Honor, Shame, and the Temple of Dagon: I Sam 5&6 in Context

I love this story, really I do and always have – but an understanding of Honor and Shame culture makes it even better. I was recently teaching it to a special needs adult (which meant that I had to teach every ounce of context as I went through – it’s actually an excellent way of pulling as much meaning out of the text as possible) and I was just floored by the things I had missed on my last read through.

Of course, Biblical scholars and secular archaeologists have long been aware that the stories about Dagon being a fish god are just that – stories – namely, Jewish Midrash developed long after the memory of true Dagan worship had faded. Instead, from the enormous amount of archaeological evidence we have unearthed (and by “we,” I mean other people), it is now clear that Dagon of the Philistines was a grain god (click to read) – which I can now support from the Biblical text as well. But that’s just a side issue – let’s get to the funny part.

This account doesn’t start out funny, much like the events chronicled in the Book of Esther, but builds to a series of hilarious climaxes. I will skip the disastrous battle against the Philistines in chapter 4, and the demise of Hophni and Phineas (good riddance) in order to begin in I Sam 5:1 “And the Philistines took the ark of God and brought it from Eben Ha’ezer to Ashdod.”

Eben Ha’ezer is actually the formal form of the well-known name Ebenezer – “the stone of help” – as Ebenezer Scrooge was the hardened curmudgeon who became a generous savior, so Eben Ha’ezer represents a place where God (our rock) is our helper. However, Israel acted presumptuously in removing the Ark from the permanent Tabernacle structure in Shiloh and placed it on the battlefield – specifically in the hands of two adulterous, encroaching, blasphemers. This is our first honor/shame milestone of the story – the holiest piece of furniture on earth was carried into battle by the most dishonorable of men, men whose status as priests made their offenses against God astronomically worse. This was a direct affront to God’s honor and so what did He do?

In the ancient world, remember, honor had nothing to do with a man’s integrity but instead his reputation. They didn’t care who you were on the inside, as we would judge honor, but who you were by birth and titles, and how you measured up to other men. Reputation was the lifeblood of the ancient world – if you had it, you had a golden ticket to whatever you desired, but if you had no honor, no one would have anything to do with you, or your sons or daughters. (If you are not acquainted with Honor and Shame culture, I suggest reading my family curriculum on the subject, which was designed for non-scholars).

Well, God returned the dishonor back upon the Israelites – they had no right to use Him like that, placing Him in the hands of sinful men. So God placed His Ark in the hands of heathen men who removed it entirely from the country. As the wife of Phineas had prophetically uttered in I Sam 4:22 “The esteem (honor) has departed from Israel, for the Ark of God has been taken.”

Going forward, we see that the Ark is taken into the house (a Biblical euphemism for a temple) of Dagon and set right by the idol of Dagon. Now, an idol was not believed to be the actual god itself, but instead, an intermediary – by feeding, bathing, perfuming, clothing, etc. the idol, they served as a sort of palace staff. They literally believed that the real Dagon out there in the universe was taking in sustenance and receiving rest as they cared for his idol, by proxy. This was called the house of a god for good reason – that is exactly how they saw it.

Imagine their horror when they woke up the next morning and the priests went into the “house” to awaken their god in order to bathe, perfume, clothe and feed him, only to find that it had fallen on its face “before the ark of the LORD.” In their eyes, their god was found to be prostrated before the Ark, and therefore was discovered worshipping the God of the Israelites. This would have been extremely puzzling as, in their eyes, Dagon had just defeated YHVH in battle (otherwise how could they have captured the Ark?). Why was Dagon worshipping his defeated foe? Kinda shameful, really, but they propped him back up, cared for him and went away. Who knows, maybe they hadn’t been feeding him enough and he passed out, or maybe the wine libation the day before had been a bit too strong. Did I sound like Elijah mocking the prophets of Ba’al there (I Kings 18)? Yeah, that was on purpose.

I imagine they were all anxious to find out what would happen the next day, and so they rose early and entered into the house of Dagon only to find, horror or horrors, Dagon was lying prostrate again – only this time two of the three most honorable parts of its body – the head and hands, were cut off. If you are familiar with ancient Near Eastern executions, you know that beheading was the least honorable death and the removal of hands was extremely shameful. Not only that, but they were laying on the threshold.

Threshold sacrifices were common in the ancient world, and I highly recommend H Clay Trumbull’s excellent work “The Threshold Covenant.” I did not cover this type of Covenant in my curriculum as it was outside the scope of the book, “Ten Commandments and the Covenants of Promise,” but they are very important to understand. The threshold of an ancient home or Temple would often have a small bowl cut or carved into the threshold – this is the place where animals were sacrificed at the arrival of an important guest, and whose meat would later be eaten in honor of that guest. The blood of the animal would fill the bowl in the threshold, hence the name of this type of sacrifice.

So, what we see here is the sacrifice of Dagon at the doorway to his own house in honor of YHVH. Dagon has not only been shamed in worshiping another god, a defeated god (in the eyes of the Philistines) but now he has been executed in the most painfully shameful way imaginable – in his own home, like an animal. Ouch.

But wait, there’s more. God started striking the Philistines with wasting tumors (5;6, 9) and, as we find out later, crop eating rats (6:11). They moved the Ark from city to city until it came to Ekron, and the inhabitants of that city would not allow it to be brought inside. So where did it go? This is important – and funny, but only when we realize that Dagon was a god of grain and not fish.

I Sam 6:1 “And the Ark of the LORD was in the field of the Philistines for seven new moons.”

Did you catch that? The Ark was placed in the midst of a field – that was Dagon’s domain – and for seven months Dagon couldn’t do a thing about it. This was seriously shameful. Not only couldn’t Dagon protect them, or himself, in the cities, in his own house – but he was also shown to be utterly impotent in his own cosmic functional domain – a field of crops. This was really bad – but it makes the story so much funnier.

I won’t bother going through the rest of the story because the focus of this teaching is very narrow, but it just goes to show how there are no small details in Scripture – not even the word “field” in I Sam 6:1 that we tend to read over without a second thought.

*****

Edit: Check out Lina’s comment, she’s absolutely right –

You have really whet my appetite to dig a little deeper. In rereading the account of Shimshon (Simson) in Judges 16, I couldn’t help but notice a possible correlation between him being humiliated & made to work ‘grinding the grain’ and that it was during the P’listim coming together to boast of their god Dagon offering him sacrifices that יהוה intervened strengthening his servant in destroying the things they held sacred!

Praised be He!🙌

Matthew Vander Els: In Judges 15, the foxes with the burning tails ran through the Philistine grain fields, as well.

 




Confronting Pseudo-Archaeological Memes Pt 3: Was Dagon of the Philistines a Fish God?

So, I saw this meme once – containing an image of a stone carving purported to be of the priests of the Philistine Dagon, mentioned three times in Scripture. They were supposedly men dressed as fish, and alongside was a painting of a merman who was also supposed to be Dagon, and then a picture of some Catholic priests with their hats and the argument was that Catholicism was just Dagon worship revamped and the pictures proved it.

Just for the record, I am not going to cover how the Catholic officials got those hats. I don’t know, and I don’t really care. I am not a Catholic, and I have never been a Catholic. What I am concerned with is the accurate portrayal of Biblical context, and so I want to analyze the archaeology and show whether it is valid or not. First, let’s talk about Dagon – was he a fish god? This artwork from the Louvre, which is often used to prove that Dagon was a merman, would certainly suggest that he is – but do we have an evidence tying him to this? And doesn’t anyone think it is strange that someone is using a rather modern colored engraving to prove something from antiquity? The original bas relief from Sumeria is to the right, and to the left is the “conjecture” that folks attribute to Dagon.

Louvre-merman

Louvre-Museum-sumerian-carving-of-a-merman

(credit for the bas relief goes to a href=”http://public-domain.zorger.com” title=”public domain images”>public-domain.zorger.com</a)

 

 

Now, let’s look at the actual word Dagon, or dgn, in Semitic languages – in Ugaritic, this word dgn can be translated as grain, and in Hebrew dagon/dagan is also an archaic word meaning grain. This meaning lines up with his association with Ba’al, the Canaanite storm god who also has ties with fertility and the harvest. In Ugaritic literature, Dagon is the father of Ba’al, just as El is the father of Ba’al in Canaanite records. Sanchuniathon, who was a Phoenician author circa 1200 BC (a contemporary of Semiramis, Queen of the Assyrians, according to Porphyry), said, “And Dagon after he discovered grain and the plough, was called Zeus Arotrios.” Arotrios was the designation of Zeus as the ploughman.

Evidently, in the 4th century AD, a tradition popped up that Dagon was a fish god based upon the Hebrew word “dag” which means fish, and this was picked up on in the Middle Ages and even swallowed hook, line and sinker by some of the noted theologians of the day. Artwork was produced, depicting Dagon as a merman, which is now on display at the Louvre. Jewish commentators Rashi and David Kimhi both perpetuated this myth in their writings, which was, in turn, picked up by John Milton in Paradise Lost, who called Dagon a “sea-monster, upward man, and downward fish.”

Now, we see Dagon mentioned three times in Scripture (Jud 16, I Sam 5, I Chron 10), and once in I Maccabees 10, depicting the destruction of the Temple of Dagon, which was surprisingly still in commission at so late a date. Josephus and Philo, as well as Jerome, mention Dagon but no one mentions him as a fish god! Clearly, the “fish-god” myth is late in origin and was sadly picked up by a very popular 17th Century Author and since passed off as archaeological fact. But the preponderance of the evidence of antiquity clearly show Dagon not to be a fish god at all.

Were there fish gods? Yes, of course. Take Oannes for instance, written about in the third century BCE by Babylonian author Berosos, who just happened to be a priest of Bel. Oannes was purported to be the one who gave wisdom to men. This is a depiction of Him in an ancient Mesopotamian Cylinder Seal – clearly meeting Berrosus’ description of him as a god whose whole body was a fish, and under the fish’s head was a man’s head and under the fish’s tail were a man’s feet. And to the right, I have included another colored engraving, depicting a very altered version – looking more like a man in a fish costume and less like a fish god. Creative license, I suppose.

Oannes

Oannes

 

 

 

 

 

 

While researching, it has come to my attention that some are equating Oannes with Dagon – but archaeology has completely discounted any chance of that. Oannes was associated with wisdom and the arts, Dagon with grain and sometimes with death – as these two gods are functionally unrelated, the ancient people would never have equated them. Remember that polytheism is all about functional gods – gods who took care of cosmic functions and kept the world from spinning into chaos. Similar gods sometimes merged between cultures, sometimes, but those gods had to share functionalities and Oannes and Dagon shared none. That they were both still worshiped independently at late dates is attested by the existence of the Temple of Dagon in the time of the Maccabees as well as in the mention of Oannes by Berosos in the 3rd century BCE, so there is no reason to even presume a merger.

So who was Dagon? Looks like he was the chief god of the Philistine pantheon, a god associated with grain and with the underworld – not unlike Osiris of Egypt. Be sure to catch part 2 HERE. But he was definitely not a fish god.  Here are some of the more accessible resources that I used.

Feliu, Luis The God Dagan in Bronze Age Syria, Brill (2000) – this is the definitive scholarly work on Dagan, it was an AMAZING read which taught me a lot about how ancient gods were worshiped in general.

Van der Toorn, Karel Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible pgs 216-219. This is the must-have book for anyone who wants to speak with authority on the deities that show up in the Bible – over 900 pages of scholarly delight. Like a high-class buffet of polytheism.

Singer, I. (1992). “Towards an Image of Dagan, the God of the Philistines.” Syria 69: 431-450.Itamar Singer – Romanian-Israeli author and historian married to a Ph.D. Egyptologist. Hebrew University of Jerusalem – double bachelor’s degrees in archaeology and geography; Tel Aviv University – Masters, and University of Marburg – Ph.D. with an emphasis in Hittite studies. He was a professor at Tel Aviv University and his focus of interest was the Ancient Near East in the 13th century BC (he had a particular interest in the “sea peoples” who many believe became the ancient Philistines). He was awarded the EMET Prize two years before his death

Stone, Adam, 2013 Ancient Mesopotamian Gods and Goddesses: Dagan  – Archaeologist, Ph.D. from Cambridge University, Associate lecturer at Birkbeck College at the University of London where he teaches Sumerian and Akkadian

Berosos and Oannes

Leick, Gwendolyn 1991, A Dictionary of Ancient Near Eastern Mythology – Leick has a Ph.D. in Assyriology

So, what I never do is check out Wikipedia first but I have to admit that I went later after studying and whoever wrote up their page didn’t do a bad job! Pretty solid resources 🙂