Ben Sira and Demotic Wisdom by Jack T. SandersReview by: Miriam LichtheimJournal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 104, No. 4 (Oct. - Dec., 1984), pp. 768-769Published by: American Oriental SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/601918 .

Accessed: 12/06/2014 20:14

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

American Oriental Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal ofthe American Oriental Society.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.203 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 20:14:08 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

768 Journal of the American Oriental Society 104.4 (1984)

work, probably because it is not realizable. Much is made of the theory of Berlin and Kay concerning the emergence of color terms in the world's languages, and Biblical Hebrew is assigned a place in their developmental scheme. But the correctness of any such conclusions depends on our having sufficient positive evidence to make reliable arguments e silentio, from the fact that a given color term does not occur; it would seem difficult to maintain that we have anything like that kind of evidence. Actually, for all that is said about new methods, the bulk of the book is taken up by philological and exegetical discussion of bible-passages, of an old-fashioned type.

Whatever its shortcomings, this monograph contains abun- dant color-lore, and invites consultation by lexicographers and translators of the Bible. An unnecessary difficulty is placed in their way by the omission of any index of color terms!

DELBERT R. HILLERS

JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY

Cities of the Delta, H.1 Mendes. By KAREN L. WILSON, with contributions from SUSAN J. ALLEN, MARJORIE VENIT and VICTORIA L. SOLIA. Pp. 43 + 35 plates + 3 figures. (Ameri- can Research Center in Egypt, Volume 5.) Malibu: UNDENA

PUBLICATIONS. 1982. $13.50.

This work consists of four studies of individual aspects of the 1979 and 1980 field seasons at Mendes, plus introductory and concluding remarks. Mendes is an exceedingly impor- tant site because it contains most of the features which inter- est Egyptian archeologists. First, there is good evidence that the site was occupied from the Archaic to the Ptolemaic Periods. Second, the site contains domestic, funerary, indus- trial and temple areas. Third, the city was important as the capital of the Sixteenth Nome and briefly, capital of Egypt in Dyn. XXIX. Thus the site presents an excellent micro- cosm of almost all the problems currently facing Egyptian archeologists.

The four studies published here are valuable mostly for providing concrete data on very specific problems. Karen L. Wilson presents a detailed analysis of several large mud-brick structures found in area H, outside the temple enclosure. The descriptions of the buildings are clear and concise. This chapter includes important observations on the stratigraphic relationships of the buildings, methods of construction, and brick composition and size. The plans and photographs which accompany this chapter are clear and easily keyed to the text. It is disappointing, however, that it was not possible to

be more specific about the function and date of these struc- tures. Additional remarks in the conclusion do not solve this problem.

Susan J. Allen provides a study of the pottery in Chap- ter 3. Again the descriptions and drawings are of very high quality. This chapter will be especially valuable when com- pared with the Late Period typologies being prepared by John S. Holliday for Tell el Maskhutta and by Donald B. Redford for East Karnak. Perhaps comparisons of the three typologies will eventually allow ceramicists to make more precise attributions of dates to Late Period pottery assem- bledges. Examinations of Redford's ceramic material from East Karnak might cause Allen to revise her conclusions concerning separate traditions in Lower and Upper Egypt during the Third Intermediate Period.

The contributions by Marjorie Venit on Greek Pottery and Victoria L. Solia on a Third Intermediate Period Relief fragment provide useful comparative material. It is especially disappointing, however, that the well dated Greek sherds were not found in secure contexts. This would have been just the kind of information which might solve a number of prob- lems in Later Period ceramic chronology.

Karen L. Wilson's chapter on the small finds again pro- vides useful raw data on various sorts of objects. Of special interest are her comments on "tokens" or "gaming pieces" (p. 35). These small rounded disks of re-used sherds are widespread on Egyptian sites including East Karnak, in addi- tion to the sites mentioned by Wilson. During the 1980 East Karnak season, the staff was able to observe a young girl from the village of Nag el Fokhani playing a game resem- bling "jacks" with just such pieces of reworked modern sherds. It is possible that these pieces served other purposes as well in antiquity, but in modern times, Egyptian children use them for games.

The staff of the Mendes excavation is to be commended for presenting the preliminary data on their finds so promptly. Egyptian archeologists will look forward to the results of further work.

EDWARD L. BLEIBERG

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO

Ben Sira and Demotic Wisdom. By JACK T. SANDERS.

Pp. 123. (Society of Biblical Literature, Monograph series no. 28.) Chico, California: SCHOLARS PRESS, 1983. Cloth: $29.50; paper $19.50.

Having recently written a monograph entitled Late Egyp- tian Wisdom Literature in the International Context; a Study of Demotic Instructions, which is about to appear

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.203 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 20:14:08 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Brief Reviews 769

(Fribourg & Gottingen 1983, Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis no. 52) I should welcome another work in this almost unex- plored field. But I cannot. Actually, only the last third of Sanders' short book is devoted to a comparison of Ben Sira with Egyptian Wisdom, namely his chapter 3, entitled "Ben Sira's Relation to Egyptian Tradition" (pp. 61-106). The first two chapters deal, respectively, with "Ben Sira's Relation to Judaic Tradition," and "Ben Sira's Relation to Hellenistic Tradition." Throughout, the argument is based on narrowly focused comparisons of individual sayings, with the bulk of chapter 2 being partly a rejection and partly a qualified en- dorsement of Th. Middendorp's extravagant claims of Ben Sira's borrowings from Theognis and other Greek sources. (Th. Middendorp, Die Stellung Jesu ben Siras zwischen Judentum und Hellenismus, 1973.) Sanders is far more per- ceptive than Middendorp, but he too fails to realize that the adduced parallels were formulations of widely diffused sa- piential themes which travelled back and forth in the Hel- lenistic oikumeme, and were coined and recoined in Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek, and Egyptian, to name only the languages most directly involved.

Sanders' comparisons of Ben Sira and Egyptian Wisdom- almost entirely limited to the Demotic Wisdom of Papyrus Insinger-are drawn from the still valuable but outdated study of Paul Humbert, Recherches sur les sources egyp- tiennes de la littrature sapientiale d'Israel, 1929, as well as from the unpublished doctoral thesis of another Bible scholar: Werner Fuss, Tradition und Komposition im Buche Jesus Sirach, Tubingen 1962. The more pertinent recent studies of Wisdom Literature, notably Max Kuchler's mas- terly Frahjidisehe Weisheitstraditionen, 1979, and the sym- posium volume Studien zu altagyptisehen Lebenslehren, eds. Hornung & Keel, 1979 (both in the series Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis) seem to have escaped his notice.

Sanders is right in insisting that there are meaningful sim- ilarities between Ben Sira and Papyrus Insinger, but having no Egyptian he is not equipped to deal with them. His com- parisons are miscellaneous and fail to penetrate into the essential character of Papyrus Insinger, and into the why and how of its correspondences with Ben Sira. Nor do his brief remarks on the other major Demotic wisdom text, the In- structions of'Onchsheshonqy, show a realization of the great significance of that work for the understanding of Papyrus Insinger and Demotic Wisdom as a whole, a wisdom which (as I show in my study) stood fully within the international sapiential currents of the Hellenistic age.

Sanders' book gives rise to the question: can a Bible schol- ar who is not also a full-fledged Egyptologist deal adequately with the interrelations of Israelite and Egyptian wisdom literatures? I think the answer is, No.

MIRIAM LICHTHEIM

JERUSALEM

Iranische Namen in den indogermanischen Sprachen Kleina- siens (Lykisch, Lydisch, Phrygisch). By RUDIGER SCHMITT.

Pp. 40. (Iranisches Personennamenbuch, Band V, Faszikel 4. Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, philoso- phisch-historische Klasse. Sonderpublikation der Irani- schen Kommission.) Wien: OSTERREICHISCHE AKADEMIE

DER WISSENSCHAFTEN. 1982.

With this issue the Iranisehes Personennamenbuch (IPNB), of which earlier fascicles were briefly announced earlier (I, I in JAOS 101, 1981: 466; I, 1-3 in WZKM 74, 1982: 250-251), continues its coverage with an inventory of Iranian names in the Indo-European languages (Lycian, Lydian and Phrygian) of Asia Minor. Rudiger Schmitt, co-editor with Manfred Mayrhofer of the IPNB as of the appearance of this fascicle has established a solid reputation in Indo-Iranian linguistics by a series of well-documented publications of which his Die Iranier-Namen by Aisehylos (1978) anticipates on projected surveys of Iranian names in Greek sources. In the "Vorlau- figer Werkplan" of the IPNB Schmitt's fascicle fits in what has been termed the "Nebenfiberlieferung" or secondary tra- dition (IPNB, Band V through IX) which will deal with Iran- ian names in Indo-European (Greek, Armenian, Latin, Slavic, Tocharian et al.) and non-Indo-European (Elamite, Semitic, Egyptian et al.) languages.

The fifty names Schmitt discusses-32 in Lycian, 13 in Lydian and 5 in Phrygian-are extracted from older and more recent collections of Kalinka (1901) for Lycian, Gus- mani (1964 and 1980) for Lydian, Neuman (1979) and Ner- oznak (1978) for Phrygian. Although some uncertainty in the identification of a small number of names remains, it gives the classical historian and Iranian linguist a comfortable feel- ing of deja vu to find such familiar names as Lyc. arssima-, O.P. rsilma-, Gr. arsdmes, kizzapriina-/zisaprhna-, Gr. Tis- saphernes, O.P. *Ni~farna(h)-; Lyd. artakiassa-, O.P. rtax- ?aca; Phryg. ksuvaksaro-, O.P. uvaxgtra-, Gr. kuaksaris, put in an appearance. Greater Greece and Asia Minor and its hinterland have influenced each other in more than one way and it is gratifying to notice in these pages the fallacy of the once pervasive territorial pride and prejudice between Clas- sical and Iranian studies. Each entry follows the format used in earlier fascicles: B stands for place of (written) occurrence (Belegstellenangabe), P for attributes of the person thus named (Prosopographie) and D for linguistic connections (sprachliche Deutung). In his interpretations Schmitt shows control of the relevant data, close attention to details and restraint in following or making adventurous suggestions. He dedicates this fascicle to his Austrian friends in Innsbruck and Vienna.

MARK J. DRESDEN

UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.203 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 20:14:08 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions