Poll: Does Ancient Near Eastern Content matter?

[Peter Brylov Christensen]

Hello!

 

In an older thread (http://www.accordancebible.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=13279&page=2) where I have been requesting Ancient Near Eastern (ANE) material for Accordance, I was informed that it wasn't a priority and isn't going to be one either due to one specific reason: I'm the only one really advocating for these niche resources. To be sure, the attention of one person alone is not sufficient in order for the Accordance team to undertake these extremely time consuming projects. A very valid point.

 

Still, the thread mentioned above did get over 1000 views over a relatively short period of time (August 2014 to November 2014) in spite of a low diversity of replies consisting of me, a few curious/interested Accordance users and, of course, the friendly Accordance staff. Anyway, it made me think about how many people would genuinely wish for this stuff other than just me.

 

So, I want to ask you all if you find that ANE content either is or could be of relevance to your Bible studies - and if you'd like to see more ANE resources become available or not - Conversely, you're more than welcome to argue against the usefulness of ANE sources for Bible studies in favor of other materials, too.

By ANE resources I mean:

1. Original language sources that has literary relevance to the Bible (e.g. The Epic of Gilgamesh in the Standard Babylonian Version)

 

2. Language tools for the literary sources such as grammars, dictionaries and lexica (e.g. Akkadian Grammar by Arthur Ungnad (translated by Harry Hoffner))

 

3. Literature that deals generally with the Ancient Near East (e.g. Context of Scripture).

 

What I don't mean by ANE resources is other Bible materials and sources that interpret the Bible - as such, Coptic and Syriac Bibles, Biblical Apocrypha, Talmud, Mishnah etc. don't "count", although I do acknowledge the overlap. For instance, I'd personally be happy to see the Ethiopic (Ge'ez) OT/ NT, First Book of Enoch and Book of Jubilees for Accordance. But that is an entirely different matter.

 

Also, do note that Accordance already has some ANE material available. These items are:

Sources

Ugaritic Data Bank

Dead Sea Scrolls (The non-biblical material) and translations

Judean Desert Corpus and translations

Textbook of Aramaic Documents from Ancient Egypt and translations

Northwest Semitic Inscriptions and translations

Hebrew Inscriptions and translations

Literature

Context of Scripture

Light from the Ancient East

..and possibly more, but I think I got them all.

With kind regards

Pchris

[Daniel Francis]

I consider them fairly important, but at the same point in time i get enough from references to them in places like Anchor and Hermenia. I honestly do not think I would purchase them if they became available. That said I can understand a academic need for them.

 

-Dan

[Juan D. Pinto]

I'll throw in my two cents and say that I've always thought the potential of a program like Accordance to contribute to scholarship in ANE topics is huge. I would absolutely love to see more ANE material, specifically ANE texts. I think that with more universal unicode implementation as the first step, then an expansion of related ancient Semitic texts in various languages, everything that already makes Accordance great would then turn it into a serious must-have for ANE scholars in general.

Having said that, I very much appreciate that the primary focus of Accordance has always been the biblical text, and agree that it should certainly stay that way. If there is one thing Accordance should always do beautifully right, it is the Bible. But man what I would give for more ANE resources that fully tap into the power of Accordance.

 

 

Juan

[Michel Gilbert]

 

Hi Pchris,

 

Here are a few quick thoughts.

 

I taught the ANE Religions course at McGill for four years. I'm also the one who developed and wrote the current course description in McGill's catalogue. So, I'm all for more ANE resources.

 

However, I'm sure we both could write several volumes about which resources to include, rationales for and against their inclusion, and underlying philosophical and pedagogical considerations. For instance, should Acc cater to Egyptologists or Assyriologists, or if to both, which one first? Or, should Acc cater to someone like me, who interprets the Bible in its ANE context? That would seem more in line with their Bible first philosophy, and would be a logical extension of it. This would include at the very least comparative Semitic linguistics, historical studies, and comparative religious studies,

 

Once there was general agreement, how would it be implemented? First, Juan is correct, that the project would require full Unicode compliance. Second, in what order should the books appear? Would it be a good first step to concentrate on comparative Semitics, and link the cognates in the Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon to the standard Egyptian, Ugaritic, and Akkadian dictionaries? This would at least cater to biblical scholars. But, most of these would have to be typed, or checked manually if scanned, e.g., Wörterbuch der Aegyptischen Sprache is hand-written. Third, there would be a need for the standard grammars. But, for instance, would we choose Huehnergard's Grammar of Akkadian, probably the standard in North America, or Ungnad's Akkadian Grammar? Which Ugaritic grammar would we choose? Bordreuil and Pardee's Manual of Ugaritic, Tropper's Ugaritische Grammatik, or another, and why? Manual of Ugaritic is already on CD, so would we choose it because it is digitized already, and it is in English? If Acc caters to scholars, they would have to include German and many other non-English works. Fourth, since it would be difficult to be comprehensive, should Acc concentrate on just one area, i.e., on Egypt, Mesopotamia, or Syria-Palestine? Would we choose based on available resources, likelihood of attaining digital texts or copyrights, or, on something as simple as a majority vote?

 

I also don't think we should give the impression to Forum members that there aren't many good ANE resources geared to the non-specialist, with beautiful and helpful illustrations, too numerous to list, but, for example, The Cultural Atlas of Ancient Egypt, and The Cultural Atlas of Mesopotamia and the Ancient Near East. And, there are translations of ANE texts of varying worth. I'm surprised no-one has mentioned Foster's Before the Muses: An Anthology of Akkadian Literature. Should Acc just concentrate on them?

 

Finally, Acc would probably have to change their philosophy about gathering interest and actual capital to even begin a scholarly project.

 

So, of course I would like more ANE resources. But the odds seem stacked against it.

 

By the way, it would be nice to be able to address you by your name, instead of Pchris.

 

Regards,

 

Michel

Edited November 12, 2014 by Michel Gilbert

[Timothy Jenney]

I am also an ANE fan, as it was there that I started my scholarly journey to Bible study years ago. I still draw upon those insights, as you can see in podcast #99 Genesis One, I can think of two solutions to adding more ANE resources to Accordance:

 

1. Establish such a large and profitable user base that we could develop these sorts of resources without being concerned about a reasonable return on investment.

2. Receive a grant from a foundation to help offset the development of such resources.

 

Remember, even major universities have trouble supporting ANE departments, the reason the major is limited to the likes of Harvard, Yale, Chicago, Michigan (my alma mater), John Hopkins, Berkley, and the like. They rely upon wealthy patrons to establish and maintain such departments and their faculties, libraries, and archaeological expeditions.

 

Anyone on the forums have some really deep pockets and a passion for this area?

[Mike Thigpen]

The SBL Writings from the Ancient World series would be a great addition alongside others that have been mentioned. The more technical series like State Archives of Assyria would also be great to have especially tagged.

 

Mike

[Λύχνις Δαν]

I'm somewhat torn on this one. I personally really like the idea of more such material appearing in Acc. I would love to be able to read Gilgamesh in Akkadian. But I would not buy such material in the original languages unless I had some grasp of them (or was acquiring it), a thing which does not seem likely to happen. But that does speak to Michel's comments concerning provision of lexica and grammars. I think Dr. J is spot on that a funding source is required. I doubt this material would self-fund based on sales after development, or at least not any time soon, whatever the cultural or scholarly benefit that would derive from the effort. The only thing I have to add would to suggest perhaps a crowd funding approach might be worth considering.

 

One final point, to Michel's comment concerning non-specialist resources in the area. They might garner more interest if they had strong links to biblical study and contained good translations of the original materials.

 

Thx

D

[Peter Brylov Christensen]

Great feedback so far And thank you all for your comments!

 

@Dan - I understand why you find them important but at the same time won't invest in them: The text sources are very inaccessible even with translations, unless you decide to dedicate at least 6 years of your life to learn the respective original languages and cuneiform like I did. It's a long unforgiving trek, so good, thorough commentary series like Hermeneia and Anchor Bible is a great way to use relevant ANE material without having to essentially become an Assyriologist/Egyptologist. I guess one the reasons I went further than the Biblical languages was the same reason for wanting to learn Greek and Hebrew: I wished to see for myself what's behind the translations we all normally use. A translation is the sum of choices we make when we try to make sense of any given text, and as such, you never see the other possible choices that could've been made instead (unless there's a critical apparatus). So in short, I want the big picture of it all. But more importantly, I did it to be able to see the linguistic ties between ANE material and the Bible.

 

@Juan: I can only agree! Accordance is a power house and the ideal tool for dealing with ANE material. There is so much potential here. And they shouldn't stray from their identity as Bible software. That would be bad.

 

@Michel: The Bible comes first for me, too, and is the main focus of my studies. The ANE texts are in that regard tools for me to understand the Bible better, although I must admit that I also study the ANE texts in their own right. They're so much fun to work with, once you get into them. And you're right about the issue with Egyptology vs. Assyriology and what to focus on first. In retrospect, maybe I should've added a few more choices to the poll to address that issue. But, as you and Juan said, the Bible comes first, and I agree.

As for what area to focus on first, it's a toss-up for me in spite of my personal affinity with the Sumero-Akkadian material: It's all equally important to the understanding of the Bible. So I'm not sure what to answer here. But from a practical point of view, I guess that it would be a good place to start with the Ugaritic material merely due to the fact that Accordance already has the Ugarit Data Bank available. The next step would then be to make grammars and dictionaries available and finally tag the texts to these language tools. As for what grammars and dictionaries, that's a different story. I would personally recommend Stanislav Segert's A Basic Grammar of the Ugaritic language for beginners, Josef Tropper's Ugaritische Grammatik (in German) for the more experienced (although Pardee's grammar is a better choice for English-speaking users) and Olmo Lete & Sanmartín's Ugaritic Dictionary in the Alphabetic Tradition, but there are, of course, many other books to choose from. In a perfect world, all of it should become available, but I'm afraid that we do have to choose, as you pointed out.

 

Oh, and my name is Peter Christensen. I'm a Biblical scholar from the University of Copenhagen - I didn't give it much thought when I made this account, but using a pseudonym is indeed impractical at times.

 

@Dr. J: Ideally, the first option would be best, which sort of is what I'm trying to do with this poll - but I guess that the second option sounds more realistic. If only I knew of a rich patron! Maybe a mix of both options could happen? Also, this might be a dumb question on my part, but what would be a sufficiently large user base? Are we talking tens or maybe hundreds of people?

@Mike: I'm very happy that you mentioned the State Archives of Assyria! Even among Assyriologists, Assyrian texts usually receive very little attention (which is saying quite a lot).

 

@Daniel: Hm, crowd funding is not too far-fetched! Coupled with the two options that Dr. J. mentioned, it might just work..

 

With kind regards

 

Peter Christensen (Pchris)

[Michel Gilbert]

Hi Peter,

 

Even though my affinity is with the Egyptian material, I agree that practically Ugaritic would be the place to start. If Acc started with A Dictionary of the Ugaritic Language in the Alphabetic Tradition, linked its entries to HAL, and tagged the texts of the Ugaritic Data Bank, I think many would buy it. I would chime in regarding my own preferences for grammars and secondary literature if Acc actually began such a project.

 

Perhaps you could search for funding for tagging the Ugaritic texts. Or negotiate with Acc to do so. You could tag the UDB texts with parsing information and a gloss, and links to DULAT for when it becomes available.

 

Regards,

 

Michel

[Peter Brylov Christensen]

 

Hi Peter,

 

Even though my affinity is with the Egyptian material, I agree that practically Ugaritic would be the place to start. If Acc started with A Dictionary of the Ugaritic Language in the Alphabetic Tradition, linked its entries to HAL, and tagged the texts of the Ugaritic Data Bank, I think many would buy it. I would chime in regarding my own preferences for grammars and secondary literature if Acc actually began such a project.

 

Perhaps you could search for funding for tagging the Ugaritic texts. Or negotiate with Acc to do so. You could tag the UDB texts with parsing information and a gloss, and links to DULAT for when it becomes available.

 

Regards,

 

Michel

 

 

I think I'll see how this poll goes first. If plenty of people express positive interest for more ANE material (maybe 20 people or so), I'll then make a new poll based on your thoughts and distinctions, for instance: What sort of ANE material do we all even want? Should it be Sumero-Akkadian, Northwest semitic, Egyptian or something different like Hittite? Or will literature about the ANE like Context of Scripture do just fine? Once that has been settled, I'll talk to the Accordance team again about adding ANE texts and then see what our options are in terms of obtaining licenses. At any rate, rather than just me pitching self-serving ideas for ANE material, I'll let popular demand decide instead, should there be any - if not, I'll then do some research on external funding for the tagging of Ugaritic texts. In a way, the project has already begun with the texts being available and all, so it might not be impossible to talk someone into helping out financially!

 

With kind regards

 

Peter

Edited November 12, 2014 by Pchris

[Robert Holmstedt]

There are myriad secondary sources, many of which become dated and less usable within 10-15 years. Accordance's original focus has been on original language corpora related to biblical studies and, in my opinion, this is sets them apart and should continue to be their focus.

 

For instance, while I am slowly expanding the NWS module (especially the Phoenician texts and revising the Hebrew), the Ugaritic database is not morphological tagged. Granted, with languages like Ugaritic or the other NWS epigraphic texts, there is less clarity on the morphological tagging than the Hebrew Masoretic tradition provides, a good scholarly educated guess at the morphology would be useful to students and scholars alike. Translations reflect the same "guess" but don't provide the explicit language analysis that a morph (and syntax) tagged text provides serious students.

 

So, if we are going to encourage Accordance to expand, let's do it in the direction of its existing strengths — ancient textual corpora that are morphologically tagged, not modern scholarship.

[Brian K. Mitchell]

... Accordance's original focus has been on original language corpora related to biblical studies and, in my opinion, this is sets them apart and should continue to be their focus...So, if we are going to encourage Accordance to expand, let's do it in the direction of its existing strengths — ancient textual corpora that are morphologically tagged, not modern scholarship.

 

I agree 100% with the sentiment expressed above.

 

Of, course I would not mind if Accordance/OakTree released more ANE, but I wouldn't be interested in buying much it. I would much rather see a module of digital images of the Leningrad Codex (Firkovich B 19 A) as well as more Masorah, too.

[Michel Gilbert]

Hi,

 

I agree with Dr. Holmstedt, that the focus should be on morphologically (and syntactically) tagged texts. That is where I think Acc should start with the Ugaritic material. But then, a lexicon would definitely be useful for students, and to most scholars. I also agree regarding translations. But if a few grammars were included, they contain translations and often language analysis for them. It is also useful to compare analyses of the same passage in different grammars. The best grammars would also be updated in new editions.

 

With regard to the Egyptian material, I would be happy if someone would tag just the material related to biblical creation texts and some of the wisdom literature. Perhaps I will be in a position to do so in a few years if no-one else does it.

 

Regards,

 

Michel

[Robert Holmstedt]

I stand happily corrected — analyzed texts, lexica, and select reference grammars (not teaching grammars) go hand-in-hand in serious work; I simply overlooked the latter in my earlier comment.

[Michel Gilbert]

Hi Robert,

I was just clarifying, certainly not correcting.

Regards,

Michel

[Anthony Pyles]

I concur that Ugaritic would provide a natural starting place, and that tagged texts and standard reference works are the best focus. This is an exciting discussion!

[Robert Holmstedt]

Michel,

 

Sometimes clarification is correction, and rightly so. I certainly took no offence. :-)

 

Best,

Robert

[Niko]

While I will support and buy the ANE stuff, I still wish that we someday see a syriac lexicon to support our wonderful tagged syriac OT and NT.

[Peter Brylov Christensen]

I concur that Ugaritic would provide a natural starting place, and that tagged texts and standard reference works are the best focus. This is an exciting discussion!

 

 

It sure is - and the poll is looking good, too! But I got to admit, that I wanted the "nay-sayers" to voice their opinions as well rather than just voting, as it would've nuanced the discussion a lot more, even though I do respect the principle of anonymity. And they still contribute to the statistics, at least, so that we may obtain an even more clear picture of the Accordance user base: It would seem weird if everyone on the poll agreed that the ANE texts are extremely important. Anyway, once/if the poll hits 20 people, who say yes to more ANE sources for Accordance, I'll make another poll concerning the specific areas of ANE material. But maybe it would indeed be better to focus completely on the Ugaritic tagging project instead, seeing that we have the Ugaritic Data Bank already.

 

While I will support and buy the ANE stuff, I still wish that we someday see a syriac lexicon to support our wonderful tagged syriac OT and NT.

 

Are you referring to Michael Sokoloff's or Payne Smith's Syriac lexicon? While the latter is slightly outdated, both are great resources! I prefer the former for another reason as well - The font of choice in Payne Smith's lexicon, Serṭa, is very hard on the eyes in contrast to Esṭrangela, the font used in Sokoloff's lexicon, which is more easy to read (in my opinion)

 

With kind regards

 

Pchris

Edited November 14, 2014 by Pchris

[Niko]

Either or both. Sokoloff would be great. I have Payne Smith in an another bible software (that let's me change the font to serta or estrangela), but Accordance is my number one choice.