Lukasz Niesiolowski-Spanò, «Where Should One Look for Gideon’s Ophra?», Vol. 86 (2005) 478-493
The hypothesis presented in this article offers a new way of explaining a number
of discrepancies in the biblical text. Perhaps more importantly, it opens the door
to the identification of a place known from the biblical tradition with a known site
of archaeological importance. Finally, the identification of Ophra with Ramat
Rahel, which in ancient times was very likely called hrp(-tyb@ / rp(-tyb@, sheds light
on the tradition of connecting Ephratah (htrpa) with Judah, (1 Chr 1,19. 50), and
the hitherto difficult hrp( tyb@ in Mic 1,10.
Where Should One Look for Gideon’s Ophra? 493
the enigmatic judge Ibzan from Bethlehem can be found (Judg 12,8-
10). Even more striking effects can be seen if we accept Gideon as the
Judahite hero.
*
**
The place name Ophra, attested in the narrative about Gideon in
Judges, seems to have only a secondary connection with the clan of
Abiezer and the tribe of Manasseh. The toponym itself, transmitted in
MT, is possibly an artificial, altered form of the original name. As such
it could be derived from one of the interrelated roots ¿rp or ÷rp and
preserved in the LXX as Efraqa. This assumption permits the
hypothesis of identifying Ophra, known from the Gideon story with
Ephrata, and other place names (e.g., Beth-leaphrah in Mic 1,10). Most
of the possibilities suggest a relationship with the territory of Judah.
The identification of Gideon’s city, where the important role was
reserved for a fortress or tower, with Ephrata in Judah, finds support
not only in linguistics but in archaeology as well. A good candidate for
the city of such an important hero, a judge of royal charism, is modern
Ramat-Rahel. The structures excavated there, used as a fortress and
royal residence, might have been the original location where Gideon’s
narrative (Judges 6) took place. Whatever the original toponym
(*Ephra; *Migdal-Ephra; *Bet-Ephra), it could have been connected
with Gideon. The reason why the redactors altered the text, and
“moved†Gideon’s city northward to the territory of Manasseh was the
literary conflict between two important figures of Judahite origins, the
king-like Gideon and David, king par excellence.
Institute of History; Ã’ukasz NIESIOÃ’OWSKI-SPANÃ’
Warsaw University
Krakowskie Przedmie¢cie 26/28
00-927 Warsaw, Poland
SUMMARY
The hypothesis presented in this article offers a new way of explaining a number
of discrepancies in the biblical text. Perhaps more importantly, it opens the door
to the identification of a place known from the biblical tradition with a known site
of archaeological importance. Finally, the identification of Ophra with Ramat
Rahel, which in ancient times was very likely called hrp[AtyB / rp[AtyB, sheds light
on the tradition of connecting Ephratah (htrpa) with Judah, (1 Chr 1,19. 50), and
the hitherto difficult hrp[l tyB in Mic 1,10.