Nadav Na’aman, «Jebusites and Jabeshites in the Saul and David Story-Cycles», Vol. 95 (2014) 481-497
This article re-examines the historical role of the Jebusites in the early monarchical period. The Jebusites, whose name is derived from the verb YBŚ («to be dry»), were a West Semitic pastoral clan that split into two segments, one settling in western Gilead and the other around Jerusalem. The two segments kept their tribal solidarity, as indicated by Saul’s campaign to rescue Jabesh-gilead. The Jebusite stronghold was one of Saul’s power bases, and David took it over. The biased description of David’s conquest influenced the way the Jebusites were presented in the late (Deuteronomistic) biblical historiography and in Israelite cultural memory.
001_naman_co_481-497 13/02/15 11:20 Pagina 483
JEBUSITES AND JABESHITES IN THE SAUL AND DAVID STORY-CYCLES 483
posit that refugees from the crumbling Hittite Empire migrated to
Canaan in the late second millennium BCE and settled in the high-
land regions 9.
Scholars still debate the identity and historicity of the other three
“nations” (Hivites, Perizzites and Girgashites), and consensus is
yet to be reached 10. It is thus evident that the historicity of each of
the seven “nations”, among them the Jebusites, should be studied
in its own right.
All other claims raised against the historicity of the Jebusites also
carry little weight. The lack of supportive evidence for the presence
of the Jebusites in Jerusalem proves nothing, as no extra-biblical
source is available to supply this information 11. Also, the fact that
some writers selected other ethnic names to describe the pre-Israelite
inhabitants of Jerusalem (see Gen 5,18-20; Josh 10,5-6; Judg 1,4-8;
Ezek 16,3.45) does not disprove the historicity of the Jebusites 12.
Biblical writers felt free to describe the antiquity of Jerusalem in a
way that fitted their historiographical objectives and/or ideological
messages and were not bound to a single fixed name. Finally, the
observations that the list of six or seven nations is used to delineate
between the pre-Israelites and Israelites, and that the scribes used
the name Jebusite to distinguish between the people who lived in
the pre-Israelite and Israelite city of Jerusalem, are irrelevant for es-
tablishing the historicity of the latter group 13. The historiographical
objectives of the writers and the manner in which they used certain
9
N. NA’AMAN, “Queen Mothers and Ancestors Cult in Judah in the First
Temple Period”, Berührungspunkte. Studien zur Sozial und Religionsge-
schichte Israels und seiner Umwelt. Festschrift für Rainer Albertz zu seinem
65. Geburtstag (eds. I. KOTTSIEPER – R. SCHMITT – J. WÖHRLE) (AOAT 350;
Münster 2008) 479-490, with earlier literature.
10
For discussions, see G.E. MENDENHALL, The Tenth Generation. The Ori-
gins of the Biblical Tradition (Baltimore, MD 1974) 142-163; H.M. NIEMANN,
“Das Ende des Volkes der Perizziter. Über soziale Wandlungen Israels im
Spiegel einer Begriffsgruppe”, ZAW 105 (1993) 233-257; A. LEMAIRE, “Hiw-
wites, Perizzites et Girgashites: Essai d’identification ethnique”, Stimulation
from Leiden. Collected Communications to the XVIIIth IOSOT Congress
Leiden 2004 (eds. H.M. NIEMANN – M. AUGUSTIN) (BEATAJ 54; Frankfurt
am Main 2006) 219-224, with earlier literature.
11
HÜBNER, “Jerusalem und die Jebusiter”, 34.
12
UEHLINGER, “Die ‘Jebusiter’”, 260-261; HÜBNER, “Jerusalem und die
Jebusiter”, 36-37.
13
HÜBNER, “Jerusalem und die Jebusiter”, 36-38.
FOLLOW US