Judith M. Hadley, The Cult of Asherah in Ancient Israel and Judah: Evidence for a Hebrew Goddess.

Cambridge: University Press, 2000. Pp. xvi + 262. Cloth, $64.95.

The goddess Asherah and her symbol, the asherah (lower case "a"), have generated much scholarly debate and publication in the last couple of decades, stimulated by the discovery in the 1970s of inscriptions at Khirbet el-Qom, near Hebron, and Kuntillet `Ajrud in northern Sinai referring to "Yahweh and his a/Asherah"and dating approximately to the ninth/eighth centuries BCE. The debate centers on whether the word in question indicates a goddess, Asherah, the consort of the Israelite god Yahweh, denotes her symbol, or is simply emblematic of Yahweh's presence in blessing. In this book, Judith Hadley re-examines these inscriptions together with the Biblical references and related artefacts such as plaques, cult-stands and female figurines.

In the first chapter, Hadley introduces the topic and provides a masterly and useful survey of books and doctoral dissertations on the subject over the last fifty years. She proposes that the word 'aserah in the First Testament refers occasionally to the goddess, but mostly to her symbol. Hadley then considers (chap. 2) the Canaanite texts from the city of Ugarit that mention the goddess Athirat (Canaanite th becomes sh in Hebrew) in the Late Bronze Age (ca. 1500-1200 BCE). There Athirat was the wife of the chief god, El, and mother of the gods. It is not possible to determine any direct link with the later Israelite Asherah, but throughout the entire ancient Near East there was the concept of a goddess who possessed the attributes of maternity and fertility manifested under different names and guises. Chapter 3 deals with the biblical references to the asherah/ Asherah; these do not yield to any easy consensus of interpretation. The author suggests that some verses indicate the goddess, but most refer to her symbol, a wooden stylized tree or pole. She detects a process by which the symbol became detached from the goddess and came to denote Yahweh's beneficent presence. By the books of Chronicles its connection with the goddess was forgotten.

The core of the book (chaps. 4 and 5) investigates the inscriptions at Khirbet el-Qom and Kuntillet `Ajrud. The former inscription is difficult to read, but the author examined it personally and confirmed her preferred interpretation. The inscriptions invoke the blessing of Yahweh, Yahweh of Samaria and Yahweh of Teman and 'srth, literally "asherah-his." Since the possessive suffix is not attached to personal names in classical Hebrew, the word most likely means the symbol, either representing Yahweh's consort or, if Asherah was forgotten, connoting his ability to preserve and protect. Hadley understands Kuntillet `Ajrud as a way station en route to the Gulf of Eilat, where travelers entreated the blessing of Yahweh and "his asherah." The three main inscriptions are on two large wine-jars. On the first wine-jar, the inscription is accompanied by three figures whom Hadley identifies as two representations of the Egyptian god of good fortune, Bes, and an accompanying lyre-player. She is correct in affirming that the figures have no connection with the inscription. On the same jar, a drawing of a stylized tree with two grazing ibexes probably represents the goddess. The inscriptions testify to Yahweh's being worshiped with the asherah, a symbol that may have represented the goddess Asherah or presented her nurturing qualities.

In chapter 6 archeological discoveries possibly relating to the goddess are considered, notably cult stands from Pella and Tanaach: the latter clearly displaying the tree and ibexes and a naked goddess between two lions, symbols of Asherah. Taanach was an Israelite site and, according to Hadley, the cult stand is sound evidence for the worship of Asherah in the tenth century BCE. The many little clay "pillar" figurines of females supporting prominent breasts, may be images of the maternal Asherah, and date mainly from seventh century BCE in Judah (chap. 7). A concluding chapter summarizes the work.

The technical parts of the book, notably the chapters on the inscriptions, should not deter any interested reader, for the overall narrative is clearly written. Unlike abundant Egypt where everything comes labeled, the iconic and archeological evidence for Asherah is limited and sometimes ambiguous, the textual references uncertain. Hadley has done an excellent job of presenting and evaluating this evidence and the scholarship, while advancing the discussion in a substantial way. Asherah and her symbol are very well served by this book.

John Barclay Burns
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA 22030