Dear MJ
Can you send me the Elyon entry in Dictionary of Demons and Deities?
[quote]
LYON עליוןI. Derived from the Hebrew verb ʿālâ, meaning ‘to ascend’, ʿelyôn in the OT may be used either as an adjective, describing something that is spatially higher than something else (‘upper’, ‘highest’), or as a substantive, used primarily in reference to the ‘most high’ deity. In Ps 89:27, however, it is used in reference to the king. As a divine name, ʿElyôn appears either on its own (e.g. Ps 9:3; Isa 14:14), in combination with other divine names (Yahweh, Elohim [→God], →El e.g., Pss 7:17; 57:3; 73:11) or in association with lesser divine elements (bĕnê ʿelyôn, Ps 82:6; cf. Aramaic references to qaddîšê ʿelyônîn in Dan 7:18, 22, 25, 27). An abbreviated form may also be attested in Hos 11:7 (על) and 1 Sam 2:10 (י/עלו). In the LXX, ʿElyôn is translated as Hypsistos.In the present form of the biblical text, the term is understood to be an epithet for Yahweh, the God of Israel. It is possible, however, as some have argued, that the epithet may conceal a reference to a separate deity, possibly an older god with whom Yahweh came to be identified. This has been argued, for example, with reference to Gen 14:18, Num 24:16 and Deut 32:8. The matter cannot be resolved without considering occurrences of ʿElyôn in other texts from the ancient Near East. ʿElyôn is attested in a variety of extra-biblical literature such as Aramaic, Phoenician, Ugaritic and Greek. As a theophoric element, ʿElyôn may also be traced in South-Semitic personal names. These wide-spread Ancient Near Eastern attestations have led to numerous hypotheses regarding the nature of the more ambiguous references to ʿElyôn in the OT, discussed below. In addition to its attestation in the OT, ʿElyôn appears as →Hypsistos in the NT, as well as in the apocryphal and pseudepigraphic books. ʿElyôn is also attested in Qumran literature (see esp. 1QapGen).II. In order to understand the character and role of ʿElyôn, it must first be determined whether or not the word refers to an independent deity or functions always as an epithet for another god. The clearest example of ʿElyôn functioning autonomously is found in the fragments of Sanchuniathon’s ‘Phoenician Theology’ preserved by Eusebius (Praep. evang. 1.10.15–29) using Philo of Byblos as his source. According to Sanchuniathon, a certain Elioun, called ‘Most High’ (Hypsistos) dwelt in the neighbourhood of Byblos, along with his wife, Berouth. To them was born a son, Epigeius, or Autochthon—who was later called Ouranos (Heaven)—and a daughter, Ge (Earth). Sometime later, Elioun died in an encounter with wild beasts and was thereupon deified. His children also became deities, and through the union of Ouranos and Ge, the god Kronos was born. Later, a union of Ouranos and his favourite mistress produced →Zeus (Demarous). With certain exceptions, this cosmology is closely related to others in the ancient Near East. Texts such as the Hurro-Hittite ‘Song of Kumarbi’ (also known as ‘Kingship in Heaven’), Hesiod’s Theogony, and various Ugaritic myths about El and →Baal all display striking similarities to the ordering and functioning of gods in Sanchuniathon. Notably absent in the latter two sources, however, is any clear indication of a counterpart to Sanchuniathon’s Elioun. Even the Hurro-Hittite Alalu, though sharing the same hierarchical relationship to other gods as Elioun, does not display much similarity in character (see “Song of Kumarbi” in HOFFNER 1990:40–43). Thus, although we find clear reference to ʿElyôn as an autonomous deity in Philo’s Elioun, similar cosmologies in the ancient Near East do not appear to have shared this view. In fact, closer inspection of Philo’s account betrays a conflation of traditions that may not be true to their earlier forms. For instance, the name Epigeius would suggest that the deity arose from Ge (cf. Hesiod). However, these gods are brother and sister according to Philo. It appears that contemporary cosmological conceptions have been absorbed into Philo’s account of more ancient traditions. His understanding of Elioun as an independent deity may reflect first century influences.A possible exception to this conclusion is found in the Sefîre I inscriptions (KAI 222 A) of the eighth century BCE, written in Aramaic. As a treaty between Bir-Gaʾyah, the king of KTK and Matîel, the king of Arpad, the inscription lists the major deities of each side as witnesses to the agreement. Listed between a series of divine names occurring in pairs and the great natural pairs of Heaven and Earth, Abyss and Streams, →Day and →Night, we find ʾl wʿlyn. This has been thought by many to confirm the existence of ʿElyôn as an independent deity (e.g. DELLA VIDA 1944; RENDTORFF 1967). However, several considerations mitigate against such a conclusion. First, El and ʿElyôn are not consorts, as are the preceding divine pairs. Secondly, the divine pairs are not followed immediately by El and ʿElyôn, but are interrupted by other clauses where there are references to non-paired deities. Finally, El and ʿElyôn may not be part of the pantheon of Bir-Gaʾyah, which lists the divine consorts, but that of Matîel (LACK 1962:57; cf. SEOW 1989:52 n. 146). On the other hand, ʿElyôn may be understood as an epithet of El in this inscription. The conjunction may be a waw explicativum (DE VAUX 1961:310; SEOW 1989:52n), rendering, “El, that is, ʿElyôn”. One notes this same phenomenon earlier in the list (line 9), where we find šmš wnr (L’HEUREUX 1979:46); →Shemesh; →Light. One notes as well the frequent occurrence of double divine names in the Ugaritic corpus where each is joined by a waw conjunction (e.g. Kṯr-w-Ḫss, Mt-w-Šr, Qdš-w-ʾAmrr). It is possible that the Sefîre inscription bears witness to this phenomenon, or that it betrays a separation of an early epithet of El that has split into a separate cult and deity (CROSS 1973:51). Whatever the case may be, it must be admitted that the treaty gives us no conclusive evidence for or against the existence of ʿElyôn as an independent deity.In contrast to the mixed evidence to support the identification of ʿElyôn as autonomous, there is a wide range of evidence to suggest that ʿElyôn was a common epithet in the West Semitic region, applied at different times and in different cultures to any god thought to be supreme. One example of the fluidity of this epithet is in its application to the Canaanite deities El and Baal. Although El is nowhere referred to as ʿElyôn in the extant Ugaritic literature, numerous attestations, both biblical and extra-biblical, link the two closely. We have already seen, for instance, that, if nothing else, El and ʿElyôn are closely linked in the Sefîre I inscription. Similarly, in South Semitic inscriptions, one finds a shortened form of ʿElyôn, ʿly (and sometimes ʿl; →Al) applied to El (RYCKMANS 1934:243). In the OT, ʿElyôn appears several times with El, either in collocation (Gen 14:18–22; Ps 78:35), or in parallelism (Num 24:16; Pss 73:11; 107:11). Many scholars believe that the pre-Israelite cult at Jerusalem worshipped the god El-ʿElyôn. There is also evidence to suggest that Yahweh was originally worshipped as El-ʿElyôn at Shiloh before David’s capture of Jerusalem (see below). These indicators all point to ʿElyôn being an early epithet of El. Yet, other texts link Baal with this same epithet in its abbreviated form. The clearest example is found in the Keret epic (KTU 1.16 iii:5–8) where mṭr bʿl, ‘the rain of Baal’, is twice parallelled by mṭr ʿly, ‘the rain of the Most High’.In the Bible, also, there exists a possible indication of Baal’s designation as Most High. In the book of Hosea—a text well-known for its unrelenting polemic against Baalism—we find such an indication (although some would amend the shortened form ʿl to bʿl, lectio facilior): “My people are bent on turning away from me. To the Most High (ʿl) they call, but he does not raise them up at all” (Hos 11:7). Further, in Isa 14:13–14, we find a satire of the King of Babylon that may reflect the myth of the rise of Baal. In Canaanite lore, Baal is the god who ascends the clouds and sits on ‘the heights of Zaphon’. Eventually he came to replace El as high god of the Canaanite pantheon. It is intriguing, then, to find in Isaiah: “You said in your heart, ‘I will ascend to heaven; I will raise my throne above the stars of El; I will sit on the mount of assembly, on the heights of Zaphon; I will ascend to the tops of the clouds, I will make myself like ʿElyôn.’ ” Thus, if a Baal myth lies behind this text, then we would have not only another association of El and ʿElyôn, but a reflection of Baal’s eventual surpassing of El, so that he himself became the ‘Most High’ god.The fluidity of the epithet ʿElyôn is far from restricted to Canaanite tradition alone. The epithet became firmly associated with the Israelite god, Yahweh, for instance. This tradition carries over into later Jewish pseudepigraphic literature and inscriptions and is also found within the NT. The epithet is frequently attested in Greek culture in reference to Zeus as well. We know that the cult of ‘Zeus Hypsistos’ was recognized at Thebes, Iasos, Mylasa and Edessa. Further, in Lydia, some form of the Mother goddess was called ‘Thea Hypsiste’. In Egypt, Hypsistes was an epithet for →Isis (TREBILCO 1989:52). Thus, the epithet ʿElyôn seems to have enjoyed a rich and widespread usage in the ancient West Semitic world. Not only was it associated with the ‘high gods’ of different cultures, but it could also be used within the same culture for different gods as one ascended in significance over the other to become the Most High God.III. It is clear that Israel appropriated ʿElyôn as an epithet for its own High God, Yahweh. This is evident in the numerous passages where ʿElyôn appears either in conjunction with Yahweh (Pss 7:17; 47:3) or Elohim (Pss 57:3; 78:56) or is found in parallelism or close association with either of these (e.g. Pss 21:8; 46:5; 83:9; 50:14). In some passages, the title ʿElyôn is applied to Yahweh as an explicit assertion of Yahweh’s distinctiveness. In Ps 97:9, for instance, one finds: “For you, Yahweh, are ʿElyôn over all the earth; You are greatly elevated above all gods.” Similarly, in Ps 83:19 one finds: “And let them know that your name is Yahweh; You alone are ʿElyôn over all the earth.” One notes that in 1 Sam 2:10, Yahweh may be associated with ʿElyôn, attested in an abbreviated form, if the MT’s ʿlw is understood as arising from common confusion of w/y (accepted by NEB, and now also by NRSV): “Yahweh, his adversaries are shattered; The Most High (ʿlw) thunders in heaven.” In a number of passages, ʿElyôn is simply one of a number of appellations used for the God of Israel. In Ps 91:1–2, for instance, we find: “Let the one who sits in the shelter of ʿElyôn, who spends the night in the shadow of →Shadday, say to Yahweh, ‘My refuge and my fortress, my God (Elohim), in whom I trust.’ ”In the few extant cases where ʿElyôn stands independently of any reference to Yahweh, the title nevertheless remains closely tied to the God of Israel. Thus, although ʿElyôn is unmodified in Ps 9:3, which reads, “I will be glad and exult in you; I will sing praise to your name, O ʿElyôn,” the title ʿElyôn nevertheless refers to Yahweh, as is evident from the numerous references to Yahweh throughout the Psalm. ʿElyôn is also found paired with El in the OT. Although El may refer either to ‘God’ (of Israel) or to Canaanite El, in most cases the context in which it occurs clearly indicates that the God of Israel is the intended referent. In Ps 78:35, for instance, we find El-ʿElyôn in parallelism with Elohim: “They remembered that Elohim was their →rock, El-ʿElyôn was their redeemer (→Goel).”In Ps 57:3, we find a similar phenomenon, except this time ʿElyôn is paired with Elohim, and these stand in parallelism with El: “I call to Elohim-ʿElyôn, to El, who fulfills his purpose for me.”In some cases, El and ʿElyôn are paired without direct reference to Yahweh or Elohim. In Ps 107:11, the psalmist speaks of those who had “rebelled against the words of El, and spurned the counsel of ʿElyon.” Again, the context of the psalm dictates that the intended referent is Yahweh. Yet, in a few passages in the OT, the pairing of El with ʿElyôn is more ambiguous. In these instances, some scholars find reflections of an earlier stage of tradition, where the title ʿElyôn may have referred originally to a god other than Yahweh. The primary examples of such occurrences are Gen 14:18–22, Num 24:16 and Deut 32:8. With regard to the last passage, some scholars find an early reference to ʿElyôn as a supreme god to which Yahweh is subordinate. ʿElyôn divides the nations among the gods (LXX; 4QDeut) and grants Yahweh an allotment like the rest. Yet, contextual considerations suggest that the preposition kî in v 9 be translated as an asseverative particle, rendering, “Indeed, Yahweh’s own portion was his people, Jacob was the territory of his possession.” Thus, ʿElyôn is more plausibly understood as functioning as an epithet for Yahweh.In an oracle of Balaam, son of Beor, in Num 24:16, we find what may be the earliest reference to ʿElyôn in the OT. Although its early date is not uncontested, many would locate the poem in the eleventh or tenth century BCE. Here Balaam describes himself as “one who hears the words of El, who knows the knowledge of ʿElyôn, who sees the vision of Šadday.” Although the context and content of the oracles dictate that Yahweh is the god to whom these titles refer, it is curious that Balaam, a prophet to a non-Israelite group, living along the Euphrates, who is summoned by the King of Moab to curse the Israelites, would be considered a prophet of Yahweh (22:8, 18; 23:5, 16; 24:1, 13). Given the association of the oracles with the ‘words of El’ it is possible that an earlier stage of the tradition knew Balaam as a prophet of El. This notion is supported by the Deir ʿAllā inscriptions where Balaam, son of Beor is attested. Although the inscriptions date to the eighth century BCE, Balaam the Seer was apparently part of a long-standing tradition, well-known by the people to whom the inscription was addressed (HACKETT 1984:124). He is described as a ‘seer of the gods’, who are also identified as Shaddayı̄n. The vision he reports is ‘an utterance of El’ (Combination I 1, 2). The similarity between the Deir ʿAllā inscriptions and the biblical tradition of Balaam is striking and has been long noted by scholars. It would appear that the biblical material shares a common tradition with that of the Deir ʿAllā inscriptions. Given the occurrence of El and Shaddayı̄n in the inscriptions, it is likely that El was also known as Shadday (see HACKETT 1984:85–89). And given its close links with the biblical account—in terms of geography, the prophet’s name, and the chief god El (//Shadday)—it is possible that El was also known as ʿElyôn in the tradition attested at Deir ʿAllā.Perhaps the most difficult text to assess in terms of the history of tradition behind ʿElyôn is Gen 14:18–22. Here, a certain →Melchizedek, king of Salem and priest of El-ʿElyôn, blesses →Abraham in the name of “El-ʿElyôn, maker of heaven and earth” (ʾl ʿlywn qnh šmym wʾrṣ). Significantly, attestations of a shortened version of this title for El are widespread in ancient Near Eastern inscriptions. Examples are:(1) The Hittite divine name Ilkunirša, occurring in a Hittite translation of a West Semitic myth from Boghazköy prior to 1200 BCE, appears to be a reference to El (OTTEN 1953; see HOFFNER 1965). (2) ʾl qnʾrṣ in an eighth century BCE bilingual god list from Karatepe (KAI 26 A III.18). (3) [ʾl] qnʾrṣ is the probable restoration of a Hebrew inscription of the eighth-seventh century BCE from Jerusalem (AVIGAD 1972; see MILLER 1980). (4) ʾlqwnrʿ in a first century CE Aramaic inscription from Palmyra, which, with DELLA VIDA 1944, is to be read ʾ lqn (ʾ)rʿ(ʾ)). (5) ʾlqnrʿ in four tesserae from Palmyra (INGHOLT 1955). (6) ʾl qn ʾrṣ in a second century CE Neo-Punic inscription from Leptis Magna (KAI 129:1). Note that the long form of this title has been read by J. T. MILIK in an inscription from Palmyra (Recherches d’épigraphie proche-orientale [Paris 1955] 182): ʾ[l gwnʾ ʾ]r[ʿ]ʾ w šm[y]ʾ.Owing to the attestation of El-ʿElyôn in Gen 14:18–22, along with the expanded El title qnh šmym wʾrṣ, Melchizedek would appear to be a representative of the cult of El-ʿElyôn, whom the biblical tradition associated with the city of Salem (note that the reference to Yahweh in v 22 is absent in LXX, Syr, 1QapGen; Sam attests ʾl hʾlhym). Most likely, Salem is a short form of Jerusalem. It only appears in one other place in the OT (Ps 76:3) where it stands in parallelism with →Zion. That Melchizedek’s Salem was considered Jerusalem in Jewish tradition is evident in 1QapGen 22:13, which adds “that is, Jerusalem,” to a reference to Salem, in Tg. Onq., which renders it simply as ‘Jerusalem’, and in Josephus (Ant. 1:180). It is attested in the Amarna Letters as ú-ru-sa-lim (EA 290:15). Owing to the likely connection between Salem and Jerusalem, a number of scholars have supposed Melchizedek to be the representative of a dominant Jebusite cult of El-ʿElyôn from which Israel drew much of its theological inspiration after the city’s capture by David (e.g. SCHMID 1955:168–197; CLEMENTS 1965:43–48).Although this supposition is not without merit, Genesis 14 provides the only evidence to link the cult of El-ʿElyôn with Jerusalem. On the other hand, significant, though not decisive, evidence may be adduced that would render an easy association between El-ʿElyôn and the Jebusite cult open to question. One notes that the name Salem suggests links to the astral deity Šalim (→Shalem). Further, the names Melchizedek (‘My king is Ṣedeq’) and Adonizedek (‘My Lord is Ṣedeq’, Josh 10:1)—both identified as kings of Jerusalem—suggest links to the West Semitic deity Ṣedeq (→Righteousness), who may also be an astral deity (note also David’s high priest Zadok). These deities, Shalim and Ṣedeq, are at least as likely to have been central to the pre-Israelite Jerusalem cult, as it is that the cult of El-ʿElyôn was the dominant religious institution (see fuller discussion in SEOW 1989:43–47). One notes that, even if the existence of a Jebusite cult of El-ʿElyôn is granted, it is unlikely that the Israelite identification of Yahweh as El-ʿElyôn derives its origin from this tradition. The presence of ʿElyôn in Deut 32 and Num 24, which may in some form be pre-monarchical, gravitates against such a hypothesis. Further, as SEOW has convincingly argued, Yahweh is likely to have been venerated as El-ʿElyôn at the sanctuary of Shiloh well before David’s capture of Jerusalem (SEOW 1989:11–54, esp. 41–54).As an epithet applied with a significant degree of fluidity throughout the West Semitic region, it is easy to understand how ʿElyôn may have made a relatively easy transition from El-veneration to Yahwistic cultic tradition in early Israelite religion. Curiously, the OT traditions rarely attest ʿElyôn standing alone, without modification. In the Aramaic sections of Daniel, however, references to Yahweh as ʿElyon (ʿlyʾ/ʿlʾh) often stand independently, without modification, although the intended referent is clearly Yahweh (Note that qdyšy ʿlywnyn is also attested). A similar phenomenon is evidenced in the frequent references to ʿElyôn (hypsistos [altus in 2 Esdr]) in the apocryphal books (1 and 2 Esdr, Tob, Jdt, Add Esth, Wis, Sir, Pr Man, 2 and 3 Macc). In Sir, it is the most common divine name after kyrios. The epithet also occurs in varous pseudepigraphical works, particularly in T. 12 Patr.In the NT, hypsistos is a decidedly Lucan title for God (TREBILCO 1989:58). Used five times in the Gospel of Luke (1:32, 35, 76; 6:35; 8:28) and twice in Acts (7:48; 16:17), hypsistos is only attested in two non-Lucan contexts—once in Mark (5:7), and once in Hebrews (7:1, which is a quotation of Gen 14:18). In Luke’s Gospel, the term is employed in the angel’s announcement to →Mary that her child will be called ‘Son of the Most High’ (huios hypsistou; Luke 1:32) and that the ‘power of the Most High’ will come upon her (dynamis hypsistou; Luke 1:35). In 1:76, Zechariah predicts that his son will be called ‘prophet of the Most High’ (prophētēs hypsistou). Those who love their enemies are called ‘children of the Most High’ by →Jesus (huioi hypsistou; Luke 6:35), and the Gerasene demoniac identifies Jesus as ‘son of the Most High God’ (huie theou tou hypsistou; Luke 8:28 par. Mark 5:7; cf. Matt 8:29). In Acts, Stephan asserts that ‘the Most High’ (ho hypsistos; Acts 7:48) does not dwell in houses made with human hands, and a slave girl from Philippi declares that Paul and his group are ‘servants of the Most High God’ (douloi tou theou tou hypsistou; Acts 16:17). Although there is not enough evidence to make a firm case, it would appear as if Luke employs the term hypsistos or ho hypsistos in Jewish contexts, and ho theos ho hypsistos in Gentile ones. As TREBILCO (1989:58–59) suggests, this may be because Luke was aware of the non-specific nature of the term hypsistos in a Gentile setting and sought to avoid confusion by employing a superlative of more significance for Gentiles. [For a further discussion of the Greek data see →Hypsistos]IV. BibliographyN. AVIGAD, Excavations in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem (1971; IEJ 22; 1972) 193–200; R. E. CLEMENTS, God and Temple (Philadelphia 1965) 40–62, esp. 43–48; F. M. CROSS, Yahweh and the God of the Patriarchs, HTR 55 (1962) 225–259; CROSS, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge, MA 1973) 44–60; G. L. DELLA VIDA, El ʿElyon in Genesis 14:18–20, JBL 63 (1944) 1–9; O. EISSFELDT, El and Yahweh, JSS 1 (1956) 25–37; J. A. EMERTON, Some Problems in Genesis XIV, Studies in the Pentateuch (ed. J. A. Emerton; Leiden 1990) 73–102; L. R. FISHER, Abraham and His Priest-King, JBL 81 (1962) 264–270; J. A. Fitzmyer, The Aramaic Inscriptions of Sefîre (Rome 1967); J. HACKETT, The Balaam Text From Deir ʿAllā (HSM 31; Chico 1984); C. E. L’HEUREUX, Rank Among the Canaanite Gods (HSM 21; Missoula 1979); H. A. HOFFNER, Jr., The Elkunirsa Myth Reconsidered, RHA 76 (1965) 5–16; HOFFNER, Hittite Myths (Atlanta 1990); H. INGHOLT et al, Recueil des tessères de Palmyre (Paris 1955); R. LACK, Les origines de Elyon, le Très-Haut, dans la tradition culturelle d’Israël, CBQ 24 (1962) 44–64; P. D. MILLER, ʾĒl, The Creator of Earth, BASOR 239 (1980) 43–46; E. T. MULLEN, Jr., The Assembly of the Gods (HSM 24; Chico 1986); H. NIEHR, Der Höchste Gott (Berlin 1990); R. A. ODEN, Baʿal Šamēm and ʾĒl, CBQ 39 (1977) 457–73; H. OTTEN, Ein kanaanäischer Mythus aus Boǧazköy, MIO 1 (1953) 125–150; S. B. PARKER, KTU 1.16 III, the Myth of the Absent God and 1 Kings 18, UF 21 (1989) 283–296; M. H. POPE, El in the Ugaritic Texts (Leiden 1955) 55–58; R. RENDTORFF, The Background of the Title אל עליון in Gen XIV, Fourth World Congress of Jewish Studies vol. 1 (Jerusalem 1967) 167–170; J. J. M. ROBERTS, The Davidic Origin of the Zion Tradition, JBL 92 (1973) 329–344; G. RYCKMANS, Les noms-propres sud-sémitiques, Vol. 1 (Louvain 1934); H. SCHMID, Jahwe und die Kulttraditionen von Jerusalem, ZAW 67 (1955) 168–97; C. L. SEOW, Myth, Drama, and the Politics of David’s Dance (HSM 46; Atlanta 1989); F. STOLZ, Strukturen und Figuren im Kult von Jerusalem (BZAW 119; Berlin 1969) esp. 134–137; P. R. TREBILCO, Paul and Silas—‘Servants of the Most High God’ (Acts 16:16–18), JSNT 36 (1989) 51–73; R. DE VAUX, Ancient Israel (London 1961) 289–311; H. ZOBEL, עליון, TWAT 6 (1987) 131–152.E. E. ELNES & P. D. MILLER
LXX Septuagint
1QapGen Genesis Apocryphon of Qumran Cave 1
KAI H. DONNER & W. Röllig, Kanaanäische und aramäische Inschriften
n. note
KTU M. Dietrich, O. Loretz & J. Sanmartín, Die keil-alphabetische Texte aus Ugarit (AOAT 24)
NEB New English Bible
NRSV New Revised Standard Version
Syr Syriac
Tg. Onq. Targum Onqelos
EA J. A. KNUDTZON, Die El-Amarna-Tafeln (= VAB 2); EA 359–379: A. RAINEY, El Amarna Tablets 359–379 (= AOAT 8)
T. 12 Patr. Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs
IEJ Israel Exploration Journal
HTR Harvard Theological Review
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature
JSS Journal of Semitic Studies
HSM Harvard Semitic Monographs
RHA Revue hittite et asianique
CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly
BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research
MIO Mitteilungen des Instituts für Orientforschung
UF Ugarit-Forschungen
ZAW Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft
BZAW Beihefte zur ZAW
JSNT Journal for the Study of the New Testament
TWAT Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Alten Testament, ed. G. J. Botterweck & H. Ringgren
E. E. Elnes and P. D. Miller, “Elyon,” in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, ed. Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst (Leiden; Boston; Köln; Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge: Brill; Eerdmans, 1999), 293–299.
