The story of the Tower of Babel in the Samaritan book Asatir as a historical midrash on the Samaritan revolts of the sixth century C.E.

• Author: Stadel, Christian
• Position: Critical essay

The Samaritans produced a substantial body of literature which explains and elucidates their holy Pentateuch from various angles. Most of this exegetical literature was composed in Arabic and remains unpublished to this day. (1) Only two exegetical works written in Aramaic survive from earlier times, with substantial parts of them predating the tenth century c.e.: Tibat Marqe and the Asatir. (2) They contain homilies and teachings and retell biblical stories, adding many details and apparently incorporating folktales and lore, often resembling Jewish Aggadah. Though both works are available in critical editions, (3) there are only very few studies dealing with their content and exegeses. This is especially true of the Asatir. (4)

The Asatir relates stories and legends about biblical figures from Adam to Moses. While it is difficult to date the work with precision, Ze'ev Ben-Hayyim has suggested that the text known today was produced in the late tenth century. He based his assessment on the terminology used, which in some cases points to an Islamic environment, and on linguistic reasoning: the Aramaic language employed was clearly influenced by Arabic. (5) At the same time, Ben-Hayyim was well aware of the compilatory nature of the work and stressed that it probably contains older midrashic material. (6) We shall treat one such pericope here.

The short piece is based on the biblical story of the Tower of Babel. In the first section of this article we shall discuss its literary structure and exegetical aim. Based on this analysis we can then, in section two, identify the historical context of the midrash and offer a tentative dating in section three. A fourth section will discuss possible echoes of the midrash in the Samaritan Targum. The concluding section offers a wider perspective comparing aspects of the work to other exegetical literature.

1. TEXT AND LITERARY ANALYSIS

   The narrative section of the Asatir dedicated to the Tower of Babel is preceded by a lengthy account of how Noah divided the earth among his offspring. It also incorporates remarks on chronology. The monotonous pattern of this account, reminiscent of Genesis 10 on which it is based, is interrupted for a short note on Nimrod, who is said to have ruled over the sons of Ham and to have built the city of Babel. While the immediately following sentences return to the main theme--Noah--and relate the circumstances and time of his passing, the topic of the settlement in Babel is resumed thereafter: (7)

   [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

   And they gathered in Babel. While journeying east they found a valley in the land of Shinar, and they dwelt there. It was like the valley of Shechem now, (8) and the mountain was like Hargerizim. And they said to one another: "Is the place we are traveling to identifiable (literally: known)? Come on, let us build for us a high building so we will not wander on the face of the whole earth." And they built for themselves a building on the mountain, and they set a beacon upon it; its light was seen in all four directions. And they called it "shem," and this is what is said: "and we will make for us a shem." (Gen. 11:4) And they finished building, but the building was shattered, and the people were scattered over the face of the earth, and one of them did not know the other's language. And this is the reason for wars. In the following text, various wars between different peoples are enumerated, in which Nimrod took part. (9) Even though the pericope of the Tower of Babel as such is a self-sufficient story (as indeed is its biblical predecessor), it is clearly linked to its wider context in providing the reason for the wars mentioned afterward. Moreover, its first sentence resumes the topic of the sons of Ham gathering in Babel, thus forming a link to the preceding account which mentions that Nimrod built that city. The internal logic of the pericope itself and its exegetical aim are somewhat less clear, however.

   In general, a midrash draws on its source text, usually the biblical text, and changes it or adds to it in order to create new meaning. Hence, an important step in uncovering the intention or exegetical aim of the midrash is the identification of additional, extra-biblical material contained in it. This additional information is likely to be indispensable for the exegetical aim of the midrash, and is thus vital for understanding the internal logic of the text. Our text contains seven pieces of information that are not found in the biblical account of the Tower of Babel:

   1) The valley of Shinar is like the valley of Shechem now, and the mountain is like Hargerizim; 2) the place is not identifiable; 3) the tower was built on a mountain; 4) a beacon was placed on the tower; 5) the whole construction was called "shem"; 6) the building was shattered; and 7) these events were the cause for wars.

   In terms of methodology, we must identify three basic functional elements in order to understand our midrash: 1.1) the textual tradition that serves as its starting point, its source text; 1.2) its exegetical aims, its purpose (what is it trying to tell us about the biblical text or about another context?); and 1.3) pieces of information that serve to link the source text to the purpose of the midrash (such links usually take the form of distortions of the source text). In what follows, we will investigate to which of these functional categories each of the seven extra-biblical pieces of information from the list above should be assigned.

   1.1 THE SOURCE TEXT

   We shall start our analysis with the tradition that serves as the source text of the midrash. Naturally, this will be either the biblical text itself, Gen. 11:1-9 as it appears in the Samaritan Pentateuch, (10) or a tradition resembling it closely. Among the pieces of additional information there are two items, 6) and 7), that can be regarded as natural extensions of the biblical story. They do not serve a literary purpose in the pericope and are therefore probably part of its source text. They are also found in other expanded versions of the story of the Tower of Babel.

   The biblical text does not speak explicitly of the shattering of the Tower of Babel. It only mentions that mankind was scattered on the face of the earth and left off building the city, and that their language was confounded (Gen. 11:7-9). The destruction of the tower is only implied by the analogy employed throughout the biblical story between the tower and the language and unity of the people. Just as God scattered the people and put an end to their unity, he also destroyed the tower, the symbol of their unity. This analogy is also reflected in the choice of words in the Asatir. The two analogous events of scattering the people and shattering the tower are expressed by the same Aramaic Dt-stem (or Gt-stem) verb, [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], literally 'to be scattered'. (11)

   In Samaritan Aramaic this verb is commonly used with an animate object, such as "people," rather than an inanimate one. In our text, it is clearly the force of analogy that dictated the use of the verb for expressing the shattering of the tower. The tradition explicitly mentioning the shattering of the tower is also found in Jewish sources, namely Jub. 10:26 and Sib. Or. III 97-104, which predate the Asatir. (12) It would be far-fetched, however, to surmise a literary dependency here. The shattering of the Tower of Babel was probably part of an oral tradition common to both Jewish and Samaritan circles. (13) This tradition served as the starting point for the exegetical retelling of the story in the Asatir.

   The connection made in the Asatir between the events surrounding the Tower of Babel and the ensuing wars can be explained in a similar manner. It too has its roots in the logic of the biblical story, which is an etiology of how the different languages of the world came into being. Even though this step is not taken in Genesis 11, one can easily proceed further in the direction of the biblical text: Different languages mean different cultures, different cultures mean misunderstanding on various levels, which would ultimately lead to war. Just like the tradition of the destruction of the tower, this reasoning too is found in the Jewish tradition preserved in Sib. Or. III 103, which explains that the events of the Tower of Babel lead to "strife" among mankind. (14)

   The tradition that served as the starting point for the midrash in the Asatir apparently incorporated the extra-biblical elements 6) and 7) from the list above. Even though constituting information not explicitly included in Genesis 11, both the destruction of the tower and the suggestion that these events were the cause for wars are to a certain degree implied in the logic of the biblical story. They are therefore "natural" additions and do not contain exegesis. As "natural" additions, both elements are also found in other Jewish versions of the story of the Tower of Babel, and one can surmise that they were part of a slightly expanded tradition, probably oral in nature, that was commonly known in Samaritan as well as Jewish circles in Late Antiquity.

   1.2 THE PURPOSE

   In terms of internal literary logic, the purpose of the piece is clear. There is only one item on the list of extra-biblical additions that has some relevance for the Samaritans and their creed: item 1), which equates the valley of Shinar with the valley of Shechem, and the mountain in that valley with Hargerizim. Because of the importance of Hargerizim and Shechem for the Samaritans, this equation was probably central for the midrash, and can therefore either be identified as its exegetical aim, or directly connected to it. Incidentally, the midrash does not equate the valley of Shinar with the valley of Shechem in general, but with "the valley of Shechem now," supposedly referring to the time of the composition of the midrash. This reference to the present of the author and/or his audience...