Review of Alejandro F. Botta, The Aramaic Legal Tradition at Elephantine: An

7KH$UDPDLFDQG(J\SWLDQ/HJDO7UDGLWLRQVDW(OHSKDQWLQH $Q(J\SWRORJLFDO$SSURDFK UHYLHZ 3DPHOD%DUPDVK Hebrew Studies, Volume 52, 2011, pp. 443-445 (Review) 3XEOLVKHGE\1DWLRQDO$VVRFLDWLRQRI3URIHVVRUVRI+HEUHZ DOI: 10.1353/hbr.2011.0004 For additional information about this article http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hbr/summary/v052/52.barmash.html Access provided by Washington University @ St. Louis (20 Mar 2015 15:22 GMT) Hebrew Studies 52 (2011) 443 Reviews Nonetheless, this book can still be an invaluable resource for understanding both Second Temple Judaism and early Christianity, which sprang out of but eventually parted ways with it. I am certain that the readers will enjoy the book and find it extremely helpful in their study of Judaism in the Second Temple period and of early Christianity just as I did. Jin K. Hwang Fuller Theological Seminary Pasadena, CA 91182 jinhwang@fuller.edu THE ARAMAIC AND EGYPTIAN LEGAL TRADITIONS AT ELEPHANTINE: AN EGYPTOLOGICAL APPROACH. By Alejandro F. Botta. LSTS 64. Pp. xvii + 237. New York: T & T Clark, 2009. Cloth, $130.00. In this groundbreaking study, Alejandro F. Botta sheds light on the influence of Egyptian law on the Elephantine documents. Heretofore, the emphasis has been on the relationship between the Aramaic law of the Elephantine texts and Mesopotamian law. Botta’s profound and perspicacious knowledge of Egyptian texts, both legal and non-legal, has given him the tools to reshape our understanding of the law of the Elephantine documents. Recourse to Egyptian law in understanding the law of the rest of the ancient Near East has been relatively rare, and Botta’s research represents an important, if not crucial, corrective. Botta also makes a significant contribution to the philological and legal analysis of the Elephantine legal texts in and of themselves. In the first chapters of his volume, a revision of his 2001 Hebrew University dissertation, Botta presents the current state of research. Botta then delves into the problematics of Egyptian law. Despite the paucity of legal texts from Egypt, there is every indication that legal codifications were promulgated by the monarchy and that written legislation was familiar to Egyptians. At the same time, there is ample evidence that legal affairs were conducted orally, and, therefore, the written document that registered a legal action is distinct from the legal action as it took place orally. In the heart of Botta’s book, he presents an in-depth study of two Aramaic legal formulae, the jylX clause and the qxr clause. The first has received much attention from earlier scholarship, but the second has not. Botta explores the usage of the jylX clause in the Elephantine texts and the Samaria papyri and demonstrates that it is used with more nuances and less uniformity in the Elephantine texts. He explores the possibility that there Hebrew Studies 52 (2011) 444 Reviews was a distinction between possession and ownership because in some documents, the formula wh $lyz is used in place of the jylX clause, but demonstrates that in fact the use of one rather than the other depends on different scribal traditions. In his discussion of the origins of the jylX clause, Botta attempts to surmount the problems of Egyptian law and the scarcity of Egyptian legal texts by recourse to non-legal texts. He finds the equivalent expression in the use of the shém formula, a formula widely attested and congruent in meaning with the jylX clause. Here, we might wish for an additional kind of evidence, data that would decisively demonstrate that the Egyptian word would be rendered as jylX in Aramaic, perhaps in a bilingual inscription or an Aramaic translation of an Egyptian text, but such evidence cannot apparently be found. The early and continuing usage of the Egyptian formula supports the claim that the Aramaic clause was patterned after the Egyptian clause, and Botta argues that this is an example of Aramaic being the conduit through which Egyptian legal formulae reached Mesopotamia. Botta devotes the remainder of his volume to an extended analysis of the qxr clause. He demonstrates that it had a metaphorical meaning in the Elephantine texts rather than indicating a physical act of withdrawal and abandonment of the property and that it indicated a final renunciation of rights to that property or associated legal action. He demonstrates that the qxr clause fits closely with the uses of the Egyptian verb wy and that any link with a cuneiform origin is greatly strained. In his lengthy and insightful analysis of Egyptian texts, he demonstrates the widespread usage of distance as a legal metaphor and as a legal formula in Egypt from earliest times. A number of verbs were used to express this. Furthermore, the proliferation of this clause in non-legal texts in a period from which few legal texts are extant suggests that the formula was widely known. In addition, we have just one attestation of the formula in the same period in Mesopotamia, a period from which we have numerous legal documents, suggests that the formula was not widely known. Moreover, the wide and early usage in Egypt strongly suggests that the formula was not brought to Egypt by Aramean scribes. It would appear then that the withdrawal clause, the equivalent of the qxr clause in Egyptian locution, was borrowed into Aramaic from local Egyptian usage. The claim that the withdrawal clause original in Egypt is more than the evidence would support: it is present in both Egypt and Mesopotamia. However, while the scribes of Elephantine texts used it, it is not found in the Wadi Daliyeh texts: this phenomenon suggests that the Elephantine scribes assimilated the usage because they were located in Egypt at a time when the withdrawal clause was normative in Egyptian law. The Aramaic scribes did not mechanically transfer the Egyptian withdrawal clause into their stock of legal terminology. They added the temporal component “from this day and forever” in adopting and adapting the formula. Hebrew Studies 52 (2011) 445 Reviews The Egyptian usages of the withdrawal formula, such as in the withdrawal from an object or the withdrawal from a person in a lawsuit, always precede the Aramaic examples in time, and Egyptian law uses the withdrawal formula in ways the Aramaic does not. Added to this distribution is the lack of attestation of the withdrawal formula in Aramaic documents outside of Egypt. This evidence strongly suggests that the Aramaic usage is dependent on the Egyptian. In Botta’s final paragraph, he offers the suggestion that the Jewish scribes writing in Aramaic in Egypt may have been compelled by the need to produce legal documents valid in Egypt to incorporate and adapt Egyptian formulary, an intriguing bit of speculation. We might wonder whether this might shed light on whether the Elephantine colony was able to conduct its own internal legal affairs or was subject to Egyptian oversight. Among Botta’s contribution to the study of the Elephantine texts apart from the comparison to Egyptian legal terminology is his rigorous analysis of the classification of specific texts. For example, he compares the classification of TAD B2.2 by Cowley and Porten as a conveyance to be called “a deed of renunciation” or as “a withdrawal from land” and makes the argument that it should be designated as “a document of release.” This clarification may prove useful in future research. This first book by Botta promises to be the start of much insightful research by Botta and those who follow his example on the relationship between Egyptian law and the law of the ancient Near East, and those who are interested in the interconnections between ancient cultures will most definitely be enlightened and intrigued by this volume. Pamela Barmash Washington University in St. Louis St. Louis, MO 63130 pbarmash@wustl.edu THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS ON SEXUALITY: ATTITUDES TOWARDS SEXUALITY IN SECTARIAN AND RELATED LITERATURE AT QUMRAN. By William Loader. Pp. x + 439. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2009. Paper, $44.00. William Loader has given us what amounts to an encyclopedia on the topic of sexuality in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The book is divided into eight chapters, three of which focus on individual scrolls, four of which discuss groups of text organized by literary genre, and, finally, a concluding assessment of attitudes toward sexuality in the scrolls. The chapters are subdivided