Jeremy M. Hutton, «'Bethany beyond the Jordan' in Text, Tradition, and Historical Geography», Vol. 89 (2008) 305-328
Origen selected e0n Bhqabara|~ in John 1,28 as the superior reading in his Comm. Jo., an assessment challenged by modern critics. Although the text-critical data seem to indicate e0n Bhqani/a|~ as the preferable reading, this claim may be
questioned on literary and redactional grounds. Those same observations provide evidence for intentional literary commemoration of John’s ministry at the Jordan. Origen’s gloss of Bhqabara|~ as “House of Preparation” (oi]koj kataskeuh~j) leads to an examination of Mk 1,2-3, and its lexical divergence from LXX Mal 3,1.22-23 [=MT vv. 23-24]; Isa 40,3. Mark anomalously uses the verb kataskeua/zw, the nominal counterpart of which (kataskeuh~) renders Heb. hdfbo(j “work, preparation” (LXXAB Exod 35,24), which is graphically similar to hrb( tyb. When combined with historical-geographical study of the area surrounding Jericho,
these data allow us to trace the process of textual and traditional development whereby the toponym hbr( tyb (Josh 15,6.61; 18,22), preserved at the modern H}. ( E!n el-G.arabe, served as the toponymic antecedent of both Bhqabara|~ and Beth Barah (Judg 7,24). This process of development provides additional defense
for the traditional localization of John’s ministry in the southern Jordan River Valley near the el-Mag.tas and H9ag]la fords.
“Bethany beyond the Jordan†325
(3.a) Etiological misanalysis in the southern Levant, predicated on the
proximity of a few major fords to the settlement bˇt ‘arabË, occasioned
the development of a new toponym bˇt ‘abarË (hrb[ tyb), which much
later became Greek Bhqabara/'. Moreover, the full toponym bˇt ‘abarË
(hrb[ tyb) may have been clipped, such that the name was preserved as
bˇt barË (hrb tyb) in a few instances (Judg 7,24).
(3.b) The translators of the Old Greek (and possibly also the tradents
who worked in Greek, such as Origen and Eusebius) seem to have
made the same misanalysis independently, representing *gμarabv
(written as hbr[, and therefore graphically indistinct from ‘arabË in
Hebrew manuscripts) without the g characteristic of LXX’s
representation of original Heb. */gμ/ (i.e., Bhqaraba' instead of an
expected Bhqgaraba' or the like). Text-critically speaking, metathesis
of the consonants b and r (e.g., LXXB at Josh 18,22) can only have
been compounded by the existence of so many similar names.
(4) It is unclear whether the graphic corruption of a Hebrew text, an
intentional play on words, or possibly somehow a corruption of an oral
tradition (?) may have yielded the tradition of John’s being one who
would “prepare†(kataskeuavzw) for Jesus at a “House of Preparationâ€
(oi\ko" kataskeuh'" < *hd:bo[} tyb < *hrb[ tyb) preserved in Mk 1,2, and
picked up by Origen in his Commentary on John.
Although appearing complicated, this schema seems to me to be
the most economical way to read the textual variants that must also
serve as our textual witnesses. But a nagging question remains: if the
toponymic antecedent for these various geographical names lay on the
western bank of the Jordan River, how is it that John 1,28 preserved a
tradition of John’s ministry on the eastern bank? The answer, once
again, lies in a critical study of the toponymic environment of the
Levant.
Due to what Elitzur calls the “territorial nature of geographical
names†(74) it is not uncommon for toponyms to be displaced ca. 7.0-
8.5 km away from the historical location of the site (75). In short, even
(73) R.C. STEINER, “On the Dating of Hebrew Sound Changes (*H > H˘ and
â‰
*GËœ > ‘) and Greek Translations (2 Esdras and Judith)â€, JBL 124 (2005) 229-267.
( ) ELITZUR, Ancient Place Names, 128; see also ibid., 13, 119, etc.; and
74
idem, “The Concept of Territory in the Arab Village and in Biblical Geographyâ€,
Israel Land and Nature 7 (1982) 146-150.
(75) AHARONI, Land of the Bible, 123; A.F. RAINEY, “The Toponymics of
Eretz-Israelâ€, BASOR 231 (1978) 10; J.M. MILLER, “Rehoboam’s Cities of De-
fense and the Levitical City Listâ€, Archaeology and Biblical Interpretation. Es-
says in Memory of D. Glenn Rose (eds. L.G. PERDUE – L.E. TOOMBS – G.L.
JOHNSON) (Atlanta, GA 1987) 275; idem, “Site Identification: A Problem Area in
Contemporary Biblical Scholarshipâ€, ZDPV 99 (1983) 123-124.