**2. Israelian Religion in Daily Life**

One key to a religious interpretation of the site has been the drawings, but in our view, these serve more to highlight aspects of religion in daily life. The early studies of the drawings were done by Beck (1982, 2012). Unfortunately, much of the discussion of the drawings has focused on the identity of the two apparent deities—possibly Bes and Asherah—on Pithos A (see Schmidt 2016b). The image of the lion pictured under the "tree of life" with gazelles certainly suggests the goddess Asherah. Indeed, the tree imagery might have been particularly significant here at a desert oasis. It is certainly possible that we have a crude drawing the Egyptian deity Bes, but it must be emphasized that this is not elegant artwork, but rather doodlings. Moreover, the Egyptian god Bes is also associated with animals, many of whom are illustrated on the pithoi (lions, bulls, gazelle, boar). While these animals can be associated with deities, they also seem to be the types of animals one might encounter in the region. In this respect, the animals as well as the deities are reflections of daily life. A possible Egyptian deity depicted on a pithos aligns nicely with the writing *ms.ry* "Egyptian" in a list of names on Pithos B (KA 3.10:6). Given its location, it is certainly plausible that Egyptians frequented the site as traders and merchants, perhaps some even worked at the site. Tallay Ornan's recent study highlights that the Kuntillet ޏAjrud drawings all find nice parallels in neo-Assyrian palace reliefs (Ornan 2015). While her analysis undermines the interpretation of the site as a specifically religious site, it does not make the site a palace either. She suggests a state-sponsored military fortress, which makes sense. While the plaster wall drawings could have a state sponsored purpose, the drawings on the pithoi certainly do not. In addition, even the plaster wall drawings should be seen as expressions of religious art applied to various contexts of daily life. For this reason, we contend that both the drawings and the inscriptions reflect the ways that religion and religious themes were embedded within a variety of streams of Israelite culture.

The inscriptions have been a particular focus for the religious interpretation of the site. While Kuntillet ޏAjrud is the most extensive extra-biblical textual evidence we have for early Israelian religion, it is easy to overstate or misrepresent the significance of various inscriptions. One example illustrates this point. The final report on Kuntillet ޏAjrud suggests, "The authors of the inscriptions believed in the power of prayer to influence God" (Ah. ituv et al. 2012, p. 133). This is undoubtedly true, but the authors base this statement on lines 2–3 of inscription 3.9, which they translate, "If he would urge, YHW will give him according to his wishes". It is important to read the whole inscription to contextualize the significance of its use at the fortress of Kuntillet ޏAjrud.

We would reconstruct and translate KA 3.9 as follows: (1) [ގ*mr* PN1 ގ*mr l*PN2 *brktk* ]*lyhwh.ht*\_*m*^*n wl*ގ*šrth*; (2) [——-]*kl* <sup>ގ</sup>*šr yš*ގ*l m*ގ*<sup>š</sup> h. nn h*<sup>ގ</sup> *<sup>w</sup>*ގ*m pth wntn lh yhw~* (3) *klbbh* "[Message of PN1, say to PN2: I bless you ]by Yahweh of the Teman and by his ގ*asherah.* [——-]whatever he asks from a man, he will give generously. In addition, if he petitions, then Yahwe(h) will give to him according to his desire". Now here it becomes clear that we have a practice letter and after the formal opening, the second part (lines 2–3) forms the body of the scribal exercise. This type of exercise is not unusual in the near east. We have a remarkably similar student exercise at Ugarit (*KTU* 5.9), which is a letter that begins with a formal introduction then proceeds in the body to include a "reciprocal formula" and then gives a humorous grammatical exercise of the verb *ytn* "to give" (Schniedewind forthcoming, chp. 5). Parallels to this reciprocal formula can be found in a variety of places. For example, in a Samގalian Inscription, we find, *wmz* ގ*š*ގ*l mn* ގ*lhy ytn ly* "And whatever I shall ask from my god, may he give to me" (*KAI* 214:4), and later in the same inscription, *wmh* ގ*š*ގ*l mn* ގ*lhy mt ytnw ly* "and whatever I shall ask from my god, surely he shall give me" (ll. 12–13). Scholars have also suggested several biblical correlates for Kuntillet ޏAjrud inscription, including: Ps 20:5 *ytn lk klbbk* "He shall give to

you according to your desire" (also see Ps 37:21, 26; 112:5). In sum, reciprocal-type formulas can be adduced in a variety of texts from a variety of places.

We may imagine that reciprocal language would have been learned and memorized from school exercises, then applied in a variety of daily contexts—some specifically religious and others rather mundane. As Avi Shveka points out, the reciprocal formula uses stock scribal terminology typical of requests known from Ebla, Amarna, and elsewhere in the near east (Shveka 2005, pp. 298–99). A nice illustration in biblical literature is Hiram's letter to Solomon, which encodes this general paradigm (1Kgs 5:22): "Hiram sent word to Solomon: 'I have heard that you have sent to me, and I will do all that which you desired (˃ʶʍ ʴʍ ʧʚʬ ʓ ˗ʚʺ ʕ ʠ ʤ ʓ ˈʓ ˆʎ ʠ ʩ ʓ ʰʑʠʏ)'". Such language evoking reciprocal relationships, requests, and gifts could be adapted to a variety of contexts, including prayers. In sum, we should understand the reciprocal formula in KA 3.9 as a stock expression—but also as something that reflects deeply embedded social and religious values.

## **3. The Use of Blessing Formulas**

A large number of the inscriptions from the site are blessing formulas. Nine blessings in total were discovered at the site (Ah. ituv et al. 2012, pp. 127–28). While there are a variety of forms of blessings attested most studies have focused upon the blessings that reference the two gods Yahweh and Asherah (Mandell 2012; Dijkstra 2001; Dietrich and Loretz 1992; Hadley 2000). However, it should be emphasized at the outset that the blessings are different in function from the inscribed blessings discovered at the sites of Khirbet el-Qom and Ketef Hinnom (Smoak 2016, pp. 12–60). The blessings at Kuntillet ޏAjrud are exercises written by scribes who were learning to write epistolary correspondence. That is, most of the blessings were not related to religious practice at the site. Rather, they reflect the long tradition of use of blessings in letter writing in West Semitic administrative correspondence (see already Lemaire 1981, pp. 26–28; Chase 1982, pp. 65–66; Catastini 1982, pp. 127–34).

Most of these blessing formulas appear on two pithoi discovered in the main building of the site. The single exception to this is a blessing that was inscribed upon the rim of a stone basin discovered near the eastern entrance to the site. This blessing reads, "to/of ޏObadyaw son of ޏAdna, blessed be he to YHW" (Ah. ituv et al. 2012, p. 76). Studies have pointed to the large size of the basin on which the inscription appears and the form of the inscription as evidence for the religious nature of the site (Tigay 2007, p. 345\*). There may be good reason for interpreting this particular blessing as a request for the person who donated the object to the site to be blessed by the deity. However, the presence of the blessing on the object does not necessarily point to the religious function of the site (Dijkstra 2001, p. 23). Inscriptions containing petitions for divine blessings are found on a variety of objects and in a variety of contexts in the Iron Age Levant. The appearance of such blessings in a variety of contexts points to their use in daily life rather than an exclusive setting in temples or cultic areas.

All of the other blessing formulas were written in ink on two pithoi discovered in a bench room in the main building. For example, the following inscription was written in red ink on Pithos A (3.1) (Ah. ituv et al. 2012, p. 87):

[Message of ... ] [-]M[-]K: "Speak to Yaheli, and to Yo'asa, and to [ ... ] I have [b]lessed you to YHWH of Shomron (Samaria) and to his ގ*asherah*" (3.1).

This particular blessing formula, with the Piel verb in the suffix conjugation form followed by a genitival *lamed* prefixed to a personal name, appears in several other Iron Age inscriptions (Ah. ituv et al. 2012, p. 127). The formula functions as a petition to the deity to bless the individual identified in the inscription. A longer blessing formula appears on Pithos B (KA 3.6). The blessing reads (Ah. ituv et al. 2012, p. 95),
