Adam and I often discuss this very topic. Today it came up as Mandy and I were translating Lachish 3. For those not in the know, Lachish was a city in ancient Israel which was sacked by the Babylonians. The ostraca from Lachish date to circa 590BCE, according to Gibson. Lachish 3 is a letter from Hoshiyahu to his governor/lord/commander Yaush.
So, how does Lachish 3 have anything to do with literacy in ancient Israel? Well, as Mandy and I were working on way through the Lachish ostraca this morning we came upon it and began translating much like we normally would. When we worked our way to lines 7-10 though, we were just amazed. Here are the relevant lines, with Gogel’s transcription and our own (very rough) translation:
7 ˓bd[k] . dwh . m˒z . šlḥk . ˒l . ˓bd
8 k . wky . ˒mr . ˒dny . l˒ . yd˓th .
9 qr˒ . spr . ḥyhwh . ˒m . nsh . ˒
10 yš . lqr˒ . ly . spr . lnṣḥ . wgm .
7. the heart (from line six) your servant is sick from when you sent (the letter) to your servant
8. and because my lord said “you do not know
9. to read a letter.” As YHVH lives, no one has ever tried
10. to read to me a letter
So, we have dear old Hoshiyahu here, and apparently Yaush had recently sent him a letter in which the later told the former “you do not know to read a letter.” Our friend Hoshiyahu is quite distraught at this accusation, and immediately sets out to correct it. Specifically he explains in lines 9-10 that he does not need someone to read letters to him. Gogel’s translation leaves less to the imagination than mine, specifying “you do not know HOW to read a letter.” Gibson has it as a question, “Cant you read a letter?” which makes it somewhat more insulting.
There are, of course, several ways to interpret these lines. It may not be that Yaush literally thinks Hoshiyahu can’t read, but rather that he simply believes Hoshiyahu hasn’t been reading his correspondence. Regardless, Hoshiyahu’s response implies that he takes his ability to read as a serious matter. This is what brings me back around to the topic of the present post.
I’m not particularly an expert on the literacy of ancient Israel, though my interest in the Wisdom Literature, and specifically my interest in the historical and religious contexts that occasioned the writing of said literature, also perks my interest in literacy in the ANE. Based on Lachish 3, one might note the following things about literacy in the ANE:
1. It was not universal–this probably goes without saying since literacy is not universal in modern day America, but still.
2. Hoshiyahu, at least, considers reading to be an important thing. He is quick to defend his ability to do such.
3. Some people (perhaps some people among Hoshiyahu’s acquaintances, or at least among his own class?) do not read their letters for themselves, but rather have them read to them
I’m not sure that any of the above three are particularly unique. But they do confirm that literacy was not ubiquitous in ancient Israel. Further, the letter appears to make clear that at least some individuals considered the ability to read to be an important thing, at least important enough to correct someone with the wrong impression. Finally, the letter also implied that some people who had cause to receive letters could not read them, but rather had them read. It is this group that Hoshiyahu does not want to be confused with.
An interesting post, thank you.
Perhaps you are already aware of this volume, but it may be worth a peek on this topic. It is by one of my teachers, Jim Crenshaw: Education in Ancient Israel: Across the Deadening Silence.
The evidence certainly seems to point to a quite aural culture. See, for instance, Ezra’s public re-reading of the Torah, which needs to be translated into Aramaic so the crowds will understand it to boot! I would also argue that the various Hebrew wordplays come out most effectively, at times, when the text is read aloud.
And yes, there does seem to be a certain special ‘caste’ of those who can write. There are writing prophets . . . Habakkuk, for instance.
I wonder, though, if having a letter read to you could also be less an issue of ability and more one of status. A rough comparison . . . at the end of Romans, Tertius (Paul’s scribe, presumably) introduces himself. Now, was Paul illiterate. I’m sure there are those who would say so, but based upon what I do know of Paul, I would argue quite the contrary.
And on this issue, it is always interesting for me to think about Jesus’ reading of the Isaiah text in Luke’s gospel. Was Jesus illiterate?
John, thanks for the comment. I am aware of Crenshaw’s book, though I haven’t had occasion to read through it yet.
I agree that the Israelites had a rather aural culture–at least by the time of Ezra. Reconstructing such a thing in the pre-exilic period becomes more troublesome, though I don’t necessarily see a reason to argue for a significant difference between the two periods.
Its interesting to consider the idea that having one to read to you would be an issue of status. I may need to do a bit more footwork on that. It seems obvious that Hoshiyahu doesn’t think so–but A) I could be reading the ostracon incorrectly and B) Lachish 3 certainly isn’t the whole story.
Nice post, thanks.
I agree that Lachish 3 is indicative of literacy among some professionals. How broad this was is hard to know. I’ve often wondered about the number of bullae and seals and the extent to which their owners were literate. And of course, there is always the definitional problem. What does it mean to be literate? Semi-literate? As early as 1955 A Lods claimed that the Siloam inscription was workman’s graffiti. And that view is still held by quite a few scholars today. See R. Altman, “Some Notes on Inscriptional Genres and
the Siloam Tunnel Inscription,” Antiguo Oriente, 5, 2007, 79 for a few references. And look at the Khirbet El Qom tomb inscriptions and tell me you think professional scribes or engravers wrote them. While not directly related, I think Sin-na’di’s letter to his king (Sargon II?) asking for a scribe is instructive. This letter, K 652, is, of course, in neo-Assyrian (Simo Parpola, “The Man Without a Scribe and the Question of Literacy in the Assyrian Empire,” AOAT, 247, 1997, 315-324.
I think Duane’s reference to the Parpola publication is extremely fascinating–the letter is instructive for several reasons. One of which is that when talking about ancient literacy I don’t think we should get a binary situation in mind–either literate or not. There is a spectrum of literacy as seen in K 652 and likely this was also the case in ancient Israel.
Forgot to mention–I have an old post that has a link to some other articles that contribute to the topic of ancient literacy (and many of the articles are available for free download). http://awilum.com/?cat=37