Genesis, A Royal Epic. Loren R. Fisher
target="_blank" rel="nofollow" href="#ulink_69c35c98-8d79-58bd-9df4-45e0a7c023aa">23. This is the blessing on the sons. Also note v. 20, which shows how all of this is continued.
24. The phrase “from my birth until this day” is literally “from my beginning to this day.” This phrase also appears in Num 22:30.
25. Also see Gen 21:12. The names of the fathers are called forth or summoned during a ritual for the dead, and when this is done, one is blessed with heirs.
26. Theodore Lewis should really understand this (“The Ancestral Estate,” 604); but in his article it seems that he is thinking more in terms of “perpetuating” and “preserving” “the memory of the family name” in Gen 21:12 and in 48:16. Also, Westermann does not understand this passage, and he sees it as a late addition (exilic or postexilic; Genesis 37–50, 189–90). He thinks that it has to do with the name of the fathers living on in the grandchildren, and thus the history of the fathers, “which was a history with God,” will continue in the children. This gives the time of the fathers a meaning for the later history of Israel. But he does say something that is important, even though he does not really understand it: “This is the clearest and most important passage in the Old Testament where one can recognize the link between patriarchal tradition and the liturgy of Israel.”
27. See Bordreuil and Pardee, “Le rituel funéraire ougaritique RS 34.126,” for the best text which we have used, and Levine and Tarragon, “Dead Kings and Rephaim,” for a good treatment of this text.
28. For this see Finkelstein, “The Genealogy of the Hammurapi Dynasty.”
29. See Kitchen, “The King List of Ugarit.”
30. For a detailed treatment of this see Astour, “A North Mesopotamian Locale of the Keret Epic?”
31. We will give more details of the story later.
32. See de Moor, “Rapi’uma—Rephaim,” 335, where he comments on the Ugaritic funeral liturgy as follows (Kuritu = Keret): “Most important, however, is the first part of the ritual. It proves that the Ugaritic dynasty traced its origins back to the same ancestor Ditanu/Didanu as Kuritu. This finally explains why the Legend of Kuritu was handed down in Ugarit.” Van Seters, In Search of History, 200–202, is clearly wrong when he says, “There is, therefore, at present no evidence to suggest that Keret was an ancestor or royal model for the people of Ugarit.”
33. We do not know much about Jacob, Abraham, or Isaac from these stories, but when the scribes put together such stories and formed an epic in order to unite the people, they were not in a position to invent new names or write new stories. For entertainment, the people wanted their stories. The new historians who see such “hero-kings” as imaginary (i.e., “never living persons”) are just not in touch. N. P. Lemche sees a parallel between “Kirta” and the later kings of Ugarit and David and the later kings of Judah. He could make a better case with a parallel between Kirta and Abraham. See Lemche, “From Patronage Society to Patronage Society,” 120.
34. Streck, Assurbanipal, II Teil: Texte, 54–57. Also see IV 65–82, 38–39, for another example.
35. See CAD, Vol. 8, 523.
36. This is a translation of kispu.
37. In light of all this, it appears that David in 2 Sam 21:10–14 is not helping his cause in giving a proper burial to Saul and Jonathan, but more on this below.
38. The common people also had their rituals for the dead. These were usually held in the House of the Marzeah. For a discussion of this see below.
39. Lambert, after discussing the new material, says, “The very considerable importance of this material is the proof it offers that the whole framework of the Hebrew traditions in Gen. i–x, and not just the episode of the flood, has its counterpart in Sumero-Babylonian legend” (“New Light on the Babylonian Flood,” 116).
40. Between these three major sections, there is in each case a very short section dealing with the elder brother. Genesis 25:12–18, “These are the stories of Ishmael” and Gen 36:1–8 and 9–43 where there are two documents with two titles, “These are the stories of Esau.”
41. Here Yahweh punishes as he does in David’s time (2 Sam 12:15).
42. Hebron was David’s first royal residence (2 Sam 2:1–7), and it is also the location of the cave of the Machpelah, the ancestral tomb (Gen 23:1–20; 25:7–11; 35:29; 49:29–31; 50:13), as well as the location of Absalom’s sacrifice and declaration of his kingship (2 Sam 15:7–12).
43. Danel is the father who is known for his wisdom. In fact, Ezekiel knew of him and listed him along with Noah and Job (see 14:13–20 or 28:3).
44. Gaster, Thespis, 330.
45. I have discussed this in great detail in several places, e.g., Fisher, “The Patriarchal Cycles”; and Fisher, “Literary Genres in the Ugaritic Texts.” For an excellent discussion of all of this see Rummel, “Narrative Structures in the Ugaritic Texts.” Perhaps we should add at this point that after Keret mourns the loss of his family, he is given instructions for his journey to obtain his bride who will produce for him children. This is similar to Abraham’s burial of Sarah followed by the journey to obtain a wife for Isaac.
46. There is a very interesting text from Ugarit (Ugaritica V, 499–504). The instructions are written in Ugaritic, but the main part of the text is in Hurrian. It is “A celebration for Astarte” that begins in four sacred areas of the threshing floor and then moves to the temple for the main sacrifices. It is also interesting to note that at a much later time Marcus Terentius Varro (116–27 BCE) in his book De Lingua Latina relates the Latin area (“threshing floor”) to ara (“funeral pyre/altar”); note Hebrew ’arah, “altar-hearth.” The threshing floor was a very interesting place.
47. It has been suggested in the past that here we have one story about Jacob’s burial at Machpelah (Gen 49:29–33 and 50:12, 13 or P) and another story about Jacob’s burial “beyond the Jordon” (Gen 50:1–11 and 14 or J), which of course does not comply with Jacob’s request. It could