In my previous
article, I made some (hopefully) educated estimations that allowed me to
calculate how heavy the fabled Ark of the Covenant would have been had it been
constructed according to the instructions in Exodus chapter 25. That exercise
clarified some issues for me.
His Ark is Bigger
than is Right
First, my estimated weight of 165 kg (362 lbs) for the ark leads
me to conclude it would have been too heavy to be carried by four men. While
soldiers sometimes carry backpacks of over 100 lbs of equipment needed for
special missions, that weight is being distributed across both shoulders.
Levites carrying the ark would have all that weight coming down on one shoulder,
greatly reducing the amount they could comfortably carry.
Second, the estimated weight of the chest and the lid are
about equal, so the center of gravity would sit at the point where the lid
meets the chest. This would be the most balanced place to locate the rings for
the carrying poles, yet the instructions in Exodus state that the rings should
be attached to the feet of the chest. Underneath the ark next to the feet would
be the strongest area to place the poles but it would also make the ark
top-heavy and prone to tipping over.
Third, the ark’s purpose was to hold the stone tablets on
which were written the Ten Commandments. 1 Kings 8:9 insists that “There was
nothing in the ark except the two stone tablets that Moses had placed in it at Horeb.” But
the ark’s dimensions are much larger than needed to accomplish that goal.
One of the six pairs of tablet props made for 1956 film The Ten Commandments sold for $60,000 at an auction in 2012. The lettering is in an early Canaanite script practiced in the late Bronze Age. |
Take Two Tablets…
The Bible does
not provide us dimensions for the two stone tablets, but does tell us
that Moses carried it “in his hand” as he climbed up and down the
mountain of God (Sinai or Horeb, depending on the tradition). The size of the
stone tablets would be limited to what Moses could comfortably carry while
climbing a mountain.
The dimensions of the prop tablets from the classic movie The Ten Commandments starring Charlton
Heston were 23.5 x 12 x 1.25”. The props were made of fiberglass. Had they been
made of actual stone, they would have weighed something like 15 kg (32 lb)
each. Quite a load for poor old Moses to
schlep up and down the mountain twice!
But even with such oversized tablets, there’s more than
enough room in the ark with the dimensions given in Exodus 25 (2.5 x 1.5 x 1.5
cubits). You could lay the tablets side by side on the gold-covered floor of
the ark and they would take up only half the floor space. And there would be 2.5 feet
of wasted space above the tablets.
An ark properly built for such movie-size stone tablets
would be much, much smaller. By stacking the tablets on top of each other, you
could reduce the footprint to something like 27 x 14” (roughly, a half-cubit by
quarter-cubit) and only 3” height. More reasonable dimensions for the stone
tablets would yield an even-smaller ark.
The “Other” Ark
To these observations, we can mention that the source of
Exodus 25 is the Priestly narrative (P), typically dated to the exilic period
(6th-5th century BCE), after Jerusalem and its Temple had
been destroyed. Many scholars have cited this as reason alone to doubt that the
ark ever existed at all.
While it is definitely possible that the Ark and Tabernacle
never existed, the detailed descriptions in Exodus could imply that the author
was familiar with the items, knew they no longer existed, but wanted to
preserve their memory so that one day they might be recreated. But even if we
accept this as a possibility, it doesn’t mean that the ark from Exodus 25
originally existed in the form described.
The ark is also
mentioned in other parts of the Bible outside of those attributed to the
Priestly writer. Deuteronomy comes from a different source tradition. Signified
as “D”, this source is typically dated towards the last years of the Kingdom of
Judah (7th-6th century BCE). Moses says in Deut 10:1-3:
At that time Yhwh said to me, “Carve out two tablets of stone like the former ones, and come up to me on the mountain, and make an ark of wood. I will write on the tablets the words that were on the former tablets, which you smashed, and you shall put them in the ark.” So I made an ark of acacia wood, cut two tablets of stone like the former ones, and went up the mountain with the two tablets in my hand.
In this older tradition, the ark is a simple chest of acacia
wood – no gold cladding, solid gold lid or angels.
But the purpose of the ark was not solely to store the tablets
of the covenant, but also for religious processions. Many ancient (and modern)
cultures carry sacred relics or images in religious procession. These images
would be placed on or in a box that would be carried on poles. Not allowed to
use graven images, the tablets of the covenant were a substitute for an image
of Yahweh. Such an object intended for public display would be larger and more
resplendent than a simple wooden chest.
Ark Evolution
Suggested only as a hypothesis, the early Israelites could
have employed the concept of the portable shrine. If Levites had a
semi-monopoly on cultic practices and if Levites hailed from Egypt, the
portable shrine would have been built along the Egyptian models they were
familiar with. Containing a statue or maybe even stone tablets, it probably
would have been smaller than the ark described in Exodus. Built of wood, maybe
covered in thin gold foil rather than sheets of gold plate.
Once all cultic practices were centralized in Jerusalem and
there was no longer a need to keep the chest portable, a new container may have
been built to take its place. Much as the Temple replaced the Tabernacle, a new
golden ark would have replaced the old wooden book box. Perhaps the old, sacred
chest may even have been placed inside of the golden ark.
If the golden ark as described in Exodus 25 really existed
and held an older, smaller wooden ark, that would explain why it is so much
larger than needed to hold two stone tablets. The extra size and weight would
not be an issue if the golden ark was intended to have its permanent home in
the Jerusalem temple and would never be moved.
No comments:
Post a Comment