Hebrew Tinual of excrifce ant sxcred gilts. In addition 10 aod in con rexion with what the Hebrews called ‘ehe alta’ (mao), it will ‘be necessary #0 consider the piece of sacred furnivare termed, by them the ible’, with oF sethout some closer definition. On certain conerpiinné of eaeeiice this tale may, indeed, he in fo sense an altar; bit this really caries us back to 4 question ‘Of erin whch aa core befare us previously, viz. 2a va whether ‘imal vitims wore, if not the exclusive, yet in all cases the fron and proper macetial of sacrifice, Yer at a criain period fr at certain periods with the Hebrews atleast, the teresa altar* tnd ‘table’ become insimately associated if not in some degree Inverchangeable; the term *ahar’, as already remarked, is n0t Tied to what wae used fog animal vieums) and itis by come supposed thac even the alyje used for animal vies was is ‘certain commexions termed ‘Table’. Even though the last point is far trom certain, sll remaing cecessary to consider sated 8 1 ALTAR table snd altar-together in rebion 10 sacrioe, Anu it aay bbe convenient st once t0 examine the use of the ter abe ‘Much the most Frejscot use of the teem “table” for a sacred ject isin reference (9 Doe table of the Showbread, or rather the table of Fresena (bona jrhr), on which che sacred loaves, renawed weekly, were arranged. The table prepared for Gad, relerred to in 35.650, may hare beea an abject more or lst salary used in che out of a foreign dey, OF whles used for ‘shored food nothing further need be sail at present, eneapt to refer to the mile OF referents to the wble of Shewbread in Baek, 4286; if tha Hebrew ioe fop, KAY) wore correct ether the table of Shewbread is referred wo a¢ “the ala’, or the aliar ff barnefering a cenmed "Uh rable that is before Yahweh and Ineihas ease we should have.anidentikeation of te corm ‘table? and ‘alta’, and of the iaverehangeablity, in Erekiels thought at lest, of the ideas covered by the erm, Bat from what it probably the true cext (LX) not 20 much followa: this eaads, And befure the eyo was an appearance like the appearance of an dar of wood", ean atardnde piece of Suraicnee this refers to the table of Shewbread sanding before the Holy {of Hootie}, bue i is not, i this wet i eight, actually sald to be an alia, Lt t0 have looked lite an alee in ether words, there fa with Tzokiel an aseocation but oot an identfention of the Ideas of sacred cable and alae, On the other hand, the Alentif- ation exists in x Ki. 6°, where, in spite of much textual ‘corruption, ram seems clearly uoed of the table of Shewbread (or = golden alar.of incense 1" corrupt. Tris commonly said, however, that the altar of burntofiering fs termed ‘the table of Yahweh": the passages dived in proof, apan fom the page jue dixumed, which, as jost stated, probally does 220" vefer 10 the alaw of burat-oifering, are Ezek, 448, Mai, 7", OF these, PreK, 440 has been difereatly imerprted ; Davidson 0, g. says ofthe table, ‘tha altar of burnt fffeding #8 no doubt «cane, and Dever io his nose on Ml. 3 thes this a5 one of the passages in which the alkar of burat- offering ie called a falfle; but on the other hay, Berltole understands the table'of Ezek. 44°10 be that of sh Shewbecad, “1 Wp in spite of Ur. om Mak Hit Seuen,p. 2, 4, LITERARY AN ARCHAKOLORICAL EXIDENCE 9 vo seem se mors ptale, Cerin wie ig oh fmsige ar ont hat Facil eon all he sar of hs Meng a wie hs worth seen sua fq le Day Ds fre mt ater ur row We wun eof tat pasege i ee tr have et wa at he ne aes cries ube Stor Grion se teen bck ay trot nay ugh pakops ct woes see © Ice sgl te cont thar Frei ope cle the sar ale The suger "Batt poe te sos esse acl ta kee hrs oy ny ‘tun be cide of Tal wet sr fo sale Tear orme to mie tmesani hey sal aad ire to thes uno tant bd crc Lond Go ty Sia ener a my smetnry Coad hy tall ces ese _Jomy til mii nn atte ta fay Charge Maa Sha Sane to hee wen hey ser fa he feof the iar cous ey sale lated wah en Forest Se? "The qusion ss Hatid here Seung to Faget or msl, nce aes, age pile of th te clare fo te Lee? "Bose mo te ss Sal (Sede ae Uoel oe ce ale af nn og Covldh an) shal approche hia of Steven nl ihe hay Ungar docs he ely an tha cy Call Ipprech the a: one the omple bt within the sored \ Zale anton rte and Sed the bt? “An mar fe he asply Leven the sii or hear Qh ativan esc sc 8 tay beat the, Sarat tho atur heh tay ove amen ike toe (reas oft n ow tte ft ey seer Peed opis meen to appraeh te eof Seca, Bae rpaen vin fatal dnl soma Othe the Lovie in in toon that area bnoy sae te hom iy" dows nar em pales aed en tough toad rove fle enone te kl sre lat the ginr ef beets ert wooo ss tprcale Rac eaang cote Tre conring tho twalasege in Mal tw be comer to ook same pomge Esl wie he my Shs iecas to eused fe dograhe sone of a eon tot ve AL AR feytetate, The page 12°29 fierce ab estatae logiealy God desines the hosts of Gog 10 become the irae and to be eaten al a great sande Cat; and 10 chose ‘summoned 10 ths feast God saya: 'Ye stall cat ft ll ye be fall, and drink ond ll yr te crunken.., . Yen, obo 9 ye stall have your fil, ic” Should “e by be vondored YB. Toy)+ ‘at my tible' as though che meaning were “siting at or round ay table"? In that cave his oald be (another) coe of the alkat of bornofering Icing teeme table’. Rot acotter view ofthe idiom is poste ana ote bran adogned (e.g BL, e.5y,c6}; om ths view he preposiion tae the see foree as ia *Man stall sos ive by (Se) beead alone’ (Dt. 8, and "table" che same ncaning a8 pnega in x Cor 7: *Ye cannot rink she cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot partake of the table of the Locd, and of the cable of devils” ‘The ablé of Yahweh ia ths ease is not the stat nor exactly the Arsh placed on the altar af hurasosfering, but the odd soutfied by Me burnings of other paris of the wietin on the ater, Te ifthe fae set by Yahorelt for his goes "The sonond mcaning je proposed for Kak. 4 tally seems west obvious in Malt’, though "ble is commonly said 0 toean there the akar isc. The passoge reads: *And ye say (viz to Yahweh, Wherein bare We Heated chy came with contempt (22) (In thatp ye olf upon my alte polluted fond (erh): And ye say, Wherein Rave sce pollsted thee {of LX inj? Sa that ye uy, Yahweh's ble % contemptible. “And it it rota bad thing: when ye offer (vi, xo Yabweh) blind anima for sierice? And eit nt a Tudela ken yer fea we animal or one tha is sickly? ‘ry raking 4 presont of ie (iz uch aaa} wo the governor fof} hy (provines)? Ts be eoiag to be pleased with face oF take thy pare (oe sueh x mera pressolashati"" Here the contemptible: tile oF Vabureb seems fo comeepond more cleus to the phrave "polled rea "th to Yahweh's alka ie ste flesh act hefore Yalneeh oe ec or Iho hy Bs pets nater ean cle altar on which the flesh was st. Bion nw" of the sume caper the palate table eqresponds Amithetially rater a the pe offering of han eofthe al. Testes Rome wisest then, not to press any of thexd parses “shay LITERARY ASD ARCHAHOLOGICAL EVIDENCE 101 as diet poo itches of hunting ws actly terme "tke abl ot Yah they ary even So aking oot of the love azodaton of the ete of Saar, he ues 3 OF fn which ofrings mace to Yebwch ere ‘hin aa im whole OF part burt ant ofthe bi an mak aed for Tae, ilelin the onnd of Haske and Malsei the pies, 0 food lidlowed by. Yahweh for the use of bis woshippery, wat ame There no lub ieee as welt say OF en once sine? ad define ejector Bone oteing amt eof Shred - Sr ut th crm eve from Jewish prance were rseted to Chiaay prac some diene of mins ies oF Diary Serched oe Encaratacocdng that on which eee rere arranged war lle nS ws prota fe Tet ce earn ar aan tac are aguney ee ntti rirne near alta nor table canbe eon laced in sation, Im sepa ote alia a co other fenton ene esc casos te ee good reanoa for expecting two net ee of ievcse, wii we may fer) extra Cansanie or Ste Canaanite acordng a they deve frm the custom of the dhsert and the sep, the tome ofthe Ilsbrows blo thei Inconion Sno Cane oF foot cane of the ara ts of Cannan, Oa the erga ofthe air an the ble there ites ccueliag to , ao sch double snences bath ae were tir rel of ct vine strain ena Say ot orem ih mone htt sere woul he aor forthe dale inonc este tn fe stoner isory of the aes ad Cit of omen ioe teen gemly raognied, een toagh Sich"an sar ae B demsibas wan, fw every pevid, alone fevkinate, in shy aneal wage of the comanoniy thee wat sai. In ape both to. nuabers and. ates there are Torn iis sages We fame period ef any aly = fuse of on sora bartotng ard aes 4.0.72 ped EFop shary slay a porn) of sacs contoase of one ro cathy» pesod of bene fand dali enya ‘srwoniaiyy peved of et imeatat alae te fa the {Recuve ofa material alr the aur ia is projected ao the Spinto real under he gue a heavenly se at THE ALTAR all dhe ayes just refered 40 ts abate a steastuce; buat there are narratives in the Ov. iuelt which tave been onder. stood as refering to what may be termed natural slears—rocke surface artificially mouited packapsy ine not strstees ‘So far a brief viturné of the Witcary evknce, but some steucteres sil more rock-susfoces endures and explorers and ccxcavator hive reasonably enowz’ sought for altars, To whae tert has their earch been sveneafal? ve the obits whl, Bey have iensiied an alas clearly and recoxzably such? nd consequenly how far does acckacology in this mater xe itorcetverary evidencs 28 to custom and betes? We have on iNe oge fal in che O:T: various terms for of used of rockssorfane or sacred store objers; and an the ther hand various clases of oto stractutes, preserved intact, i brokeo dpwn of fextured, not destroyed beyond recogmiion oftheir Ganction, and broayht to lich by exploratioa or excava tian. Hove elo these stand related ta ore anocher’ To what sextont lo tps tom reir to attra To what extent do xecient lta eesnizaly survive? “The Hebrew terme in uration, tome vf ebem techticah, some of thet wide terns Use aly in vertala conDesions of sated foske or stone, are no, 1. pillar; note, akary ve, wk Sh RV. heap; Sih, in RLV always treated ana proper same, Gligal, with neglect of the atticle which ia invariably used except in the narrmive of the maming of the place in Jon 5° (iw MT, fa Jon. 12 alka 2shbj; thru fan. The anaeslogieal types ate ia the tecminology sow widely wed of stone maa: tems fa other countzey a ell as Palestine: (1) Menhies, single tipeighe scones: (a) Dolmens, which ia their simplest form umsst of two uprights supporting third placed root wees {5} Cromlechs, circles or other groups of stones forming. an cudonure; (4) Alignments, groups of stones in Une; (6) Rock surfaces nacurally or ariially remarkable mere especialy towing to the presence of cuprmrks, These cp-nals ary times aagociaisd with monpt of the fir four groups, which, ene ie nna, nga wo he presence of auch mars “The comeeponence of Meuhc to Maygebih is obvious and generally reeized, As aleady remarked, on 2 extn theory LITERARY AND ARCHAROLOGICAL EVIDENCE. 203 nf saeriice the Massebih has Leen regarded 3s a primive or Jereinal form of the altar; hat of an alear oa which an aniimal ita way ether slain nor Lugo, bat ta which onguente oF Tiquids eoul be appfied as by Jacob to the Macgebah at Bethel? We nel wot pursue Hiv point further here except to remark that the Menbits would atait of anvintng but aoe of receiving: the animal or iis earease far Slaying or burning, To this esse we are able to idemify the Hehraw feckurcal tara for an archacological type. For ehe ast archaeological cype mentioned hore, the rock-curfue distinguished by spacial features, we eam certainly dicover na technical Tebrew term; bot thers are passages where the wide cerm "if cock appears to refer to euch Teck-surfaces aml co their we as lure. To these we shall return in the next lecture, The stoves of which the Crorlechs ‘or Aligrments consist are of the Messi Slageloh type an there is merely one point to letain ok for a momene bere, Te i possible that dhe Hebrese echnical crm for a Comtech or erate enle aurvives in diene though on atosher theory ® the term rally reel not the ronad or ciecle sit oF sxcrod stones, but rollectively the sade (tones), in which cree ic may have eefereed to grenps or collections of stones withnut reference to the fara fof the single esimna and Alignments as well 2s to Cromlechs, ‘That one of the places named Gilgal possessed, at all events, a group of stones. whether arranged in a cirele line, er how, we are not informel—we leven Irom Jos 4. According t0 this tury cvelve stones stave ia ee Gilad awl they lad bee crected there ig commemoration vf the paswogs of tha Jordan, Ewe there can le Gtr question that whae the ateprer actually contains i wory shat Rad grosta up amooget the Hebrews 10 fexplaia a pecbitoric momoovenr which bad slood and given ian name? (@ Gill long befor the Hebrews entoeed the country In the nareative these Sunes are called by the eomeian maene ‘aba, ‘Stones, and it f perhaps implied abat they were oF no cena, 2 Nandi in 2A, cone! Meine? ia PE a 151 + Flow eich nae of ace and pein cin gerbe ara see in Genrabs in oe near the secant toh of Laz ond 9 numeo iobabied stuncra Datel; people spake of gene Lar or ta he (seus) Bethel ofthe place? graualy Debetbecate the sown fer ever The (hum nd deve oot be ld mane. Cp. A, Slee 17 LITERARY AND ARCHAKGLOGICAL EVIOENCE 105 2.8 akoluss, though auch more,rarely, een oF die altar WGon. se bvum, a4, 20 shut $daa aight possibly mean fr he Gilgal it doube toes mean, however, in the atea— ‘whether the stone-cirle ac or the twa naried ater it—sehich Contaiaed the ales just as i 28 common 10 speak of fing Se (9) auch and such a town, de the movatain (Gen. 3 cf om the tops of the houatais, and even se the So, oF high places which contained bat wore not theaselwes lars "There are farther fcts worth considering in relation to the probability that an altar when ascociued with a group of ones was iovependeat of the stoaes themselves. The sory (Osx. 244) that Moves (at Sina built an altar under the: most and twuive Maschoth, acording t0 the number of the relve tees of Ieee, poines to flirty widh altars adecent 0 bat alstince Goma group of Matceboth, Tiweadope Baudissive sug. seston with regard n the meaning of the retin Gelod, and rake ‘that tera in the sense he suggests i Jon 23°, we have amir scene depicted "And when they came tothe Gell of the Jordan, =the children of Reubeo, &e. bile chere an akar, «x And the children of Israel heard sing, Baio che hitdren of Reuben, Be Tbave built the akar beside (9) vhe Celt of Jordas.* ‘The sucviving stone monumenes of Patewing, which have by seme been largely identied with ancient altars, are dolmere thie thoory of Paletiatan dolmene ie, peshae, losing ground, ‘but cannot be said to he dead. Strongly advocated by Conder fnearlier publications of the Palestine Exploration Func it bas ecendy Yeen atticked, not 10 say ridiculed, by Dr. Duncan Mackearic in his report of an examination, uderaken by him, fresh from experienes of European dolmens, of eerain megs Tihio siractores in the neighbourhood of Amaan! But 30 dliinguished and erudite a scholar as Kaudissin acoeprs the dolmen* as being. at least in certain easee, an alr, aod Spoer ian ace in Za 77, 1908, ropenes 3 theory of the evolution ofthe alae of which the starting-point was te ideatication of altars with dolmens. The question stl requires examination. No Hebrew term for dolmen, if such ever existed, survives, and ics very doubtful whether uey of the ngmeroua narratives * Pa Anan tg, SPs gg T So asa So Stein, 124,209: Kensedy DB Alt