Thread by @JamesBejon

THREAD: Gold & Silver.

This morning at @Tyndale_House, we read a 2nd mill. BC text from Alalakh (Syria).

The text doesn’t pull its punches.

It details a bequeathment,

and says anyone who challenges its contents must fork out 1,000 shekels of silver and 100 of gold:

In the ancient Near East, the rate of exchange between silver and gold fluctuated considerably over time and space.

In Mesopotamia, it was generally between 6:1 and 15:1.

At Ugarit, I’ve seen it as low as 4:1.

The ratio of 10:1 attested in our text seems likely to have been close to the then-present exchange rate (cp. Zaccagnini 1991),

...which would make sense.

It would have provided a kind of hedging mechanism (in case one of the metals became particularly cheap/expensive in relation to the other).

Against that backdrop, let’s consider some of the payments recorded in the Biblical narrative.

In 2 Kgs. 5, the king of Syria sends a gift to the king of Israel. He sends 10 talents of silver and 6,000 (shekels) of gold.

Note: Like our text from Alalakh, the unit attached to the first figure (‘talents’) is explicitly supplied. The second is left for the reader to infer (on the basis it designates a similar sum to the first).

Given the Syrian definition of a talent (60 minas x 50 shekels), these 6,000 shekels would have amounted to 2 talents. (It would make sense for the king to have sent a round number of shekels.)

As such, the king of Syria sent a gift/payment of silver and gold in the ratio 5 to 1.

That’s towards the lower end of the range we noted above.

Other payments in Scripture typically involve higher silver-to-gold ratios (in roughly the range noted above).

For instance, the ratio of silver to gold in the exiles’ contributions to the Temple is 6.5 to 1 (cp. Ezra 8.26, though the text is difficult).

David’s contribution to the Temple is in the ratio 10 to 1 (cp. 1 Chr. 22).

And the ratio of gold to silver bowls in the Temple was over 20 to 1 (cp. Ezra 1.9-10), though that wasn’t really a *payment* as such.

Of particular interest is the payment recorded in 2 Kgs. 18.

In the days of Hezekiah, Sennacherib (the king of Assyria) marched against Judah.

Sennacherib is said to have captured a number of ‘fortified cities’ and to have demanded a payment of 300 talents of silver and 30 talents of gold.

Sennacherib’s Prism mentions Sennacherib’s demand too.

But the records of 2 Kgs. 18 and Sennacherib’s Prism don’t seem to cohere.

2 Kgs. 18 says Sennacherib demanded 300 talents of silver from Hezekiah,

while Sennacherib’s Prism says Hezekiah paid him *800* talents of silver (rather than 300),

...which makes the ratio of silver to gold recorded on Sennacherib’s Prism rather odd, viz. 26⅔ to 1.

(For a king to have such a ratio of silver to gold in their possession would not, of course, be odd; what would be odd is for someone to have demanded a payment of silver and gold in such a ratio.)

The text of 2 Kgs. 18.15, however, provides us with a clue as to what might have transpired.

Apparently, then, Hezekiah didn’t (just) give Sennacherib the ‘round number’ of talents he initially demanded. He gave him all the silver he could lay his hands on.

What initially, therefore, looks like an inconsistency between the texts of 2 Kgs. 18 and Sennacherib’s Prism is consistent with a more detailed consideration of their contents.

The text of 2 Kgs. 18 records Sennacherib’s demand,

which involves the kind of round/hedged ratio we might expect it to,

while Sennacherib’s Prism records what Hezekiah actually paid him--namely as much silver as he could find--,

which accounts for the unusual ratio recorded on the prism.

Or least so my hypothesis goes.

Ultimately, however, my hypothesis is only a *possible* way to explain/reconcile the texts mentioned above.

Whether it’s what actually happened I can’t say.

What I *can* say, however, is that the careful study of Scripture is always worth the effort.

THE END.