Prophecy in the Hebrew Bible: Selected Studies from Vetus Testamentum (Brill's Readers in Biblical Studies)

Prophecy in the Hebrew Bible P R O P H E C Y IN T H E H E B R E W BIBLE BRILL'S READERS IN BIBLICAL STUDIES V O...

Author: David E. Orton

302 downloads 1446 Views 11MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!

Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

Prophecy in the Hebrew Bible

P R O P H E C Y

IN

T H E

H E B R E W

BIBLE

BRILL'S READERS IN BIBLICAL STUDIES

V O L U M E

5

PROPHECY IN THE HEBREW BIBLE Selected Studies from Vetus Testamentum

COMPILED BY

D A V I D

E.

O R T O N

' / 6 8 ‫' ל־‬

B R I L L LEIDEN

· B O S T O N

2000

· K Ö L N

This book is printed on acid-frce paper.

Cover design:

BEELDVORM,

Lcidschendam

Die Deutsche Bibliothek - CIP-Einheitsaufnahme Prophecy in the H e b r e w Bible: selected studies from Vetus Testamentum / comp, by David E. Orton. - Leiden ; Boston ; Köln : Brill, 1999 (Brill's r e a d e r s in biblical studies ; Vol. 5)) ISBN 9 0 - 0 4 - 1 1 1 6 0 - 3

Brill's r e a d e r s in biblical studies. - Leiden ; Boston ; Köln : Brill [Neue Schriftenreihe]

Library of C o n g r e s s Cataloging-in-Publication Data Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data is also available

ISSN ISBN

1389-1170 90 04 11160 3

© Copyright 2000 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910 Danvers MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. PRINTED IN THE NETHERLANDS

C O N T E N T S

Preface Places of Original Publication Orthodoxy and the Prophetic Word A Study in the Relationship between Jeremiah and Deuteronomy R. Davidson

vii ix

1

The Special Form- and Traditio-historical Character of Ezekiel's Prophecy W. Zimmerli

11

Micah in Dispute with the Pseudoprophets A.S. van der Woude

24

Amos' Intercessory Formula W. Brueggemann

41

The Elijah-Elisha Sagas: Some Remarks on Prophetic Succession in Ancient Israel R.P. Carroll

56

2 Kings III and Genres of Prophetic Narrative B.O. Long

72

Ancient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literature M. Weinfeld

84

From Early to Classical Prophecy: Continuity and Change M. Haran

102

The Purpose of the "Editorial Framework" of the Book of Haggai R A . Mason

115

Possession Trance and Prophecy in Pre-exilic Israel S.B. Parker

124

Poetic Structure and Prophetic Rhetoric in Hosea J.R. Lundbom

139

The Prophecies of Isaiah and the Fall of Jerusalem R.E. Clements

148

The Main Concern of Second Isaiah A.S. Kapelrud

164

Reflections on the Study of the Prophetic Discourse The Question of Isaiah i.2-20 Y. Gitay

173

Zechariah's Visions: A Theological Perspective D.L. Petersen

188

Prophetic Legitimation in Jeremiah J.L. Berquist

200

1 Kings XIII: True and False Prophecy D.W. Van Winkle

211

Structure, Genre and Intent in the Book of Habakkuk M.A. Sweeney

224

Official Attitudes toward Prophecy at Mari and in Israel S.B. Parker

245

Index of Authors

265

Index of Biblical References

271

PREFACE Prophecy in the Hebrew Bible is the first collection of articles from the pages of Vetus Testamentum to appear in the new series of Brill's Readers in Biblical Studies. The series, which began successfully with a number of selections from Novum Testamentum, is designed to provide convenient and useful selections in a handy format, affordable for classroom use and by individual students of the Bible. The present volume presents a broad range of scholarly insights into biblical prophecy published in the last third of the twentieth century. In this period Vetus Testamentum has published several hundred articles on the prophetic books of the Bible. The majority of these have been exegetical readings of individual texts. The focus of this selection, however, is on the broader picture—the nature of biblical prophecy in the cultural context of the ancient Near East, the issue of true and false prophecy in biblical perspective, the genres of the prophetic texts, and central features of the main prophetic books. Readers will recognize many of the authors in this volume as household names in biblical scholarship. The hope is, therefore, that this collection will prove genuinely useful to students of biblical prophecy. In accordance with the ethos of Vetus Testamentum, no editorial comment is made on the articles published here, except, by implication, with regard to their suitability for republication in this form. The arti‫״‬ cle by F. van Dijk-Hemmes, "The Metaphorization of Women in Prophetic Speech: an Analysis of Ezekiel xxiii" (VT 43 [1993] 162ff.) is not included because of its recent reprinting elsewhere. The articles are arranged in chronological order of appearance in the journal. Thanks are due to Arie van der Kooij, current editor of Vetus Testamentum, for his friendly advice. Students and scholars interested in the treasury of studies of particular prophetic texts, and in articles in German and French, which could not be included here, are referred to Vetus Testamentum itself. The Index to Volumes I-XLV published in 1996 is useful for this purpose. DEO

Leiden, August 1999

PLACES O F O R I G I N A L PUBLICATION The articles in this collection first appeared in Vetus Testamentum. R. Davidson, 'Orthodoxy and the Prophetic Word. A study in the Relationship between Jeremiah and Deuteronomy' VT 14 (1964), pp. 407-16 W. Zimmerli, 'The Special Form- and Traditio-historical Character of Ezekiel's Prophecy' VT 15 (1965), pp. 515-27 A.S. van der Woude, 'Micah in Dispute with the Pseudoprophets' VT 19 (1969), pp. 244-60 W. Brueggemann, 'Amos' Intercessory Formula' VT 19 (1969), pp. 385-99 R.P. Carroll, 'The Elijah-Elisha Sagas: Some Remarks on Prophetic Succession in Ancient Israel' VT 19 (1969), pp. 400-15 B.O. Long, '2 Kings III and Genres of Prophetic Narrative' VT 23 (1973), pp. 337-48 M. Weinfeld, Ancient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literature' F T 27 (1977), pp. 178-95 M. Haran, 'From Early to Classical Prophecy: Continuity and Change' VT 27 (1977), pp. 385-97 R.A. Mason, 'The Purpose of the "Editorial Framework" of the Book of Haggai' VT 27 (1977), pp. 413-21 S.B. Parker, 'Possession Trance and Prophecy in Pre-exilic Israel' VT 28 (1978), pp. 271-85 J.R. Lundbom, 'Poetic Structure and Prophetic Rhetoric in Hosea' VT 29 (1979), pp. 300-308 R.E. Clements, 'The Prophecies of Isaiah and the Fall of Jerusalem' VT 30 (1980), pp. 421-36 A.S. Kapelrud, 'The Main Concern of Second Isaiah' VT 32 (1982), pp. 50-58 Y. Gitay, 'Reflections on the Study of the Prophetic Discourse. The Question of Isaiah i.2-20' VT 33 (1983), pp. 207-21

D.L. Petersen, 'Zechariah's Visions: A Theological Perspective' VT 34 (1984), pp. 195-206 J.L. Berquist, 'Prophetic Legitimation in Jeremiah' VT 39 (1989), pp. 129-39 D.W. Van Winkle, '1 Kings XIII: True and False Prophecy' I T 39 (1989), pp. 31-43 M.A. Sweeney, 'Structure, Genre and Intent in the Book of Habakkuk' I T 41 (1991), pp. 63-83 S.B. Parker, 'Official Attitudes toward Prophecy at Mari and in Israel' I T 43 (1993), pp. 50-58

O R T H O D O X Y

A N D

T H E

P R O P H E T I C

A STUDY IN T H E RELATIONSHIP B E T W E E N J E R E M I A H

AND

W O R D DEUTERONOMY

BY

R. D A V I D S O N St. Andrews

If many aspects of prophecy in Ancient Israel cannot be understood except against the background of parallel phenomena in the world of the Ancient Near East and beyond 1 ), so within Israel — as recent research has increasingly emphasized — prophecy is but one strand, albeit a very important strand, in the total religious life of the community. Much attention has therefore been given to the prophets in relationship, for example, to the cult, to the Psalms, to tradition and to the wisdom literature 2). The purpose of this paper is to explore another avenue in the same general area. Can we analyse the relationship between the prophetic message and what was generally accepted as orthodox religious tradition? A deceptively simple answer to this question has had wide currency.What we have described as 'orthodox religious tradition' was in fact a crude mixture of animism, polytheism and amoral Canaanite religious customs and beliefs. The turning point came with the prophets of the 8th century B. C. who first insisted that Yahweh was not merely the god of Israel but the moral sovereign of the entire universe. It was the prophets from Amos onwards who created and defended Hebrew orthodoxy mid a sea of near paganism 3). This is a dangerous oversimplification of the history of the religion The Prophetic Achievement, 1 9 6 3 pp. 2FF. Prophecy in Ancient Israel, 1 9 6 2 pp. 1 - 4 6 . A . H A L D A R : Associations of Cultic Prophets among the Ancient Semites 1 9 4 5 2 ) A . R . J O H N S O N : The Cultic Prophet in Ancient Israel 1 9 4 4 . N. W. P O R T E O U S : 'The Prophets and the Problem of Continuity' in Israel's Prophetic Heritage (ed. B . W. A N D E R S O N and W. H A R R E L S O N ) 1 9 6 2 pp. 1 1 - 2 5 . S. T E R R I E N : 'Amos and Wisdom' ibid., pp. 1 0 8 - 1 1 5 . J . L I N D B L O M : 'Wisdom in the Old Testament Prophets' in S. V. T. ILL 1 9 5 5 1

) C. F. WHITLEY:

J . LINDBLOM:

pp.

192FF.

R . H . P F E I F F E R : Religion in the Old Testament 1 9 6 1 pp. 123FF., cf C . F . W H I T L E Y op. cit. p. 43, . . . the great creative prophets were but little indebted to traditional Israelite belief for the content of their message'. 3

)

of Israel. For one thing, we must take far more seriously than this view allows the existence within Israel of a living tradition of faith rooted in the Exodus and covenant, a tradition which preceded the prophets and shaped their message. The prophets were the guardians and interpreters of this tradition not its creators 1 ). Attempts to reverse on theological grounds the traditional Old Testament order, Torah followed by the Prophets, are mistaken. Even if the present literary redaction of Torah is later than certain of the prophetic books, the essential content of Torah predates the prophets 2). Jewish tradition has correctly envisaged the prophetic books as commentary on Torah 3). In the second place it is obviously unsatisfactory to see the religion of Israel at any particular moment solely through the eyes of a prophet in revolt against certain features of that religion. It may be an interesting study to attempt to reconstruct the popular religious mood of the day from the criticisms which Amos directs against it, but the resultant picture is inevitably in certain respects a caricature. T o explore adequately the relationship between the word of Yahweh as it came to the prophet and the religious orthodoxy of the day, two conditions must be fulfilled. 1. There must be a prophet locked in conflict with the religious establishment and providing us with sufficient information to sketch clearly the major issues at stake. 2. We must have access to the orthodox standpoint independent of that provided by the prophetic criticism. In view of the sketchy information we have concerning most of the prophets and the continuing difficulty of dating the literary traditions in the Old Testament, these conditions are not easily satisfied. Jeremiah, however, would seem to fulfil our requirements. We know more of the personal life of Jeremiah than of any other prophet in the Old Testament. Not only are we reasonably well provided with biographical material concerning key incidents in his 1 ) J. M U I L E N B U R G : 'The Form and Structure of the Covenantal Formulations', V.T. 9, 1959 pp. 35Iff. N. W. P 0 R T E 0 U S : 'The Basis of the Ethical Teaching of the Prophets' in Studies in Old Testament Prophecy (ed. H . H . R O W L E Y ) , 1 9 5 0 pp. 1 4 3 - 1 5 6 . 2 ) cf D. N. F R E E D M A N : 'Law and Prophets' in S.V.T. I X , pp 250-265 for the view that the literary redactions of Law and Prophets went hand in hand during the crisis years of exile. 3 ) cf. A . C . W E L C H : Deuteronomy, the Framework of the Code 1932 p. 25.

ministry, thanks to Baruch 1 ), not only has he left us his considered verdict on the political and religious establishment, priests and prophets, kings and politicians 2) ; his 'Confessions' or 'Intimate Papers' throw an intensely personal light on an inner crisis provoked by persistent opposition 3 ). The theological presuppositions of the orthodoxy which opposed Jeremiah are equally well documented in Deuteronomy. Whatever the origin of Deuteronomy — and its roots are probably to be traced to Mosaic tradition in certain religious (? Levitical) circles in north Israel 4) — there is little doubt that the Deuteronomic Code provided the theological impetus for the national religious reformation of 621 B. C., a few years after Jeremiah began his prophetic ministry 5). N o r was that impetus misguided. Deuteronomy is one of the most stimulating theological documents in the Old Testament. T o the mystery of God's unmeritable outgoing love Israel's existence as the covenant people is traced. To such a love the people are challenged to respond in love, a love which can only adequately express itself in an exclusive loyalty to Yahweh 6). Israel is 'holy', chosen by Yahweh ; a nation for whom obedience to the ordinances of Yahweh brings well-being and security, disobedience the destructive curse of Yahweh 7). Deuteronomy is written in the conviction that however much Israel may fail, obedience is her true destiny. Anything, therefore, which threatens to undermine this obedience must be ruthlessly eradicated from the community. In particular a reiterated warning

1

) e.g. xxvi-xxix; xxii-xxxix. ) ii 8; ν 30-31; vi 13-15; viii 8-12; xiv 13-16; xxii 13-19; xxiii 9-33; xxviii 5ff. 3 ) xi 18; xii 6; xv 10-21; xvii 9-10; 14-18; xviii 18-23; xx 7-18. 4 ) G. VON RAD: Deuteronomiam-Sttidien 1948 (Ε. T. Studies in Deuteronomy 2

S.B.T.

9)

Interpreter's Bible Vol 2 . 1 9 5 3 . pp. 323FF. Peake's Commentary (ed. M . B L A C K and H . H . R O W L E Y ) 1962 §§ 231 c-e, but per contra Rowley § 69 c. 5 ) Attempts to deny the link between Deuteronomy and Josiah's reformation, and to doubt the chronological data in Jer. i. 1-3, have not in our view been substantiated c.f. J. P. H Y A T T Interpreter's Bible, Vol 5, 1956, introduction and commentary on Jeremiah pp. 777ff. For a sound survey of the issues c.f. H. H. R O W L E Y , 'The Prophet Jeremiah and the Book of Deuteronomy' in Studies in Old Testament Prophecy (ed. H . H . R O W L E Y ) 1950 pp. 157ff. ; reprinted with additional bibliography in From Moses toQumran 1963 pp. 187-210. A. J E P S E N : 'Die Reform des Josia' in Festschrift Friedrich Baumgärtel 1959 pp. 97-108 β ) Deut, vi 4-9; χ 12-13; xi 1. 7 ) Deut, vii 6-11; vii 12ff; xi 13-32; xxviii. G. E. WRIGHT: G . HENTON

DAVIES:

is given against the corruptive influence of Canaanite social and religious customs 1 ). It is in this context that two passages in Deuteronomy, xiii 1-6 and xviii 15-22 seek to legislate for prophecy. Significantly these are the only two passages in Torah which profess to give guidance on one of the burning issues of Jeremiah's ministry, how to distinguish between the true and the false in prophecy; Jeremiah's 'Thus says the L O R D ' being answered by other prophets declaring with equal conviction 'Thus says the L O R D ' and a message which was the direct antithesis of Jeremiah's word 2). (a) xiii 1-6 True to its central thesis, the necessity for exclusive loyalty to Yahweh, Deuteronomy here declares that any 'prophet (‫ )נביא‬or 'dreamer of dreams'(‫ )חלם חלום‬who seeks to seduce the people from their allegiance to Yahweh must be disregarded, no matter what his credentials. Even when he authenticates his message by 'sign and wonder' (‫ )האות והמופת‬he is still in 'rebellion against Yahweh your God' (‫)דבר סרה על יהוה אלהיכם‬. Since all must betraced to the direct causation of God it can only be assumed that such a prophet has been sent to test the people 'to know whether you love Yahweh your God with all your heart and with all your soul' v.4. (b) xviii 15-22 seems to recognise that the test proposed in xiii 1-6 may have only limited value. A prophet advocating open apostacy from Yahweh was likely to be a rare phenomenon. In contrast to the devious magical and occult methods which other nations employ to determine the mind of God (xviii 9-14) Israel, claims this passage, will have from age to age a succession of prophets mediating to the community the word of God as Moses had done at Mt. Horeb 3). But what guarantee does the community have that when a prophet speaks in the name of Yahweh he is not 'speaking presumptuously' (‫?)יזית ל ד ב ר דבר‬ The answer lies in a purely pragmatic test, 'when a prophet speaks in the name of Yahweh, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word which Yahweh has not spoken; the prophet has spoken presumptuously, you need not be afraid of him' v. 22 4). 1

) Deut, vii 1-5; xii 2-3, 29-31; xiii 6-18; xviii 9-14; xx 10-18. 'Die falschen Propheten, ‫ י‬ZAW, 5 1 , 1 9 3 3 pp. 109FF. G . Q U E L L : 'Wahre und falsche Propheten' BF Ch. Th. 4 6 i. 1 9 5 2 J. S K I N N E R Prophecy and Religion 1922 pp. 187-200. 3 ) The arguments adduced by S. R . D R I V E R in Deuteronomy (I.C.C. Commen2

) G . VON R A D :

tary ad loc) for this interpretation of the Mosaic ‫ נביא מקרבך מאחיך כמוני‬are still decisive. 4

J.

) cf. J .

S K I N N E R op.

LINDBLOM,

cit.

ρ

173η,

pp.

198f.

Prophecy in Ancient Israel pp. 213f.

S K I N N E R ' S verdict on these two Deuteronomic passages is interesting. 'The authors of the Deuteronomic legislation were thus aware of the dangers involved in the unrestrained exercise of freedom of prophesying; and in their attempt to regulate it and control it we have the first intimation of the radical opposition between the written code and the living voice of prophecy which ultimately led to the extinction of the latter' 1 ). In fact we may go further. It is our contention that in all probability, 1. the Deuteronomic texts were used by the religious orthodoxy of the day to discredit Jeremiah, to brand him as a 'false' prophet. 2. Jeremiah was driven to criticise the texts as being irrelevant to the developing religious situation of his day. 1. Jeremiah's attitude to the Deuteronomic reformation of 621 B. C. is difficult to determine. Still the likeliest hypothesis is that what began between prophet and reformers as a marriage of like minds, or at least convenience, led through increasingly mutual incompatability to divorce 2). Whatever the history of that relationship, Jeremiah after 621 B. C. found himself speaking to a reformed community, a community pledged to a religious loyalty as outlined in Deuteronomy. Such a loyalty involved a measure of religious apartheid; it enshrined 'the triumphant spirit of a people who will have safety in the land if they keep the covenant because it is God who will fight for them and protect them from all their enemies' 3). That much of Jeremiah's teaching post 621 B. C. is inimical to this spirit has long been recognised. His letter to the exiles (xxix) is a good illustration 4). To counteract the activity of certain revolutionary prophets, encouraging the exiles of 597 B. C. to adopt a policy of non-cooperation towards the Babylonian authorities, out of a conviction that Yahweh would soon crush Babylon and return the exiles to Jerusalem, Jeremiah not only urges the exiles to prepare for a stay of several generations (70 years v. 10), but exhorts them to 'seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile and pray to Yahweh on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare' (v. 7). Earlier prophets, for example

1

) J.

2

) cf.

S K I N N E R : op.

cit.

p.

214.

op.cit. 3 ) G . Ε . W R I G H T : op. cit. P . 325b. 4 ) For the critical problems of ch. xxix, problems which do not affect the central assertions of the passage c.f. J . S K I N N E R op. cit. pp. 287ff. P . V O L Z : ΚΑΤ. 10(1928) pp. 267ff; W . R U D O L P H : H.A.T. 12 1958 pp. 166ff. Α. W E I S E R : ATD 21,1955 pp. 257ff. A . C . W E L C H : Jeremiah, his Time and his Work pp. 158ff. H.

H.

ROWLEY:

Amos and Isaiah of Jerusalem 1 ), had thought of foreign powers as the instruments of Yahweh's just chastisement of his people, but Jeremiah here claims far more ; that loyalty to a foreign power which threatens Judah's continuing existence is not inconsistent with loyalty toYahweh. In the light of the Deuteronomic ideas of a reforme national religion this is heresy. It is as if Deuteronomy, instead of advocating the destruction of the Canaanites and all their ways, had demanded that the Hebrews pray for the welfare of their Canaanite neighbours. N o r was this for Jeremiah a passing mood. A few years later when the leaders of church and state were summoning the people of Jerusalem to a last defiant stand against the Babylonians in the sure confidence that Yahweh would fight for them, Jeremiah pursuing a lonely path of high treason openly counselled his fellow citizens to desert to the enemy 2). There is no reason to doubt the religious sincerity of the men who opposed Jeremiah on these issues. Viewed in the light of Deut. xiii 1-6 Jeremiah was a false prophet inviting his people to 'go after other gods' (Deut. xiii 3), a politico-religious fifth columnist proclaiming treason against the noblest reformed tradition of his people. Nor does Jeremiah fare any better when we apply to him the yardstick of the other Deuteronomic test (xviii 15-22). At any time prior to the final collapse of Jerusalem in 586 B. C., Jeremiah's witness could have been legitimately dismissed with the words 'Jeremiah has spoken presumptuously, you need not be afraid of him' (Deut. xviii 22) From the earliest of his oracles concerning 'the foe from the north' 3) Jeremiah had repeatedly in the name of Yahweh proclaimed coming disaster 'and the word did not come to pass nor did it come true'. (Deut. xviii 22). The thesis that Jeremiah stood condemned in the light of the orthodox assessment of prophecy helps to explain certain aspects of his ministry. There is the consistent and savage certainty of the opposition to Jeremiah from the religious establishment. There is his total failure in one of the traditional roles of the prophet, that of advisor to the ruling monarch 4). There is the depths of the religious 1

) e.g. Amos iii 11; iv 2-3; Isa. χ 5ff. ) cf. Jer. xxi 1 - 1 0 ; xxiv 8 - 2 2 ; xxxvii 3 - 1 0 , 1 1 - 2 1 ; xxxviii 1 - 2 3 . Attempts by certain scholars e.g. Β . D U H M ( K . H . C . 1 9 0 1 ) and C . H . C O R N I L L ( 1 9 0 5 ) to avoid the obvious meaning of xxi 9 and xxxviii 2 reveal the extent to which the radical nature of Jeremiah's message has not been understood. 3 ) Jer. iv 5-31; v. 15-17; vi 1-5, 22ff. cf. i 14. 4 ) Even when a king such as Zedekiah had more than a passing suspicion that 2

crisis in Jeremiah's own soul, a crisis provoked by the burden of a prophetic word which devout men dismissed as false, but to which Jeremiah had to remain true 1 ). 2. Is there any evidence that Jeremiah, aware that the orthodox tests of prophecy were being used to discredit him, questioned the adequacy or relevance of these tests? (a) In Jer. xxiii 9 ff there is a collection of sayings entitled 'Concerning the prophets (‫ )לנביאים‬in which an editor has assembled criticisms of prophetic orthodoxy which Jeremiah must have voiced on many different occasions 3 ). Verses 13-14 contain an interesting contrast. Prophets of a past age in the old northern Kingdom, says Jeremiah, led the people astray by 'prophesying by Baal' (‫ )הנבאו בבעל‬v. 13. In such a situation the Deuteronomic test (xiii 1-6) would be decisive — they entice the people 'to go after other gods'. But, claims Jeremiah, his prophetic contemporaries in Jerusalem do something equally 'horrible' (‫ — )שערורה‬they practice evil themselves and allow the evil in society to go unchecked (v. 14). This, in Jeremiah's eyes, is as much a betrayal of Yahweh as open apostacy. Deuteronomy, however, has no word to say concerning this situation in the ranks of the prophets. It is tempting to assume that in the pointed contrast of these verses, Jeremiah is drawing attention to the inadequacy of an orthodox definition of false prophecy which met the needs of a past age, but proved irrelevant to the religious situation of his own day. Another statement from this same section is most meaningful as a criticism of Deut. xiii 1-6. The Deuteronomic passages begin by speaking about 'a prophet' (‫ )נביא‬or 'a dreamer of dreams' (‫חלם‬ ‫ )חלום‬in such a way as to assume that they are identical or at least parallel phenomena 3). Certain prophets in Jeremiah's day seem to have accepted dreams unquestioningly as containing authentic revelation (xxiii 25). Jeremiah in what can only be pointed contrast draws a sharp distinction between 'dream' (‫ )חלום‬and the true prophetic ‫( ד ב ר‬xxiii 28). The dream is to the true prophetic word as chaff to the true prophetic word was to be found on the lips of Jeremiah, he. did not follow it in defiance of the politico-religious orthodoxy of the day cf. Jer. xxi 2; xxxvii 2; xxxvii 17ff; xxxviii 17-19, 24ff. 1 ) Jer. XX 7-12. 2 ) cf. J. S K I N N E R op.cit. pp. 190 ff. P . V O L Z op. cit. ad loc; W. R U D O L P H op. cit ad l o c ; A . WEISER 3

op.

cit.

ad

loc.

) The dream as a medium of revelation is well authenticated in Old Testament traditions e.g. Gen. xxviii 12; xxxvii 5; 1 K. iii 5; Dan. vii

wheat; the true prophets word being 'like fire, yes like a a hammer which smashes rock' (xxiii 29), characterised by a moral realism. (b) A similar situation seems evident in the relationship between Jeremiah and the other Deuteronomic passage xviii 15-22. In xxiii 17 Jeremiah accuses the prophets who oppose him of proclaiming a message whose unconditional theme is 'Security (‫ )שלום‬shall be yours . . . no disaster shall befall you'. The tension between Jeremiah and prophetic orthodoxy is dramatically personalised in the conflict between Jeremiah and Hananiah ben Azzur spokesman of the Jerusalem prophets (xxvii-xxviii). In response to an oracle of Hananiah's which uncritically endorsed the patriotic fervour of the day Jeremiah declares 'Amen so may Yahweh do; may he vindicate your prophetic word' (xxviii). The word of the true prophetic tradition, however, has been critical not jingoistic. 'As for the prophet who prophesies 'Security' (‫ )שלום‬when the word of the prophet comes to pass, it shall be known that Yahweh truly sent that prophet' (xxviii 9) Can this statement be anything other than a deliberate echo and criticism of Deut. xviii 22 with its insistence that any prophet whose word is not vindicated by events is a false prophet? Jeremiah narrows the operation of this test to one prophetic category only, to the prophet who encourages in the people a mood of false complacency. The content of the prophetic word at the time of its delivery is the ultimate test of its truth or falsity. Any prophetic word which seems to ignore the essential moral realism of Yahwehism must be considered to be false unless later vindicated by events. To these general considerations we may add several other linguistic parallels which strongly suggest that Jeremiah was well aware of the Deuteronomic tests. (a) Deut. xiii 6 says of the false prophet !‫דבר סרה ע ל יהוד‬. Elsewhere in the Old Testament ‫ סרה‬meaning apostacy is found only in Isa. i 5; xxxi 6; Jer. xxviii 16; xxix 32 1 ). The Isaianic passages refer to the apostacy of the people as a whole. The Jeremiah passages alone refer to prophecy. In xxviii 16 Jeremiah condemns Hananiah ‫כי סרה דברת אל יהוה‬ In xxix 32 judgement is pronounced against Shemeliah in Babylon ‫כי סרה ד ב ר ע ל יהוה‬ 1

) cf. BROWN,

DRIVER,

B R I G G S ad

loc;

KOEHLER-BAUMGARTNER

ad

loc.

In both passages L X X omits the phrase and it has generally been assumed that it is an editorial insertion from the Deuteronomic passage 1 ). In view of the critical problems surrounding the L X X text of Jeremiah 2), however, it is doubtful whether a L X X omission ought to be uncritically followed. In both passages Jeremiah's activity stands to be condemned in the light of Deut. xiii 1-6. Is it not possible that he is accusing the representatives of Deuteronomic orthodoxy of being themselves in that state of ‫ סרה‬against Yahweh of which they are accusing him? (a) Deut. xviii 10 lists various religious practices to which the pagan nations resort in their attempts to find God. Such are pronounced to be ‫ תועבה‬and responsible for Yahweh driving these nations out of Canaan. Jeremiah (xxvii 9) links with the prophets who support the powerful anti-Babylonian lobby of the day, three of the roots which appear in the Deuteronomic list ‫קסם‬, ‫ענן‬, ‫כשף‬. May he not be hinting that such prophets are ‫ תועבה‬to Yahweh and responsible in part for the coming destruction of the Judean state? (c) Deut. xviii 18 describes the character of the true prophet in the following terms ‫ונתתי דברי בפיו ודבר אליהם את כ ל אשר אצוני‬ The closest parallels to this are to be found in the call experience of Jeremiah , ‫״‬ ‫( נתתי דברי בפיך‬i 9) Deuteronomy provides us with the sole attempt in Torah to control prophecy by legislation. It is obvious that there are dangers in granting unlimited licence to anyone prepared to impose upon a credulous people by claiming to speak in the name of Yahweh. The Deuteronomic tests seemed at the time of their formulation both theologically sound and realistic; yet at a later age they support Hananiah against Jeremiah. The reason lies in the very nature of prophecy. Though it builds upon a religious tradition, it speaks a new creative word to each age, a word varying in content and emphasis with the needs of the age. The attempt to legislate for prophecy is, therefore, doomed to failure since it means fossilizing prophecy at a certain stage of its development. Theologically S K I N N E R ' S insight remains true. 'False prophecy. . . so far as it had any root of 1

) cf. P . V 0 L Z op. cit. ad loc.; W . R U D O L P H op. cit. ad loc.; and footnote to B. ad loc. 2 ) cf. J. Z I E G L E R : Septuaginta‫׳‬. Ieremias 1957.

H.

sincerity was fundamentally an unprogressive survival of the ancient prophecy of Israel under conditions to which it was no longer adequate 1). Like false prophecy, orthodoxy, when encased within a written document such as Deuteronomy, runs the danger of negating the truth it seeks to preserve by fossilizing it at a particular stage of its development. It is easier for the false prophet to repeat uncritically orthodox truisms than to face the demand of a creative prophetic word. In this sense the attitude of false prophecy is akin to the attitude of Job's friends, while Jeremiah, like Job, is on pilgrimage away from orthodoxy to a more adequate faith. 1

) op.cit. ρ 187 (italics mine)

T H E

SPECIAL F O R M - A N D C H A R A C T E R

T R A D I T I O - H I S T O R I C A L

O F E Z E K I E L ' S

P R O P H E C Y

BY

W. ZIMMERLI Göttingen

In spite of all the work that has been done on the prophet Ezekiel, his prophecy still remains difficult to comprehend. In the following paper 1 ) we will not presume to illuminate all of those difficulties. Rather, we will take up the more modest task of presenting certain facts about the form and material of Ezekiel's message, and on the basis of these, draw several conclusions about the personal character of this prophet and the background of his traditions. We will proceed in this task from the opinion that even though a complex redactional work can be recognized in the book of Ezekiel, it preserves for us on the whole the peculiar characteristics of the prophet. Thus, the critical work of H Ö L S C H E R , M E S S E L , T O R R E Y , I R W I N , and others appears to me not to do proper justice to the text. When one considers the book of Ezekiel according to its form, he is immediately struck by the consistent recurrence of speeches by the prophet in the first person. Only the superscription in i 3a, which has been secondarily inserted into the text, is in the third person. VON 2 R A B E N A U ) has shown how deeply this structure has penetrated into the substance of the book, so that it can by no means be stripped away as a secondary redactional veil. Of the 52 units which I find in the book, only one can be considered strictly a narrative without a word of proclamation. This is xxxiii 21-22, the account of the arrival of the news that Jerusalem had fallen. Because of the peculiarity of this form, the news of the fall of Jerusalem receives unusually strong emphasis. Five of the units then are accounts of visions 3 ). All of the remaining 1

) Paper read at the Bangor meeting of the society for Old Testament Study, July 22, 1964. 2 ) K. V O N R A B E N A U , "Die Entstehung des Buches Ezechiel in formgeschichtlicher Sicht" (Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Martin-Luther-Universität HalleWittenberg, ges.-spr. wiss. Reihe 5, 1955/56, 569-683). ‫ ף‬i 1 - iii 15; iii 22 - ν 17; viii 1 - xi 25; xxxvii 1-14; xl 1 - xlviii 35.

46 units, with the single exception of the qinab in Chapter xix 1 ), are introduced with the sentence ‫ויהי ד ב ר יהוה אלי‬. This sentence is formally an element of narrative. In many texts in Samuel and Kings 2), we find it in a narrative context, reporting in the third person that the word of Yahweh had confronted a prophet. Apart from secondary superscriptions, the formula does not appear in the earlier classical prophets down to Jeremiah. In Jeremiah it appears again in narrative texts 3). However, it can be seen here that this short sentence, formulated in the third person, is a simple introduction formula of a prophetic speech. This recalls the fact that the prophetic word does not express a timeless knowledge of Yahweh but is in fact an event, an intrusion of divine reality into the prophet's life. Along with the narrative formula in the third person, the first person formulation of the sentence is also found in Jeremiah 4). And this is the form which appears exclusively in Ezekiel. By means of this personal account, Ezekiel subordinates everything else to the intrusion of the divine word and vision. And in light of this, all else recedes into the background. Thus we learn nothing of a circle of disciples such as we do in Isaiah, although the book of Ezekiel clearly betrays the work of a group of students who were responsible for handing his prophecy down to subsequent generations. Neither do we know of a figure which would correspond to Jeremiah's Baruch. The message in this prophet is dominated completely by the event of the divine word to which he refers in the first person. This strong accent of personal encouter with the word of Yahweh might well allow us to presume that Ezekiel goes his own original way and finds original forms for his proclamation. But such is not the case. In reality, his proclamation shows a completely different picture. We discover first a clear line which leads back from Ezekiel to the manner of expression and the world of ideas of pre-classical prophecy. This is best shown in the visions. All five are introduced by the stereotyped expression: "the hand of Yahweh came (‫ )היה‬or fell (‫ )נפל‬over me". The phrase "the hand of Yahweh" appears only once in Isaiah (viii 11) and once in Jeremiah (xv 17). But the most common place 1 2

) Cf. my Commentary, p. 420.429. ) Cf. Ο . G R E T H E R , Name und Wort Gottes im Alten Testament,

(1934), 3 4

6 7 ff.

) Jer. i 2; xiv 1; xxviii 12 et al. ) Jer. i 4.11.13; ii 1 et al.

BZAW

64

for it is in the stories of the earlier pre-classical prophets. 2 Kings iii 15 reports that after music had been played, the hand of Yahweh came over the prophet Elisha so that he could deliver an oracle. According to 1 Kings xviii 46, the hand of Yahweh came over Elijah after the divine judgment on Mount Carmel, so that he could run to Jezreel alongside the chariot of Ahab, an inconceivable feat of strength. This leads us next to the expression that the "spirit of Yahweh" seizes the prophet and transplants him into some different state, indeed, translocates him from one place to another. In 2 Kings ii 16, after Elijah had made his ascension, the prophetic disciples express the apprehension that the "spirit of Yahweh" might have lifted Elijah up (‫ )נשא‬and tossed him into some mountain or into some valley. On the other hand, we find in 2 Kings ν 26 an inner translocation which allows the prophet to see things which occur at a great distance. Elisha perceives from his remote vantage point the fact that Gahazi had accepted a gift from Naaman against his command. He describes this with these words: "Did my heart not go along (‫ )לבי הלך‬when a man descended from his chariot and met you?" It is even more conspicuous that the classical prophets before Ezekiel avoided the expression of the prophetic ‫רוח‬. It seems that these prophets wanted consciously to disassociate themselves from the "spirit" character of the older prophets which could be so readily incited to extreme manifestations. In Hosea (ix 7) we hear the people say: " T h e man of the spirit is mad." But in Ezekiel this aversion is completely missing. He stands unconditionally in the old prophetic tradition when he says at the end of his call vision that "the spirit" lifted him up (‫ )נשאתני‬and took him away (‫)ותקחני‬, or when in viii 3 he says concerning his translocation to Jerusalem that a figure seized him by the hair, and the "spirit" lifted him up between heaven and earth (‫ )ותשא אתי רוח‬and brought him in a divine apparition to Jerusalem. Thus, just as Elisha looked into the distance to see Gahazi accept a gift from Naaman, Ezekiel saw what was happening in the Temple. According to xi 24, the spirit lifted him up again (‫)ורוח נשאתני‬ and brought him back to Jerusalem. Also xxxvii 1 reports his translocation ‫ ברוח יהוה‬into a field full of dead bones. Still a further minor feature should be discussed in this context. According to viii 1 ff., the vision of his translocation suddenly falls on the prophet as he sits in his house while the elders of Judah are sitting before him (‫)לפני‬. This stereotyped situation is to be found also in xiv 1 ff. and xx 1 ff. (cf. also xxxiii 31). We seek in vain for

this situation in the books of Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Micha, and Jeremiah. But its exact equivalent is found in 2 Kings vi 32, where Elisha is "sitting in his house" and the elders are "sitting with him" (here: ‫)אתו‬. We may conclude, therefore, that we have discovered here a typical scene from the prophetic "Lehrhaus". Its relationship to similar typical scenes in the Egyptian royal novelle 1 ) needs further clarification. At this point, we have established nothing more than a connection between the tradition of Ezekiel and the earlier prophetic ‫רוח‬theology. This leads us next to the essential question of the relationship in content. The phenomenon of dramatic incitation plays an incomparably stronger role in the visions of this prophet than in the earlier classical prophets. Whereas the visions of most of the others show one single picture: locusts, a basket of fruit, an almond rod, the visions of Ezekiel are much more strongly dramatized. The prophet not only feels himself bodily removed and led around in his visions. He himself initiates a part of the action which comprises the visions. Under his prophecy, Pelatiah collapses dead. According to the vision in xxxvii 7, the dead bones come together again and receive new life at his word. Ezekiel's visions contain, to use 2 L I N D B L O M ' S terminology, a strong autodramatic element ) which does not appear in the other major classical prophets. This observation leads us to another group of words which are characteristic for Ezekiel. The older pre-classical prophets already knew the prophetic sign acts. Ahijah of Shilo tore his mantle apart and gave Jereboam ten of the twelve pieces—the ten tribes which Jereboam would receive as the future king 3). Elijah threw his mantle on Elisha, and by this act invested Elisha with the office of prophecy 4 ). F O H R E R has carefully collected all of the material relevant to a study of these acts under the title : Die symbolischen Handlungen der Propheten, 1953. Yet it seems to me that the designation "symbolic act" is nevertheless unsatisfactory because it does not make it clear enough that the prophet wants these acts to represent something more than the symbolic. In his sign (thus, the Old Testament itself speaks of this act), he initiates the beginning of a future event. The 1

) S. H E R R M A N N , "Die Königsnovelle in Ägypten und in Israel" (Wiss. Zeitschrift der Karl-Marx-Universität Leipzig, ges.-spr. wiss. Reihe 3 , 1 9 5 3 / 5 4 , 5 1 - 6 2 . 2 ) J . L I N D B L O M , Prophecy in Ancient Israeel, 1 9 6 2 . 3 ) 1 Kings xi 29 ff. 1 Kings xix 19 ff.

coming event is in fact already present in the sign act. This form of proclamation which anticipates future events is also found in the other major prophets, Isaiah goes around for three years naked and barefoot 1 ), Jeremiah carries a yoke around his neck 2 ). F O H R E R counts three such acts in Isaiah. In Jeremiah, there are seven 3 ). But in Ezekiel there are twelve 4), far more than in any of the other prophets. If one examines the formal structure of the accounts of the sign acts in Ezekiel, the most conspicuous aspect which strikes his attention is how rarely the completion of the sign act is expressly narrated. As a rule, only the divine word which calls forth the act is reported. Thus, the accounts of the sign acts often stand in units which are introduced by the formula: ‫ויהי דבר יהיה אלי‬. This shows once again the concentration on the word-event which was established above. These units also illuminate the especially strong autodramatic character of Ezekiel's proclamation which marked his visions. The proclamation shows again and again the strong personal participation of the prophet in that which he proclaims. Or to formulate it the other way around: The event which is proclaimed by the prophet seizes him again and again and makes him a part of the event itself. His person—even his body—participates in the event which his word proclaims. With regard to the content, it is surprising how often Ezekiel's sign acts revolve around the fall of Jerusalem. The supposition that this event has special emphasis because it is reported in the only purely narrative unit in Ezekiel is thus confirmed from another angle. The three sign acts which form the literary basis for Chapter iv^f., describe the event of the siege and fall of the city. The prophet besieges a city which has been drawn on a brick—this is the beginning of the siege of Jerusalem. He eats a rationed amount of food and drinks a rationed portion of water. This is the hunger of the sieged city. He cuts off his hair with his sword, burns a third in fire, cuts up a third with his sword, and scatters a third to the four winds. This is the end of the inhabitants of Jerusalem. He marks two roads with signposts 5). This points to the time before the beginning of the 1

) Is. XX. ) Jer. xxvii f. 3 ) Jer. xiii 1-11; xvi 1-9; xix 1-15; xxvii f.; xxxii 1-15; xl 8-13; 11 59-64. *) Ez. iii 22-27; iv 1-3; iv 4-8; iv 9-11; iv 12-15; ν 1-3; xii 1-16; xii 17-20; xxi 11-12; xxi 23-29; xxiv 15-24; xxxvii 15-28. Concerning all the details of the individual units cf. my Commentary. Ez. xxi 24 ff. 2

siege when Nebuchadnezzar was in the midst of finding his way to Jerusalem. He leaves his house by night with only a small bundle of goods which could be carried by an exile 1 )—this is the deportation of the inhabitants of Jerusalem. The sighing of the prophet in xii 17 ff. gives voice to anxiety over the devastation of the land. According to xxi 11 ff., the groaning of the exiles is attested. And according to xxiv 15 ff. the dumb grief of the prophet over the sudden death of his wife represents the dumb grief of the exiles over the news of the fall of the city and the temple, a grief which is no longer capable of the normal process of mourning. All of these texts show how the prophet saw himself participating in the event of the siege and fall of Jerusalem and the deportation of its inhabitants through acts which were in part consciously executed and in part unconsciously experienced (such as trembling, or mute mourning). With the autodramatic characteristics which recall the phenomenon of rapture associated with the ‫ רוח‬in the older prophets belongs that which is suggested by the introductory formula in vi 11 : "Clap your hands and stamp your feet and say . . . ," or in xxi 19: "You, son of man, prophesy and strike one hand against the other." With these fomenting gestures, Ezekiel proclaims his word. Also the formula which calls for a type of Qibla in the prophetic announcement must be discussed here, a formula which is found eight times in Ezekiel. According to vi 2 ff., the prophet should set his face against the mountains of Israel; in xxi 3, against the forest in the south (which in xxi 7 is interpreted as "Jerusalem"); xxv 2, against Ammon; xxvii 21, against Sidon; xxxv 2, against the mountains of Seir. He is also required to do the same against persons: in xiii 17, against the false prophetesses; xxxv 2, against Pharaoh; xxxviii 2, Gog. In the other classical prophets, this formula is completely missing. But we are reminded here of the Bileam stories where the seer Bileam must first set his face toward the valley where the people of Israel are encamped before he could speak 2). The visual contact of the seer with the addressee of his words is necessary in order for his word to be effective. Thus, we can establish an archaic tendency here which fits into the strong autodramatic character of EzekiePs proclamation. From still another side, we may show that this tendency toward dramatic animation which recalls the ‫ רוח‬- theology of the older prophets represents an essential characteristic of Ezekiel. In one of 1 2

) Ez. xii 1 ff. ) Numb, xxii 41; xxiii 13; xxiv 1 f.

the confessions of Jeremiah, we hear the affirmation of the prophet before G o d : "As often as thy word appeared, I swallowed it, and it became a joy to me" (xv 16). This is doubtlessly a figure of speech in Jeremiah. That God's word is sweeter than honey is also affirmed in Ps. xix 11 as well as Ps. cxix 103. But in the story of the call of Ezekiel, this figure develops into a dramatic reality. The prophet sees the word set before him in the form of a scroll, and he receives the commission to eat it. "So I ate it, and it became in my mouth sweet as honey." In Is. vii 20, one hears in the form of a prophetic threat that Yahweh will shave Judah—the head, and the hair of the feet, and the beard—with a razor which had been hired in the East. Again we are dealing with a figurative expression. Again Ezekiel develops this figurative expression into a dramatic reality, this time in a sign act. For Yahweh commands the prophet to take a sword at that very moment, cut off his hair, and execute judgment on it (v 1). In xxxvii 11, we can hear the sigh of the exiles : " O u r bones are dried up. Our hope is gone. We are lost." The first sentence of this three-fold complaint employs a figurative expression. Prov. xvii 22 says : " A cheerful heart freshens the body, but a downcast spirit dries up the bones." For the third time, this surprising process is to be recognized in Ezekiel. A figure of speech develops into a dramatic event (here in the form of a vision). In his vision xxxvii 1 ff., the prophet sees himself transplanted into a large field of dried bones, and receives the command to awaken them through a prophetic word. This process of developing a figure of speech into reality which without doubt appears at least three times shows the dramatic sensitivity of this prophet with great clarity. We may move on here to a further trait which is characteristic for the form of Ezekiel's proclamation. It is striking how often we find lengthy units in Ezekiel which completely exhaust one particular theme, while no such phenomenon is to be found in the earlier classical prophets. Yet many of the themes which Ezekiel so expounds are borrowed from his predecessors. Thus the message ‫בא הקץ‬ appears in Am. viii 2 by association from the vision of a ‫כלוב קיץ‬. This ‫ בא הקץ‬then forms the text for an exhaustive portrayal of the last days in Ez. vii. It is cited and modified several times in vii 2 ff., 6 ff. In Hosea, the comparison of Israel with an unfaithful wife is to be found. Ez. xvi paints this figure of the unfaithful wife in great breadth for application to Jerusalem, making use of various memories from Jerusalem's history and religion. Jeremiah modifies the theme in iii 6 ff, in which he applies it to both kingdoms of Israel, ad-

dressing Israel with a type of personal name ‫ משבה‬and Judah with ‫)בגדה( בגודה‬. Along these same lines, Ez. xxiii develops the figure of the two faithless sisters, who now receive the names Ohola and Oholiba, and especially emphasizes their Egyptian origin. The principal difference is that here again Ezekiel paints his picture with greater breadth and more drastic phantasy. Cf. further the oracles against the nations, especially against the ship of Tyre and the world tree of Egypt. This broad painting of figures with stark impressions belongs to the peculiar character of Ezekiel's speech. And once again, behind this peculiarity of form, the definite face of the man appears. This picture of the dramatically stimulated sensitivity, of the power of experience, and the capacity for phantasmic visions must not mislead us to suppose that we can see in Ezekiel an introverted mystic who is sunk in the world of his own experiences. In order to guard against this mistake, we must consider a further form of speech which is rather common to Ezekiel—the form of the discussion or disputation. Ezekiel's words often begin with citations from his peers which are quite valuable for our knowledge of his environment. We hear the words of men who cast aside the prophetic word as a word which will not come to pass at all (xii 22), or which can be expected only in the far distant future (xii 27). We hear of cynical mockery (xviii 2), and open accusation against Yahweh (xviii 25, 29 ; xxxiii 17, 20). After the catastrophy, we hear words of self-righteousness from the inhabitants who were left in the land after 597 (xi 15) and then after 587 (xxxiii 24), as well as the arrogance of the neighboring peoples (xxv 3; xxvi 2) and the deep doubt (xxxiii 10; xxxvii 11) and resignation (xx 3) of the exiles. The prophet takes up the discussion with all of these voices, and thereby develops a style of discussion which later becomes dominant in the book of Malachi. But here again we see a characteristic tendency to set both the complaint of the people and the answer of the prophet formally in the oracle of Yahweh. Yahweh himself tells the prophet what the men will think about him and how he should answer them. The citations almost always form a part of the word-event which confronts the prophet. An especially common form of speech is formed in this context by the speeches of accusation in which the prophet is required by Yahweh to judge the people (‫ שפט‬xvi 4; xx 4; xxii 2, sec. xxiii 36), and to make their abominations known to them (‫הודע · · · · את תועבתיה‬ xvi 2; xx 4; xxii 2). The stereotyped manner of formulation creates

the impression that a fixed form of technical accusation, perhaps having its background in the priestly sphere (‫ הודיע‬- ‫ )דעת‬lies before us. This is worth still further formcritical investigation. This leads, however, to a further broad area of tradition in Ezekiel. In Hos. iv 1 and Jer. vii 9, it is seen that a prophet can formulate an accusation against his people by enumerating a series of commandments which his people have transgressed. It is widely recognized that the classical decalogue can be seen in the background of the texts from Hosea and Jeremiah. This phenomenon is also to be found in Ezekiel, but here the series of laws which are set before the people carries a strong priestly color and has a certain resemblance to the formulation of the holiness code. Thus the bloody city of Jerusalem in xxii 6 ff. is characterized by an enumeration of the commandments which it has transgressed. In xviii 5-9 and 14-17 the pattern of the righteous and in 10-13, that of the wicked are marked by a series of enumerations which give the impression of formulas. A fragment of such a series is also to be found in xxxiii 15. xviii 5-9 allows us to go a step further, for here the righteous is characterized by a series of sentences which are then concluded with a completely superfluous ‫צדיק הוא‬. One can recognize here, according to the research of R E N D T O R F F and VON R A D 1 ), a "declaratory formula" which is particularly chatacteristic in priestly terminology. It probably has its Sit% im Leben in the priestly declaration at the temple gate. By means of this formula, the priest expresses his decision at the threshhold of the temple whether a temple visitor will be allowed to enter the sanctuary or not. In Ez. xviii 7, we have the formula ‫חיה יהיה‬, which certainly reflects the speech of the temple, for whoever enters into the temple enters into the spere of life 2). The priestly torah which is cited polemically by Amos suggests a priestly invitation: "Seek Bethel, and thus you will live." (cf. Am. ν 4 ff.). We are therefore within the tradition which is reflected by the entrance Torah, best known to us from Ps. xv and xxiv. Thus Ezekiel develops what he has to say about the new life in the language of the temple liturgy. 1 ) G . VON RAD, ThLZ 76 (1951), 129-132 (=Gesammelte Studien zum Alten Testament, Theol. Bücherei 8, 1958, 130-135); R . R E N D T O R F F , Die Gesetze in der Priesterschrift, 1954, 74-76. 2 ) G. VON RAD, "Gerechtigkeit" und " L e b e n " in der Kultsprache der Psalmen (Testschr. für A. Bertholet 1950, 418-437=GM. Studien, T h B 8, 1958, 225-247); W. Z 1 M M E R L 1 , " L e b e n " und " T o d " im Buche des Propheten Ezechiel ( T h Z 13, 1957, 494-508=Gottes Offenbarung, T h B 19, 1963, 178-191).

In the context of this priestly speech we may move on to the form of the casuistic sections in the book of Ezekiel. In the book of the covenant, we have a casuistic style in which a conditional sentence is introduced with ‫כי‬. In the style of the priestly casuistic, as we know it in the book of Leviticus, the ‫ כי‬appears regularly in the second position of the sentence, immediately behind the subject. (Cf. Lev. i 2, ‫ ;אדם כי‬ii 1, ‫)נפש כי‬. This very form appears in Ezekiel not only in the description of a righteous man in xviii 5, ‫איש כי יהיה צדיק‬, but also in the casuistic development in the picture of the watchman in iii 19; xxxiii 9: ‫ ;איש כי‬in xxxiii 2: ‫ ;ארץ כי‬xxxiii 6 and xiv 13 ‫הצפה כי‬. In Lev. xvii, a more complete style is found in a series of four regulations. Here the individual commandments are introduced with the heavily accented ‫איש איש מבית ישראל )ומן הגר הגר בתוכם( אשר‬. Exactly this same style can be found twice in the unit Ez. xiv 1-11, which has grown formally out of sacral law. These observations show that Ezekiel was strongly influenced both formally as well as traditionally by priestly language and the traditions of the sanctuary, and confirm the information given to us in i 3 that he was a priest. We must pose still another question in our study of the traditions behind the prophecy of Ezekiel. Recent research has shown very clearly that a strong line of Jerusalem-David traditions stands alongside the "total-Israel" perspective of the Exodus traditions 1 ). This duality of traditions is especially apparent in the prophets. While the prophet of the northern kingdom, Hosea, stands exclusively in the former group of traditions, the proclamation of the Jerusalemite Isaiah is determined decisively by the latter. But when one examines Ezekiel for these traditions, it very readily appears that here the question of alternatives does not apply. Ez. xx shows the full use of the tradition of the election of Israel in the exodus, even though this tradition in Ezekiel is recast in the dark light of a history of sin. Also in the story of the two unfaithful wives in Ez. xxiii, the Egyptian origin of both Israelite kingdoms is strongly emphasized. According to B A C H 2), there is an old tradition which can be recognized behind the motif of the foundling in Ez. xvi which maintains that Yahweh " f o u n d " Israel in the wilderness (cf. Hos. ix 10; Dt. xxxii 10). This story in Chapter xvi, however, is about Jerusalem, whose father was 1

) Cf. for example E. R O H L A N D , Die Bedeutung der Erwählungstraditionen Israels für die Eschatologie der alttestamentlichen Propheten, Diss. Heidelberg, 1956. 2 ) R. B A C H , Die Erwählung Israels in der Wüste (Diss. Bonn, unpublished, 1951).

an Amorite and mother a Hittite (xvi 3). Thus, it appears here polemically in a prophetic accusation. In xl-xlviii, however, the new Jerusalem stands at the center of the hope for salvation, the place to which the new exodus would lead according to xx 32 ff. There on the high mountain of Israel (xx 40), the new pure sacrifice will be offered. The anticipation of a new David is mentioned in xxxiv 23 ff., and in xxxvii 25. Ezekiel appears, therefore, to be a late-comer for whom the ancient salvation traditions are thoroughly entwined. He is also clearly a latecomer among the prophets, for his work presupposes the earlier classical prophets. The ‫ בא הקץ‬in Ez. vii stems from Amos, shaving his head from Isaiah, the proclamation about the adulterous wife from Hosea, the story of the two adulterous wives from Jeremiah, which, as M I L L E R 1 has shown, has influenced Ezekiel in an especially strong measure. But this poses the peculiar problem of tradition in Ezekiel. Ezekiel shows traditio-historical influence from various sides. He lives on the one hand in an archaic world of elements from pre-classical prophecy. Along with this, his themes are strongly influenced by the earlier classical prophets. Seen from this aspect, he seems to be an unoriginal follower, the heir of earlier prophetic proclamation. But then on the other hand, there is a sharp distinction between Ezekiel and the earlier prophets who influenced him. This can be seen more clearly in the field of his theological peculiarity with its unprecedented sharp attack on the sin of his people. Unfortunately time prevents our saying more about the theological character of his message here 2). The peculiarity of Ezekiel's message can also be demonstrated in his vocabulary. For important terms from the proclamation of his predecessors are missing. Thus, this Jerusalemite priest never speaks of Yahweh Sabaoth (also missing in the Ρ narrative) 3) ; he never mentions the love of Yahweh (the verb ‫ אהב‬appears in xvi and xxiii only as a participle which refers to the lovers which Israel, or Jerusalem, takes). ‫חסד‬, which is so important in Hosea and Jeremiah, never appears in Ezekiel. Nothing is said in any form about the fear of God (‫)יראת יהוה‬. Never does he speak of trust in Yahweh. The 1 ) J. W . M I L L E R , Das Verhältnis Jeremias und Hesekiels sprachlich und theologisch untersucht, 1955. 2 ) Cf. for example "Das Gotteswort des Propheten Ezechiel" ( Z T h K 48, 1951, 249-262 = Gottes Offenbarung, ThB 19, 1963, 133-147). 3 ) Cf. W. K E S S L E R , " A U S welchen Gründen wird die Bezeichnung , Jahwe Zebaoth' in der späteren Zeit gemieden?" (Wiss. Zeitschr. der Martin-LutherUniversität Halle-Wittenberg, ges.spr. wiss. Reihe 7, 1958, 767-772).

verb ‫ בטח‬appears only twice (xvi 15; xxxiii 13), and both times are colored by negative accents (false confidence). The only text in which we meet the accusative formulation, to know God, which is so dominant in Hosea and Jeremiah, is critically suspect (xxxviii 16 ‫)למען דעת הגרים אתי‬. Ezekiel never speaks of a "plan" (‫ )עצה‬or " w o r k " (‫ )מעשה‬of Yahweh; neither do we find a verb, adjective, or substantive form the stem ‫ צדק‬applied to Yahweh. On the other hand, completely new forms of speech come into the foreground and give his proclamation an unmistakable individuality. So finally, we must briefly sketch out one of these: the socalled Erweiswort which Ezekiel uses in a particularly characteristic way to speak about the knowledge of Yahweh 1 ). With this peculiar form of proclamation, the prophet not only announces a future act of Yahweh but formulates this announcement in a manner which expresses the hidden intention of Yahweh's act. In xxxvii 12 we hear: ‫״‬See, I open your graves and raise you out of your graves (as my people) and bring you into the land of Israel, and you will know (we can also translate : in order that you may know) that I am Yahweh when I open your graves and raise you out of your graves (as my people)". Yahweh acts, and the goal of that action is the creation of knowledge, the knowledge that he is Yahweh. But this is always formulated in the first person. The content of this knowledge is the sentence: ‫אני יהיה‬, "I am Yahweh". We have in this a formula of self-revelation 2) by which Yahweh steps out of his incognito, just as we find it in the preamble of the decalogue or the postscript of the Holiness Code. This form of speech is found in 1 Kings xx 13, 28 in a narrative about the old northern prophets of the ninth century. So once again we meet a relationship in the tradition of Ezekiel to the pre-classical prophets. This formulation, which again is completely missing in the classical prophets before Ezekiel, has central meaning for Ezekiel. I cannot speak further here about the pre-history of this form of speech 3). It is enough simply to have presented something of the peculiar stamp which Ezekiel receives from this formulation, a 1 ) "Das Wort des göttlichen Selbsterweises (Erweiswort), eine prophetische Gattung" (Mélanges Bibliques rédigés en l'honneur de André Robert, 1957, 154-164= Gottes Offenbarung, ThB 19, 1963, 120-132). 2 ) "Ich bin Jahwe" (Geschichte und Altes Testament, Festschrift für A. Alt, 1953, 179-209 = Gottes Offenbarung, ThB 19, 1963, 11-40). 3 ) "Erkenntnis Gottes nach dein Buche Ezechiel", ATANT 27, 1954 (=Gottes Offenbarung, ThB 19, 1963, 41-119).

stamp which is of decisive importance for our understanding of this prophet. Ezekiel, this prophet of sensitivity, of dramatic personal involvement who is seized by the sudden intrusion of the word of Yahweh, who paints his pictures with the glaring color of extreme phantasy but nevertheless stands in a passion-filled dialogue with his peers, who speaks out of a rich priestly heritage and takes up many themes which have reached him through the earlier traditions of Israel and her prophets, this prophet Ezekiel with all of his characteristics recedes into the background, when one asks about the goal of his proclamation. And in his place appears the one who is revealed by his intrusion, who desires to make the mystery of his person known to the world. We must look back to our beginning. The whole book of Ezekiel is stylized as a report in the first person, not because the prophet wants to emphasize his own experience but because he has been invaded by one who is greater than he. The prophet is the son of man, the creature. "The word of Yahweh came over me". The whole accent in Ezekiel lies on the word of Yahweh. This word he has experienced as a fomenting assault from the Lord which he must then make known to his people and the world—I am Yahweh. All else is entwined with and recedes behind this Yahweh who is revealed in both judgment and grace.

M I C A H

I N

D I S P U T E

W I T H

T H E

P S E U D O - P R O P H E T S

*)

BY

A. S. V A N D E R W O U D E Groningen

In a number of prophetic books we are given an account of heated disputations between the canonical prophet and persons who were also prophets, albeit that they were disqualified as such already in the Septuagint by means of the term ψευδοπροφήται.1) It was held against these pseudo-prophets that they prophesied by Ba'al (Jer. ii 8), that they have not stood in the council of Yahweh (Jer. xxiii 18), that they prophesied lies (Jer. xxvii 14; Zech. xxiii 3) and thereby led God's people astray (Mi. iii 5). In trying to define the motives of these pseudo-prophets, 2 ) we encounter a number of difficulties. Usually they are mentioned only in passing and none of their own writings are known to us. The book of Nahum, in my opinion, is no exception, for it is very unlikely that this book is to be regarded as the words of a nationalistic, professional prophet resembling a figure such as Hananiah, whom Jeremiah opposed. 3 ) Therefore, our only source of information about the pseudo-prophets is an Old Testament tradition, which displays a distinct aversion from them. This means that a measure of distortion * Paper read at the summer meeting of the British Society of Old Testament Study at St. Andrews, Scotland, July 16-19 1968. I am deeply indebted to my friend Dr. C. J. L A B U S C H A G N E (Groningen) for his invaluable assistance in translating this paper. 1 ) Cp. Jer. vi 13; xxxiii (Hebrew text xxvi) 7, 8, 11, 16 etc.; Sach. xiii 2and Ε. J A C O B , 'Quelques remarques sur les faux prophètes', Theologische Zeitschrift Basel xxiii (1957), p. 479. 2 ) G. Q U E L L , Wahre und falsche Propheten, Gütersloh 1 9 5 2 (BFchTh 4 6 , 1 ) ; Ε. O S S W A L D , Falsche Prophetie im Alten Testament, Tübingen 1 9 6 2 ; TWNT xi, p. 8 0 5 ff.; RGG3 v, 6 2 1 - 6 2 2 . 3 ) Of the same opinion are J. L. M I H E L I C , 'The Concept of God in the Book of Nahum', Interpretation II (1948), p. 199 ff. and E. O S S W A L D , o.e., p. 18, n. 40. I agree with S . J. DE V R I E S , 'The Acrostic of Nahum in the Jerusalem Liturgy', Vetus Testamentum XVI (1966), p. 481, n. 2, that the Nineveh poems belong to the genre of the prophetic oracles against the foreign nations. From this point of view it does not necessarily follow that the book of Nahum contains a prophecy 'im Sinne der von einem Jeremia bekämpften Heilspropheten' (O. E I S S F E L D T , Einleitung in das Alte Testament3, Tübingen 1964, p. 561).

of their aims and views could have crept into the prophetic books, 1 ) especially as regards the description of pseudo-prophetism. Meanwhile, that it proved to be difficult to distinguish between true and false prophets, is shown clearly by Jeremiah's encounter with Hananiah 2) and even more clearly by the statement in Deut. xviii 21-22: And if you say in your heart, 'How may we know the word which the Lord has not spoken?'— when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word which the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously, you need not be afraid of him. This statement does not of course offer a ready-made criterion by which one could judge. Matters become even more difficult if we seek to probe the theological or ideological conceptions of these prophets. Is it at all possible to give a somewhat exact description of the theologoumena through which pseudo-prophetism exercised its influence on religious life in Jerusalem and Judah at the close of the eighth century B.C.? Needless to say, if we could trace these theologoumena, we would be in a position to fathom the spiritual climate against which the pre-Exilic canonical prophets made their stand. In general it can be said that the pseudo-prophets subscribed and conformed to the established order not only politically but also in matters of religion. On the question, however, as to the exact components of that order, there is no general agreement among scholars. In this connection opinions differ widely as regards the question whether covenant theology and election theology played a significant and decisive rôle at a relatively early stage, and whether the writings of the earlier canonical prophets should and could be understood against the background of these conceptions. W H I T L E Y , e.g. thinks that the great creative prophets were but little indebted to traditional Israelite belief for the content of their message; in his opinion the prophets conceive of Yahweh's connection with Israel in terms of human relationships rather than that of a covenant. 3 ) F O H R E R has expressed the view that a true covenant theology in the sense of a "rechtlich gültiger und wirksamer Vertrag" commenced only at the time of Deuteronomy and that Yahweh's 1

)

2

) Jer. xxviii.

S

) C. F. WHITLEY,

Ε.

O S S W A L D , O.E., P .

8.

The prophetic achievement, Leiden 1963, pp. 24-44.

connection with his people in pre-Deuteronomic times was nothing but a "Lebensgemeinschaft". 1 ) Some scholars think that electiontheology, in the sense of the election of Israel, only evolved in deuteronomic times. 2 ) With regard to Zion-theology, V R I E Z E N states that the events of the year 701 roused the belief among the people of Judah and Jerusalem that the city of Jerusalem was inviolable because it was the place where Yahweh dwelled in his temple on Zion. 3 ) VON RAD, however, regards Zion-theology as belonging to the most important earlier traditions, without which Isaiah's message cannot be understood. 4 ) Should we succeed in tracing the whole range of ideas held by the pseudo-prophets in the period before the Exile, many of these problems can be viewed in a new light. But in what manner can these theologoumena be traced directly and with some measure of certainty? In this regard I am convinced that we should pay special attention to the disputations between canonical prophets and pseudo-prophets in the prophetic literature of the pre-Exilic period. Of special interest are those disputations containing in all probability quotations of the very words of the pseudo-prophets. Unfortunately theological disputations of this type occur only sporadically in the Old Testament, but nevertheless they are there, and, still more important, there are more of them than has been recognised up to now. Because of their importance as regards the study of the background of the canonical prophets' activity, it seems to me worth while to examine some of these passages more closely. The reason for confining myself to the book of Micah, is that Micah belongs to the earlier canonical prophets and was a contemporary of Isaiah, one of the greatest among them. Should we be able to find definite clues in the book of Micah as to the range of theological ideas held by the pseudo-prophets of his time, then we are also in a position to comprehend the setting of Isaiah's prophetic activity. By 700 B.C. pseudo-prophetism was hardly influenced by canonical prophetism. At that stage, therefore, it must reflect a theology that was shaped during early monarchic times. There is, however, another, more important reason for our special interest in the book of Micah in this connection: I hope to prove that the ) G . F O H R E R , 'Altes Testament — 'Amphiktyonie' oder 'Bund'?', Theologische Literaturieitung 91 (1966), Sp. 900 and ibid., 89 (1964), Sp. 481-500. 2 ) Cp. G. F O H R E R , 'Prophetie und Geschichte', Theologische Literatur^eitung 89 (1964), Sp. 489. 3 ) Th. C . V R I E Z E N , De godsdienst van Israël, Zeist 1963, p. 181. 4 ) G. VON RAD, Theologie des Alten Testaments II, München 1960, pp. 166 ff. 1

" G a t t u n g " of the "Disputationswort" is relatively well attested in this book. At the same time this investigation enables us to study problems such as the intricate structure of the passages in question and the authenticity of a number of seriously disputed passages, particularly in the fourth chapter of Micah. One of the most evident instances of a disputation between prophet and pseudo-prophets occurs in Micah ii 6-11. This passage is expressif verbis characterised as such by the opening words: "Do not preach"—thus Uhey preach, "one should not preach of such things". The authors of these words quoted by the prophet, are the men who tried to prevent Micah and his supporters from prophesying, as they did, prophecy of doom. The persons in question seem to be men who represent the established religious-political order of the day; more specifically, however, the words "thus they preach" (‫ )יטיפון‬seem to indicate the pseudo-prophets as the most influential group among them. Micah's adversaries cannot subscribe to his conception of prophecy; in stubborn opposition they confidently maintain that "disgrace will not overtake us" (vs. 6b). 1 ) In the next verse they state their reasons for having such confidence. In this verse the words ‫ האמור בית יעקב‬in their present form are untranslatable. The rendering "Should this be said, ο house of Jacob?" is nothing but a makeshift, quite out of place in the context which is a quotation from what the pseudo-prophets said. Elsewhere 2 ) I tried to show that the obscure ‫ האמור‬must be read ‫האמיר‬, the hi. of ‫אמר‬. From Deut. xxvi 17, 18—the only other known instances of the Hiph. of ‫—אמר‬we know that it is a terminus technicus referring to the making of a covenant. Taking ‫ בית יעקב‬to be the subject of ‫האמיר‬, we get the following translation: "The house of Jacob affirmed (what has been undertaken by Yahweh)"; however, taking ‫ בית!עקב‬to be the object of ‫האמיר‬, Yahweh being the supposed subject, we have to translate: "He {seil. Yahweh) affirmed (what has been undertaken by) the house of Jacob". 1

) The correct interpretation of these words is known to be difficult. I take ‫ יסג‬from ‫' נשג‬overtake'. The plural ‫ כ ל מ ו ת‬might be explained according to Gesenius-Kautzsch § 145 ο or by changing it to (the sing.) ‫( כ ל מ ו ת‬vide BHK 3 ). 2 ) Vetus Testamentum XVIII (1968), p. 388-391.

The contract referred to here, seems to include the traditional covenant clauses explicitly mentioned in Deut. xxvi 17-18: The Lord shall be your God, and You will be his people. It is most important to note that this reference to the covenant between Yahweh and Israel (understood as a treaty) comes from the pseudo-prophets themselves. This means that in Micah's time this conception of a covenant played an important part and that it stems from pre-prophetic tradition. It is on this covenant, which obviously in view of ‫ יעקב‬.‫ בית‬relates to the Sinai covenant and not to that of David, that they base their bold claim that Yahweh will not forsake them but will remain their loyal partner. In their opinion giving credence to Micah's prophecy of doom amounts to having no confidence in Yahweh and in what He does! For "Is the Spirit of the Lord impatient? Are these his doings?" (vs. 7 b, c).1) The prophet doesn't permit their discussion to peter out, on the contrary, he demonstrates that the pseudo-prophets and their supporters prove to be unworthy of the covenant because of their attitude with regard to the covenant (vs. 8-10). Pseudo-prophetism holds the covenant to be an objective guarantee for national existence: even as all the other canonical prophets Micah discloses the falseness of their confidence. Casting ridicule upon his adversaries, he rapped out: If a man should go about and utter wind and lies, saying: "I will preach to you of wine and strong drink"— he would be the preacher for this people! (vs. II)·2) Before returning to chapter ii, we turn to chapter iv. In doing so we venture upon very slippery ground. There is no consensus of opinion at all on either of the following questions: the structure, the date, the authenticity and the interpretation of this chapter and its component parts. Some scholars ascribe the chapter as a whole to Micah, while others hold it to be post-Exilic; still others consider some verses to be stemming from Micah. 1

) Whether the following sentence (vs. 7c) belongs to the words of Micah's adversaries, is not quite clear, due to the obscurity of the text. 2 ) For another possible translation of the latter words, see below, p. 257, n. 2.

It is of course impossible to go into all the details here as regards the problems of the date and the structure of chapter iv, but we can't avoid raising these questions, be it at least in part. At the moment we are mainly concerned with the verses 9-14. As a rule these verses are held to be a succession of unconnected oracles dating in part possibly from the time of Micah. They are generally divided into three separate pericopes, namely: 9-10; 11-13 and 14. One of the reasons for such a division is the fact that prophecy of weal clearly alternates with prophecy of doom, so much so that because of the marked correspondence between these oracles and the light- and shadow effects in Rembrandt's paintings, a Dutch author called Micah the Rembrandt among the prophets! S E L L I N considered this passage to be the most difficult in the whole book as far as its context and its date are concerned, because—as he put it—"die Situation kaleidoskopartig zwischen Verzweiflung und Triumphgefühl, Unheil und Heil, klar umrissener historischer Lage und unbegrenzter Zukunftserwartung wechselt". 1 ) The question arises whether any prophet or pupil of a prophet, or redactor could have got it into his head to juxtapose words of doom and words of weal in such a clumsy and confusing way. Verse 9 speaks of weal (by implication), vs. 10 of doom, vs. 11-13 of weal, while vs. 14 proclaims doom. That being the state of affairs, I take the liberty to suggest another solution to the problem as to the structure of this passage, that differs from traditional solutions based on the method of an atomising literary analysis. In my opinion the passage in question contains neither more nor less than a disputation between the pseudo-prophets and Micah, in which the words of the arguing parties are juxtaposed. The disputation opens with a statement by the pseudo-prophets (vs. 9), followed by Micah's retort (vs. 10), continued by another statement by the pseudo-prophets (vs. 11-13), again followed by a word from Micah (vs. 14). A characteristic of this "Disputationsw o r t " is that we miss both the ‫ כה אמר יהוה‬and the ‫ יהוה‬CW3-f0rmu1a in the passage. In order to illustrate what I mean, we must have a closer look at the text. In verse 9 we read:

1 ) Ε. S E L L I N , Das Zwölfprophetenbuch*·* (ΚΑΤ XII), Leipzig 1929, p. 332, who considers iv 8-v 5 to be a unit stemming from Micah (except for a later insertion iv 10 b β).

Now why do you cry aloud? Is there no king in you? Has your counsellor perished, that pangs have seized you like a woman in travail? It is quite clear that these words are spoken by one or more persons reproaching the people of Jerusalem (addressed here in the second person feminine) for having anxiety. They obviously lived in fear of an enemy that laid siege to the city (though as to the exact identity of this enemy we are still in the dark). 1 ) According to the speakers the inhabitants have no reason at all to be afraid : they ought to know that there is a ‫מלך‬, a ‫ יועץ‬in Jerusalem! Commentators perhaps rightly consider "your counsellor" to be synonymous with " k i n g " because of the parallelism. On the question as to the identity of the ‫מלך‬, there are different opinions—does it signify the reigning monarch or Yahweh himself? The term ‫יועץ‬ does not necessitate a refuting of the view that " k i n g " relates to God. 2 ) Vs. 12 distinctly refers to the ‫עצה‬, the "plan" of Yahweh (cf. Is. xix 17). Moreover, in Jeremiah viii 19, a text running parallel to our text in more than one respect, the " k i n g " is unmistakably Yahweh : Hark, the cry of the daughter of my people from the length and breadth of the land: "Is Yahweh not in Zion? Is her king not in her?". The conclusive argument, however, for interpreting ‫ מלך‬as referring to Yahweh, to my mind seems to be Micah iii l i b where the prophet says of the pseudo-prophets in Jerusalem: 1 ) Many authors think in terms of the siege of Jerusalem in 701, which is probably right. For Isaiah's comment on the attitude of the city's people after this siege, cp. Is. xxii. 2 ) ‫ ( י ו ע ץ‬a s substantive) denoting Yahweh does not seem to occur elsewhere in the O.T. (cp. P . A . H . DE B O E R , 'The counsellor', Suppl. Vetus Testamentum I I I [Festschrift H. H. Rowley], Leiden 1955, p. 42-71). Therefore, the possibility should always be born in mind that 'counsellor' is not synonymous with 'king'. If it is synonymous, ‫)לך‬£ could be interpreted as referring to the reigning davidic monarch. Then the pseudo-prophets appeal to the divine promises given to the house of David, as their argument does not seem to be without a religious basis. On the strength of the texts cited below, it seems to me, however, that 'king' and 'counsellor' in this connection most probably refer to Yahweh. Cp. also Num. xxiii 21.

its prophets divine for money yet they lean upon the Lord and say: "Is not the Lord in the midst of us ? No evil shall come upon us". Whereas the latter text is a direct quotation from the words of the pseudo-prophets, it is only natural to assume that they are also the speakers in the text under consideration. Should our interpretation of " k i n g " as referring to Yahweh be correct, then the words in vs. 9 can only be interpreted as reassuring words coming from the pseudo-prophets, who point out that Yahweh dwells on Zion, which means that God's mountain will never be shaken nor be overpowered by the enemies. In verses 11-13 they will return to this point soon in order to elaborate on the reasons for their confidence. The object of the pseudo-prophets' statement in vs. 9 is therefore to do pastoral work, to restore the people's confidence, which clearly shows that the verse was not intended to be understood ironically at all.1) It was this kind of pastoral work which Micah challenges in vs. 10: Writhe and groan 2), ο daughter of Zion, like a woman in travail, for truly you shall go forth from the city and dwell in the open country; and you shall go to Babylon! There you shall be rescued, there the Lord will redeem you from the hand of your enemies. That we meet with two different speakers in vs. 9 and in vs. 10, was recognised already e.g. by D U H M , who writes: H o w could the poet possibly write in such a reproachful manner in vs. 9: why are you so frightened when Yahweh himself guards you?, only to do quite the opposite in vs. 10 by calling upon them to be frightened? 3) In quite another way, however, there are very distinct connecting links between vs. 9 and 10: both refer to Jerusalem, c.q. to the daughter of Zion; in both she is addressed in the second person feminine; 1 ) Cp. D . D E D E N , De kleine projeten [De boeken van het Oude Testament], Roermond 1953, p. 217: 'ironisch vraagt de profeet, of zij soms geen koning meer hebben'. 2 ) The exact meaning og ‫ גחי‬is disputed, cp. the commentaries. 3 ) B. D U H M , Anmerkungen χμ den zwölf Propheten [Sonderdruck aus der ZAW], Glessen 1911, p. 50.

in both some form of the verb ‫" חיל‬be in travail" is used with reference to the anxiety of "one in travail" (‫)כיולז־ה‬. There is a connection, but then one by way of contraposition: statement and counter-statement. Over against the prophecy of weal uttered implicitly by the pseudo-prophets, Micah poses his prophecy of doom, although even here judgment implies prospective salvation. This salvation, however, will only be realised there, after the people shall have gone into exile; God will only accomplish it there (note the twice-repeated ‫)!שם‬. Should vs. 10 not be considered to be a post-Exilic addition, but stemming from Micah, on the strength of the fact that the fall of Jerusalem is announced, objections are often raised against the words "you shall go to Babylon". 1 ) None the less I am convinced that they could have been spoken by Micah. An Exile to Babel was predicted by another contemporary prophet too, by Isaiah. 2 ) Even the metre tells against any attempted deletion. Moreover, the clause "there the Lord will redeem you from the hand of your enemies" obviously induced Micah's debating partners to pursue the theme of 'being redeemed from the hand of the enemies' (vs. 11-13).3) Even as in verse 9, where the statement of the pseudo-prophets is introduced by ‫עתה‬, and in verse 10, where Micah uses ‫ כ י ־ ע ת ה‬to introduce his answer after summoning the daughter of Zion to "writhe and groan", the counter-statement of the pseudo-prophets here in verse 11 again opens with 4.‫ )ועתה‬The pseudo-prophets were not in a position to share Micah's views on redemption from the hand of the enemies that dare to lay siege to God's city: 1

) So for instance E. S E L L I N , o.e., p. 332. ) Is. xxxix 6. Many commentators, however, consider the appearance of the name 'Babel' in this verse to be one of the unhistorical traits of chapters Is. xxxvi-xxxix. D E D E N , o.e., p. 2 1 7 , points (apart from Is. xxxix 6 ) to the deportation of the northern population to Babel and the removal of people from Babel to the towns of Samaria (2 Kings xxvii 24). The authenticity of the text can only be settled satisfactorily after a thorough analysis of the Redaktionsgescbichte of the book of Micah. 3 ) One could also argue that it was a redactor who combined the original sayings of Micah in iv, 10a-b by means of 10c-d with the following verses. To my mind, however, this seems less probable. 4 ) ‫ ע ת ה‬is used to introduce an argument or counter-argument. On the use of ‫ ע ת ה‬cp. H . A. B R O N G E R S , 'Bemerkungen zum Gebrauch des adverbialen rv^attāh im Alten Testament', Vetus Testamentum XV ( 1 9 6 5 ) , p. 2 8 9 - 2 9 9 and A. L A U R E N T I N , 'We<-attäh-Kai nun, Formule caractéristique des textes juridiques et liturgiques', Biblica X L V ( 1 9 6 4 ) , p. 1 6 8 ff., 4 1 3 ff. 2

Now many nations 1) are assembled against you, saying, "Let her be profaned and let our eyes gaze upon Zion". But they do not know the thoughts of the Lord, they do not understand his plan, that he has gathered them as sheaves to the threshing floor. Arise and thresh, ο daughter of Zion, for I will make your horn iron and your hoofs bronze; you shall beat in pieces many peoples and shall devote 2) their gain to the Lord, their wealth to the Lord of the whole earth. In his study on Die Zionstheologie der Korachiten (Berlin 1966), Günther once again pointed out that this passage is one of those containing the "Volkerkampfmotiv", which is typical of the Zionpsalms such as xlvi (7 ff.), xlviii (5 ff.) and lxxvi (4 ff.). A classical phrasing of this motif occurs in Isaiah xvii 12-14: WANKE

Ah, the thunder of many peoples, they thunder like the thundering of the sea! Ah, the roar of nations, they roar like the roaring of mighty waters! The nations roar like the roaring of many waters, but He will rebuke them, and they will flee far away, chased like chaff on the mountains before the wind and whirling dust before the storm. At evening time, behold, terror! Before morning, there are no more! This is the portion of those who try to despoil us, and the lot of those who try to plunder us. True enough in our text it is the daughter Zion who is called upon to arise and thresh the enemies, but even here it is Yahweh himself who supplies the ways and means. Purposefully and according to plan He gathers the enemies to Jerusalem in order to destroy them there with the horn He himself makes of iron and the hoofs He himself makes of bronze. What is remarkable here is not only the "Völkerkampfmotiv", well-known from the Zion-psalms, but also the reference to the "thoughts" (‫ )מחשבות‬and the "plan" (‫ )עצה‬of Yahweh. The latter term figures prominently in Isaiah's theology 1

) The mentioning of many nations seems to be a formcritical trait and does not, therefore, exclude a siege by one particular nation at that moment (for instance the Assyrians in 701, though they had foreign troops under their command, cp. Is. xxii 6). 2 ) The archaic second person feminine form must be retained (against BHK 3 ).

where he deals with Yahweh's wonderful and incomprehensible "plan", especially with regard to his own people. Isaiah most evidently adopted this term from tradition, 1 ) more specifically from traditional Zion-theology, which also played a notable rôle in the theological thinking of this prophet. 2 ) The pseudo-prophets, on the other hand, do not consider Yahweh's plan to be "wonderful" at all : his intentions are well-known to them! Only the heathen are totally ignorant: blindfold as they are, they advance against the city of God only to perish in a shameful manner. Although the pseudo-prophets, hard pressed as they were by the facts of reality, could no longer just shrug their shoulders at the siege, their answer in vs. 11-13, even as their statement in vs. 9, displays a total lack of adequate theological thinking required by the given situation. Whereas Micah's words in vs. 10 and also in vs. 14 are marked by what S E L L I N called the "klar umrissene historische Lage", the answer of the pseudo-prophets connotes nothing but "unbegrenzte Zukunftserwartung". 3 ) They can only speak from the viewpoint of tradition, unable "sich in der historischen Situation zu orientieren". 4 ) The Zion-myth is the divinely guaranteed key-stone on which their whole existence depends: and on this they rely with dogmatic confidence! The answer of the prophet in vs. 14, once again introduced by ‫עתה‬, is not very clear owing to philological difficulties. 5 ) What is clear, however, is that now "the siege is laid against us", it will come to pass that "they will strike with a rod upon the cheek of the ruler of Israel". 6 ) In other words something most humiliating will happen to the king of Judah and Jerusalem. It is typical of Micah to avoid using the word ‫מלך‬, to which he prefers the terms ‫ שפט‬and perhaps (7.‫מושל‬ 1 ) Although G. VON RAD, 0.c. II, p. 172 accentuates the traditions behind the prophecies of Isaiah, he considers the use of ‫ ע צ ה‬by this prophet as 'wohl eine eigene Schöpfung des Propheten'. 2 ) Cp. G. VON R A D , o.e. I I , p. 1 6 6 ff. and H. W I L D B E R G E R , 'Jesajas Verständnis der Geschichte', Suppl. Vetus Testamentum I X [Congress Volume Bonn 1 9 6 2 ] , Leiden 1 9 6 3 , p. 8 3 - 1 1 7 . 3

) E.

4

) Cp.

R

S E L L I N , o.e., E.

p.

332.

O S S W A L D , o.e.,

p.

21.

) For a recent attempt to solve these difficulties cp. S . J. S W A N T E S , Ά note on Micah 5:1 (Hebrew 4:14)', Andrews University Seminary Studies I (1963), p. 105-107. e ) ‫ ש פ ט‬seems to be used in assonance with ·‫שבט‬ 7 ) V I , although it is not certain that the prophecy of the ('messianic') ruler of Israel (v 1.3.4a a) is to be attributed to Micah.

In his Introduction to the Old Testament V R I E Z E N x) suggested that ν 4b-5, being an utterance of Micah's adversaries, is to be connected with the prophet's words in iv 14. Here the pseudo-prophets no longer appeal to their theology, but rely upon their Realpolitik: the forming of coalitions in order to ward off external dangers. Here, we are dealing with a large group, referred to in the first person plural : When the Assyrian comes into our land and treads upon our soil,2) we will raise against him seven shepherds and eight princes of men; they shall rule the land of Assyria with the sword, and the land of Nimrod with the drawn sword; and they shall deliver 3) us from the Assyrian when he comes into our land and treads within our border. That policy of making coalitions, so vigorously opposed by Isaiah, is re-echoed here (v 4b-5) by the pseudo-prophets and their accomplices in a classical way. 4 ) From what has been said above we conclude that at least Micah iv 9-14 should be regarded as belonging to a literary unit containing a discussion between the prophet and the pseudo-prophets of his time. This means, therefore, that there is no longer any reason whatsoever for considering this passage to be of post-Exilic date. As we have seen, the historical allusions in these verses argue against a post-Exilic dating. Moreover, we dare to hope that we have advanced a few steps in solving the problem of analysing the whole of chapter iv. What is theologically most significant, however, is chat it has been established that Zion-theology, intervolved with the "Völkerkampfmotiv", was of crucial importance to the leading theologians of Micah's and Isaiah's time. The metamorphosis of this tradition, as it appears in Isaiah ii and Micah iv, in the well-known prophecy about the pilgrimage of the nations to Zion, should therefore not only be reckoned among the possibilities of pre-Exilic canonical prophecy, but in point of fact inherent to it. The arguments up till now consider1 ) Th. C. V R I E Z E N , De literatuur van Oud-Israël, Den Haag 1 9 6 1 , p. 172: 'Cap 4:14 kan met 5:4b + c en 5 een twistgesprek van profeet en volk vormen'. 2 ) Reading with the Greek and Syriac versions ‫( באד״מתנו‬cp. BHK 3 ). 3 ) Reading ‫ ל ה צ י ל ו‬or ‫( ו ה צ י ל נ ו‬so BHK 3 ). 4 ) Without excluding the possibility of the unity of iv 14 and ν 4b ff., I prefer to take ν 4b-5 as a fragment containing words of the pseudo-prophets juxtaposed to the preceding prophecy of weal (ν 1 ff.). The latter prophecy, however, in my opinion cannot be regarded as spoken by the same prophet(s).

ed to be conclusive evidence against the authenticity of these passages, now fall away, so that it is most likely that Micah adopted the oracle from Isaiah in a somewhat modified form. 1 ) We turn now to the third and last passage in the book of Micah requiring our attention: chapter ii 12-13 and chapter iii 1 ff. ii 12-13 contains a prophecy of weal, while chapter iii consists of three utterances of doom: two of these are directed against the "heads of (the house of) Jacob and rulers of the house of Israel" (1 ff; 9 ff.); the third concerns itself with the pseudo-prophets (5 ff.). It is most remarkable that chapter iii following upon the prophecy of weal in ii 12-13, opens with ‫" ואמר‬and I said", or (adversatively) "but I said". Commentators are quite at a loss as far as this word is concerned. Thus W E I S E R writes: 2 ) "The introduction to the oracle by means of "and I said" is remarkable and it can hardly be explained otherwise than that it derives from a narrative, the original form of which has not been preserved". Should this be so, the question presents itself as to why ‫ ואמר‬has in fact been preserved if the original narrative, to which it belonged, has not survived. In my opinion there is a solution to the problem that deserves serious consideration, namely that "but I said" introduces Micah's answer to the prophecy of weal, uttered in ii 12-13, as has been suspected before, by the pseudo-prophets. It reads as follows: I will surely gather all of you, ο Jacob, I will gather the remnant of Israel; I will set them together like sheep in a fold 3) like a flock in its pasture 4) a noisy multitude of men. He who opens the breach will go up before them; They will break through and pass the gate, going out by it. Their king will pass on before them, the Lord at their head. This passage is generally held to be a post-Exilic addition to the book of Micah. The 'gathering' of the ‫שארית לשךאל‬, occurring at the beginning of the oracle, would then refer to the gathering 1

) As already argued by T H . C. V R I E Z E N , De literatuur van Oud-Israël, p. 171. Α. W E I S E R , Das Buch der χιwolf kleinen Propheten I 3 [Das Alte Testament Deutsch], Göttingen 1959, p. 253. 3 ) Cp. BHK 3 . 8

)

‫ ף‬Reading ‫דבנרו‬.

from exile. But this is not necessarily so. S E L L I N 1 ) thought that it refers to the refugees from the rural districts, who fled to the walled city of Jerusalem after the hostile invasion and gathered together there like sheep in a fold. Moreover, the expression "pass the gate" (vs. 13) argues against thinking in terms of the Exile. It is equally possible to see the passage as referring to a besieged city from which captives succeed in escaping under the command of their king, who heads the procession like a bell-wether. It is quite clear that this king is identified with Yahweh. As we have seen, the pseudo-prophets expressed their confidence in the future by saying: "Is not the Lord in the midst of us? N o evil shall come upon us!" (Micah iii 11). How could the King, who dwells on Zion, suffer his city to be taken by the enemies? It is very likely that this confidence forms the background of ii 12-13 too, and that these words also were spoken by the pseudo-prophets. In this way, ‫ואמר‬, at the beginning of chapter iii, makes good sense. 2 ) Although we have to concede that ii 12 ff. cannot as obviously be characterized as "Disputationswort" as was the case with iv 9-14, I am still convinced that much in the passage points to a discussion between the pseudo-prophets and Micah. At the beginning of this paper it has been pointed out that direct information about the theology of the pseudo-prophets would be extremely valuable to our knowledge of the backgrounds serving as the setting to the prophetic activities of the canonical prophets. As a rule we have to rely on indirect conclusions drawn from the words of the canonical prophets, by making use e.g. of the formcritical and traditio-critical method of studying their message. That is why there has been no consensus of opinion yet as to the most important theologoumena, such as covenant and election. One of the results of our analysis of these texts is that we have gleaned some valuable, direct information more specifically with regard to the theology of the pseudo-prophets. We came to the conclusion that the Zion-theology was a decisive factor in their lives and thoughts. 1

)

2

Ε.

S E L L I N , o.e.,

ρ.

3 2 2 f.

) The need for a redaktionsgeschichtlich treatment of Micah's prophecies is felt again at this point. One must concede that the prophecy iii 1-4 is not as good an answer to the objections of the pseudo-prophets as iii 9-12 would be, where Micah predicts the total destruction of Jerusalem. On the other hand one might ask whether the last words of ii 11 could not be translated: 'but this people prophesied', serving as a follow-up of ii 6-11 and as an introduction to the vss. 12 and 1 3 (cp. ii 6 and iii 1 ) .

In Jerusalem it was this theologoumenon that the main emphasis was laid on, which does not mean of course that the general Israelite tradition of the Sinai covenant was excluded. Evidence derived from ii 7 led to the conclusion that the covenant terminology regarding the "house of Jacob" pertained to the fixed vocabulary of their theology, and that they steadily relied upon the Sinai covenant for the future of their people. As far as Yahweh is concerned, He will never violate his own covenant, for "his spirit is not impatient" and "these are not his doings". Apart from this, we can imagine that they were even more strongly influenced by the typical Jerusalem theology, not only because they were inhabitants of the city of Yahweh, but because Yahweh was thought to have committed himself to Zion almost unconditionally. 1 ) In preference to other terms it was the term ‫ מ ל ך‬that was chosen to designate Yahweh, a title closely associated with El in Ugarit to describe this deity as the ruler of the world of the gods and head of the pantheon. 2 ) Yahweh is also the counsellor of his people, who permits the blindfold nations to advance to the very walls of Jerusalem, just to carry out his plan to destroy them there. The hemming in of the holy city spells no danger at all as far as the pseudo-prophets are concerned, nor does it give cause for alarm, on the contrary it spells weal in that it implies total destruction of the enemies. 3 ) As we have remarked before, in pseudo-prophetism the traditional theologoumena act as a basis for existence in a mythical way, as the rescuing key unlocking all doors. The canonical prophets neither denied nor rejected out of hand the theology of the pseudo-prophets as such. This concerns both Zion-theology and the Sinai covenant theology. As for the old traditions concerning Yahweh, the canonical prophets stood on one and the same ground, but as far as the interpretation of these traditions is concerned, they differed widely from the pseudo-prophets. Woe instead of weal!4) Isaiah holds it against his contemporaries that they act unfaithfully toward Yahweh by seeking coalitions, and 1 ) Cp. G . W A N K E , Die Zionstheologie der Korachiten, Beiheft Z A W 9 7 , Berlin 1966, p. 35. In his opinion, however, is 'diese enge, fast unbedingte Verbindung Jahwes mit Jerusalem . . . in der vorexilischen Schriftprophetie noch völlig undenkbar'. 2 ) Cp. inter alia W . S C H M I D T , Königtum Gottes in Ugarit und Israel, Beiheft Z A W 80, Berlin 1961, p. 4 ff., especially p. 18 ff. 3 ) The retreat of the Assyrian army after the siege of Jerusalem in 701 seemingly vindicated the pseudo-prophets. Cp. however Isaiah's reaction in Is. xxii. 4 ) Cp. G . V O N R A D , o.e. I I , p. 1 8 9 .

he does so on the basis of Zion-theology, telling them that their actions spell disaster. 1 ) Micah again, sees the Sinai covenant as the starting point for rebuking the leaders of Judah and Jerusalem with regard to their wrong attitude towards divine law, and predicts doom. 2 ) The canonical prophets derived from tradition not only the form of their message but also their theological vocabulary. Micah iv shows that even such a loaded term as ‫ עצה‬was adopted by Isaiah from the theological vocabulary of Zion-theology, and that goes probably for Yahweh's title ‫ מלך‬too. 3 ) What the canonical prophets did, was to give another content to these theological terms, a content that differed from that which the pseudo-prophets gave: the reason being that they were utterly convinced that the people were heading towards disaster. In this way ‫ עצה‬does no longer mean the plan of Yahweh, as something unknown to the nations and quite plain to Israel, but something connoting Yahweh's unfathomable, mysterious acting in history. In the same way the "Volkerkampfmotiv" in connection with Zion, becomes the back-cloth serving as the setting to Isaiah's and Micah's prophecy concerning the pilgrimage of the nations to the mountain of God. In quite another way also the canonical prophets seem to have handled tradition: by explicitly ignoring specific elements thereof. Thus Micah avoids using the term ‫מלך‬, irrespective of whether it regards Yahweh or a davidic ruler in Jerusalem. This goes for covenant and election too, neither of which is explicitly mentioned by Micah. 4 ) It was obviously because these terms were only associated with weal by Micah's hearers, that he deemed them unfit to be vehicles of his message of doom. But we would be wrong if we conclude that the canonical prophets were ignorant of or unfamiliar with the covenant and election traditions. They knew them and drew on them just as the pseudo-prophets did, with this difference, however,—they understood these traditions in quite another way! It has become clear that, as a result of our analysis of Micah iv, we cannot share the view that the Zion-psalms only came into being at a relatively late period. C . W A N K E considers Micah iv 1 1 - 1 3 to 1 ) Is. vii. ‫ ף‬Micah iii, 1 ff. 3 ) Is. vi 5, cp. Ps. xlviii 3. 4 ) That is to say, in Micah's own words. As we have seen ‫ מ ל ך‬is used probably in connection with Yahweh in the pseudo-prophets' words (iv 9). The Sinaicovenant is referred to only by the pseudo-prophets (ii 7a).

be a late modification of the "Völkerkampfmotiv" occurring in these psalms, and so he deems the text to be post-Exilic. 1 ) After what has been said, our conclusion would rather be that Micah iv 11-13 is clearly pre-Exilic, which means that the Zion-psalms can equally be of pre-Exilic date, or better still, they must be. The later eschatological use of the "Volkerkampfmotiv" is not to be found either in these psalms or in Micah iv 11-13. Moreover, this motiv displays such a disregard for history, that it is difficult to see how it could have derived from one specific historical occasion. It must have had a fixed place in the period preceding that of the classical prophets, in the ideology of the mountain of (the) God(s), which originated in ancient eastern mythology and was coupled with the idea of the election of Zion. The type of Zion-theology conceived of by the pseudo-prophets as an ideology, does not in fact differ from any other ideology: its dogmatism, its objectivism, in particular its false hope for the future! 1 ) G . W A N K E , o.e., p. 8 2 . 8 3 . The vocabulary of Micah iv 1 1 - 1 3 which W A N K E adduces to bolster up his post-Exilic dating of the text, does not in my opinion tell against an earlier period. Arguments drawn from the vocabulary used have always a limited significance, since ancient Hebrew literature is very fragmentary. The same material can often be used to prove the opposite. This applies also to the Aramaisms in the Old Testament.

A M O S '

I N T E R C E S S O R Y

F O R M U L A

BY

WALTER B R U E G G E M A N N Webster Groves (Missouri)

The conventional interpretation of Amos as a preacher of judgment and doom is under challenge, so that now he is placed either in a context of covenant worship or wisdom teaching 1). But curiously the conventional interpretation of judgment and doom had one important moment of respite in the intercessory formula of vii 2, 5 which persists. This has usually been interpreted to show Amos' appeal to Yahweh as an expression of compassion and tenderness which is quite unexpected on the usual assumption of doom and judgment 2) The present examination of the intercessory formula will argue that the form is not simply a departure from judgment and doom in a rare moment of tenderness. While it may manifest tenderness, the formula is better understood in the context of covenant liturgy and lawsuit 3 ). 1

) See the summary of that discussion by J. L. C R E N S H A W , " T h e Influence of the Wise upon Amos," Ζ AW 1967, pp. 42ff. 2 ) This is less so in the great German commentators ( M A R T I , D U M M ) but quite apparent in the English commentaries. Thus for example, G. A. S M I T H , The Book of the Twelve Prophets I, p. 110, writes, "For two moments—they would appear to be the only two in his ministry—his heart contended with his conscience, and twice he entreated God to forgive." Similarly, R. S. C R I P P S , A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Amos, p. 220, says, "These verses seem to indicate a tender (and truly lovable) personality such as we associate especially with that other great prophet of doom, Jermiah . . ." The RSV revision of KJV seem also to move in this direction as "he is small" now is rendered " H e is so smalll" Every attempt to treat the personality of the prophet as the primary datum moves in this direction. a ) We shall see in what follows that forensic language is employed. Perhaps the term "lawsuit" (rib) is to be retained in vii 4 as suggested for example by H. W. R O B I N S O N , Abingdon Bible Commentary, p. 7 8 2 , who comments on the forensic character of the whole. D . H I L L E R S , "Amos 7 , 4 and Ancient Parallels," CBQ 1 9 6 4 , pp. 2 2 1 - 2 2 5 , offers a different reading but not unrelated to covenant curse. S. T A L M O N , "The Ugaritic Background of Amos VII 4 , " TarbiZ 3 5 , 1 9 6 5 - 6 6 , pp. 3 0 1 - 3 0 3 (summarized in Ζ A W 1 9 6 7 , p. 1 0 6 ) goes in quite a different direction, relating the text to a Ugaritic pattern of myth. The use of halaq in the text also points to a forensic tone but that term has also been frequently challenged. Closely related to the forensic tone, W U R T H W E I N and R E V E N T L O W have suggested

1. Israel as "small ‫״‬ The word "small" in this formula has been understood either as "helpless" or "insignificant" or both, i.e., unable to raise herself, or unworthy of attention from a strong helper. Without denying these dimensions to the term, usage in legal and traditional contexts further illuminates the term. Among the more important uses for our study are references to the following family situations : 1. Jacob is small and Esau is great (Gen. xxvii 15, 42). The narrative clearly is concerned with the right of inheritance. The term indicates that Jacob has no claim upon the estate and shares in it only by extralegal arrangements 1). 2. Rachel is younger and Leah is older (Gen. xxix 16, 18). Here the younger is favoured and more attractive. But the settlement by Laban indicates that the older sister has a claim and the father has an obligation to her. 3. Benjamin is youngest among the sons of Jacob (Gen. xiii 13, 15, 20, 32, 34, xliii 29, xliv 2, 12, 13, 20, 26). In the narrative the youngest is recipient of special graciousness (xliii 29) and is loved by his father (xliv 20) in a peculiar way. He is object of special concern. It is not his naturally, but he receives it by the arbitrary action of his father. It is contrary to the normal, conventional arrangement. 4. In the blessing of Ephraim and Manassah (Gen. xlviii 19), the qatonjgadhol arrangement can be reversed and inverted by the powerful blessing of the father. To be the son of special favor is not simply a matter of chronology but can be a legal relationship of blessing established by the intervention of the father. 5. In the enigmatic story of Samson (Jud. xv 2) Samson prefers the older to the younger daughter, even though the younger is more beautiful. Could it be because the older had certain rights and privileges Samson did not wish to lose? 6. The story of Saul is the account of the smallest being made great that Amos' intercession is to be understood in terms of his office and not his person. W U R T H W E I N , "Arnos-Studien," Ζ AW 1 9 5 0 , p. 2 6 , rightly says the office of the prophet has to do with the sbalom of his people and that of course related to intercession. Cf. G U N N E W E G , "Erwägungen zu Amos 7 , 1 4 , " Z T K 1 9 6 0 , p. 7 , and especially John D . W . W A T T S , Vision and Prophecy in Amos for the role of the prophet in lawsuit and covenant renewal. 1 ) These two uses of the term are in the narrative. The formal inversion of the right of the two brothers is in the poetic fragment of xxv 33. Though the term "little" is not used there, the sense is the same. The poem has the marks of a formal, legal binding declaration. No doubt it stands at the beginning of this tradition.

by Yahweh's action. He is of the smallest tribe (1 Sam. ix 21) and has no claim to power. Indeed he is "little" in his own eyes (xv 17). Only the action of Yahweh can change that. The rule of Saul, brief and ineffective as it was, is a witness to the power of Yahweh to invert a situation for a person who has no legitimate claim. 7. Solomon, in the Deuteronomic prayer (1 Kg. iii 7) is called "little," i.e., without capacity to act as king. It is this kind that Yahweh makes king. These references suggest two dimensions of "little" that should be noted : a) it describes the person who lacks the legal credentials to make a claim for himself and b) it describes a person who is totally dependent on another for his position or power which is not his right, but a gift granted to him 1). In this context we may examine two texts in greater detail. The prayer of Jacob (Gen. xxxii 9-12) is a remarkable statement of Israel's election 2). The passage has these elements : a) address of deity which alludes to a history of promise (v. 9). b) statement of dependence (v. 10). Along with the term "little" are "loyal" and "true." The terms are placed in juxtaposition so that the loyalty and reliability of Yahweh counterbalance the littleness of Jacob. c) petition (v. 11) including both imperative and motivation. d) concluding affirmation which reasserts the promise and calls upon Yahweh to honor his pledge (v. 12). The only thing which keeps Jacob from death at the hand of Esau is the fidelity of Yahweh. Jacob has no other appeal or claim to make. He asserts his helplessness against his brother who has all the legal claims on his side. He can only appeal to Yahweh's graciousness which disregards the questions of legitimate claim. Yahweh has obligated himself to be gracious and Jacob appeals to that obligation. The David tradition makes remarkable use of the "little" motif from the Jacob narrative. The beginnings of the rise of David (1 Sam. xvi 11, xvii 14) set the stage by affirming that a) David has 1

) See the discussion of Otto B Ä C H L I , "Die Erwählung des Geringen," TZ 1 9 6 6 , pp. 3 8 5 - 3 9 5 . Interestingly he links the motif of insignificance to the credo of Deut. xxvi 5 and the Amraean reference. In what follows, we will explore the Jacob materials in reference to the older traditional factors. 2 ) VON RAD, "The Problem of the Hexateuch," The Problem of the Hexateuch and Other Essays, p. 59, concludes that the prayer is "indicative of the whole course of Jacob's life-history." See his note with references to H E M P E L and K I T T E L .

no legal claim to the throne and b) he is totally dependent upon Yahweh who ignores questions of legitimacy. The motif is most fully expressed in the prayer of David (2 Sam. vii 18íf.). In a structure quite parallel to Jacob's prayer David makes his case: a) statement of dependence (vv. 18-20). b) doxology which asserts the promise (vv. 21-24). c) petition which asks Yahweh to honor his vow, for David has no other claim (vv. 25-29). d) concluding affirmation (v. 28). The entire David tradition and certainly this prayer understand clearly the role of the David establishment in history, a) He has no legitimate claim. David like Jacob is a usurper, b) The security of David is not in his usurpation but in the incredible action of Yahweh. c) In a moment of crisis both David and Jacob appeal to Yahweh's grace for without it, each would disappear from history as a usurper must, according to retribution theology. Thus qaton refers to rights granted which by-pass the normal standards of legitimacy. The use of the word "little" illuminates the intercessory prayer of Amos. First, the prayer clearly alludes to the Jacob tradition, for the father is named here in a peculiar way. Only four other times is "Jacob" used in the Amos tradition. In iii 13, ix 8, "house of Jacob" refers to the dynasty or at least to a political entity and in vi 8, viii 7 the "excellence of Jacob" refers to the political, cultural achievements of the establishemnt. Only in our formula is the term Jacob used in a theological way to appeal to the patriarchal tradition. The prayer of Amos recalls the younger brother of Esau and affirms his precarious place in the eighth century. The covenant people is still without legitimate claim to territory or to a role in history. The covenant people is still totally dependent upon Yahweh and apparently in a precarious situation in which she will perish without Yahweh's intervention. But the covenant people through their mediator can appeal to Yahweh s obligation in light of the promise tradition. Secondly, Amos belongs in the southern tradition of the Davidic covenant and asserts in this strange formula the gracious covenant by which Israel exists if she exists at all 1 ). The use of the traditional 1 ) The connections of Amos with the David traditions have been in part explored by H . G O T T L I E B , "Amos und Jerusalem," VT 1 9 6 7 , pp. 4 3 0 - 4 6 3 . Though he concludes that Amos is a preacher of judgment (p. 463) perhaps the same tradition from Jerusalem also permits more positive affirmations. See now

reference which resembles the prayers of Jacob and David is not simply a moment of tenderness. It is a very solemn, sober affirmation of the state of the covenant. The Jacob of Amos has no claim of its own but Yahweh has made a commitment 1). The prayer, in agreement with its two forerunners, reasserts this commitment and calls Yahweh to honor it 2). This way of understanding the Jacob reference (vii 2, 5) in the context of the Esau/Edom traditions may perhaps be linked to eighth century Israel-Edomite relations to which Amos addressed himself. In addition to the oracle against Edom (i 1 If.), this people is mentioned as being master over Israel (i 6, 9). But the more important reference is in ii 1. There Edom is singled out as being under the special protection of Yahweh as was Israel 3 ). The specific historical allusion made there is lost to us and the relation of Israel and Edom in the time of Amos is far from clear. But it is clear that Amos has a special awareness and perhaps involvement in the Edomite tradition. T E R R I E N 4) suggests a relation with the Edomites though he rejects the more extreme view of E. M E Y E R that Amos was an Edomite. C R I P P S 5) in commenting on ii If., affirms that "according to Amos, Israel's foe, Edom, shares with her in the blessings of Jehovah's universal rule." W O L F F 6) is concerned with the T. M. R A I T T , " T h e Concept of Forgiveness in the Pre-exilic Prophets in Relation to its Form-Historical Setting," (Dissertation, Vanderbilt, 1964), pp. 209ff. He shows the southern tradition has a peculiar confidence in God's Vergebungsbereitschaft. 1 ) This dimension of covenant has been clearly stated by D. N . F R E E D M A N , "Davine Commitment and Human Obligation," Interpretation 1964, pp. 419-431 and more recently by R. E. C L E M E N T S , Abraham and David, pp. 61 ff. 2 ) On this basis a clearer appreciation of Amos ix 11-15 is possible. In light of Yahweh's commitment, it is quite possible that these verses are not a late version but simply an appropriate affirmation that Yahweh honors his commitment and therefore Israel is not without hope. Seen in this context it agrees with the theology of the prayers of Jacob and David. 3 ) This is in keeping with the old tradition (Gen. xxvii 39-40) that Esau-Edom is not without a blessing. Cf. Deut. xxiii 7-8. 4 ) "Amos and Wisdom," Israel's Prophetic Heritage, ed. by A N D E R S O N and HARRELSON, p p . 5

113-115.

) Richard S. C R I P P S , op. cit., p. 136. On the Edomite references in Amos, cf. pp. 282ff. Β ) H. W . W O L F F , Amos' Geistige Heimat, pp. 53ff. To be sure Wolff turns this line of evidence in a quite different direction, but at least the argument connecting Amos and the Edomites seems secure. I suggest, as Wolff would not, that this connection with the Edomites is primarily informed by the old covenant traditions in which the older brother is denied his rights and the younger is guaranteed what is not properly his.

wisdom of the sons of the East and so connects Amos to Edom. He suggests Amos was quite aware of the Pentateuchal tradition of Isaac as the father of Jacob and Esau, of Israelite and Edomite claims (Gen. XXV 29f.). This general line of reasoning and particularly the reference of W O L F F suggests the power of the affirmation that Jacob is "little," i.e., in contrast to Edom he is both helpless and dependent. From the beginning, Jacob's history has been rooted in the arbitrary commitment of Yahweh. Now in a moment of crisis, Amos appeals to that commitment. 2. The form of the intercession : kî qaton hif That this prayer is concerned with the legal position 1) of Israel before Yahweh and Yahweh before Israel is substiated by the form. Indeed, the form is crucial for understanding this use of the "little" tradition. The form of kî qaton hu* has close affinities with the declarative formula which VON RAD has discussed in quite another connection 2). The formula consists in an adjective coupled with a pronoun introducted by a very strong particle. VON RAD has shown that the origin of this phrase is to be found in the cultic judgment rendered by a priest concerning a worshiper or the action or offering of the worshiper. It is spoken by the cultic official who, with great authority, announces the will of Yahweh concerning the object under consideration. Thus a disease is appraised (Lev. xiii 8), an offering is rejected (Lev. vii 18b) or categorized 3). A worshiper is declared clean or unclean. But VON RAD has been able to show that the form is not confined to priestly affairs 4). It also functions as a declarative formula so inclusive in scope that it involves the entire covenant relation. It now becomes a verdict about a relationship 5). The form is unchanged. It still 1

) By legal position I mean Jacob is what he is because Yahweh made a solemn, binding oath to be the suzerian over Jacob. This oath has the force of a legal contract and Israel can rely on it. On the contractual character of the relation, see G . M . T U C K E R , "Witnesses and Dates in Israelite Contracts," CBQ 1 9 6 6 , pp. 42ff. 2 ) "Faith Reckoned as Righteousness," op. cit., pp. 1 2 5 - 1 3 0 . See also R. R E N D T O R F F , Die Gesetze in der Priesterschrift, pp. 7 4 - 7 6 ; Klaus K O C H , Die Priesterschrift, p. 8 2 , "Haggais unreines Volk," Ζ AW 1 9 6 7 , pp. 6 2 - 6 3 ; Martin M E T Z E R , "Gesammelte Studien zum Alten Testament," Verkündigung und Forschung 1966, p. 2 2 ; and W . Z I M M E R L I , "The Special Form- and Traditio-Historical Character of Ezekiel's Prophecy," VT 1965, p. 523. 3 ) On the role of the priest, see J. B E G R I C H , "Die priesterliche Tora", Ζ AW 1936, pp. 65ff. 4 ) VON RAD, "Faith Reckoned as Rightousness," pp. 128-130. s ) The form is used confessionally in Is. xii 23.

includes an adjective and a pronoun. The context is unchanged. It is a solemn verdict for which there is no expressed justification nor is there any source of appeal from the verdict. The cultic formula is utilized concerning the covenant. The only changed factor is the adjective. N o w cultic terms are replaced by broader categories of covenant. Moreover the form now has accompanying it in some of its uses a statement of consequence. The implications of the verdict are now explicit. Thus in Ezek. xviii 5ff., the verdict is sadîq hu\ The explication of the verdict is the assurance of life. It is reasonable to argue that the intercessory formula of Amos is another development of the form. The phrase has the same structure as the early cultic pronouncements, adjective and pronoun. The particular adjective permits the form to serve a new purpose. Ostensibly qaton hu‫ ג‬is a verdict upon Israel : a) he is helpless and b) he is dependent. This is clear from the tradition to which the prophet appeals. This is the basis of his intercession. It is a verdict beyond question in light of a) Israel's tradition of elction (cf. iii 2, ix 7) and b) the current eighth century situation. But in the context of Amos, the verdict is not only an announcement about Israel. It is also a statement to Yahweh, a protest and challenge, perhaps an accusation 1 ). The word "little" in light of the tradition is covenantal and speaks about Yahweh's obligation to Israel. The "little" one has no legal claim and has been placed in the present situation by the powerful act of Yahweh 2). Yahweh has made a commitment to Israel in her helplessness and sustained Israel in her dependence. Yahweh has made commitments to this legally disenfranchised one. N o w the verdict is a reminder to Yahweh of his past commitment and an urging that he act on the basis of his past commitment. That Israel is helpless and dependent has important implications for Yahweh's fidelity and he must respond in light of 1

) Here I am assuming that Amos occupies an office concerned about the condition of the covenant. As elsewhere in the Amos tradition, the forms of lawsuit are employed. Often he functions on the side of Yahweh to establish the guilt of Israel. Cf. my paper, "Amos iv 4-13 and Israel's Covenant Worship," VT 1965, pp. 1-15. On this occasion, however, he takes the side of Israel, intercedes in the lawsuit Yahweh on behalf of Israel. The form suggests that Israel has been wronged by Yahweh who has failed to keep his covenant commitment. 2 ) The formula for the younger child is balanced in the formula of 2 Sam. xiii 21 as K I T T E L ( B H 3 ) has reconstructed it from versions: kî bekôrô bu'. Again this is a formal assertion of the rights and privileges of the older child. So our formula is a statement about the legal position of the younger, the one deprived of the rights of the other.

the verdict. Amos here avoids every moral judgment, every assessment of Israel's disobedience, every allusion to Israel's guilt or merit. He moves behind such questions so that his declaration makes an appeal to Yahweh on his own terms. He is responsible for this helpless, dependent one and cannot renege now. The question of the "verdict" concerns Yahweh as much as it does Israel 1 ). That the formula qaton hit‫ י‬refers to Yahweh is suggested by the development of the form in priestly usage so that Yahweh is added as in Lev. xxvii 28: "Most holy to the lord," (qadosh-qadeshim hu1 1 Yahweh) 2). Our formula in Amos declares only "he is small" but the form carries the notion, "little to you," i.e. in reference to Yahweh. Too much must not be made of the introductory kî and yet it should not be ignored. N o doubt it is employed here to add stress and solemnity to the verdict about to be announced. R E N D T O R F F 3 ) lists a number of passages in which the formula is introduced by kî. 4 M U I L E N B U R G ) suggests the emphatic stress given to the oath formulae by the particle. Probably this is its function here. Thus the verdict is underscored. This phrase in the intercession affirms that the present state of Israel (under curse) not only concerns Israel but concerns Yahweh with equal urgency. The prophet puts Israel's case in a way which shows that the fidelity and honor of Yahweh is now at stake. He has made a commitment to Israel. The prophet subtly introduces an accusation which suggests Yahweh is guilty for the present state of things because he has not honored his commitment. The formula serves as an indictment designed to move Yahweh to action for Israel. 3. The form of the intercession·, mîyaqûm If our analysis thus far is cogent, then a fresh approach is possible for the preceding question : mî yaqûm Jacob. This is often read as a cry of despair and perhaps it is. But a careful study of the form suggests other nuances. We have already seen that the declaratory formula is a verdict which 1

) See F R E E D M A N , op cit., on this dimension of covenant. ) Thus R E N D T O R F F , p. 75, n. 57. 3 ) Ibid., p. 75, n. 57. 4 ) James M U I L E N B U R G , "The Linguistic and Rhetorical Usages of the Particle kt in the Old Testament," HUCA 32 (1961), p. 156. On p. 145, he renders such a usage, "surely." 2

is related to life and death 1). Thus in Ezek. xviii 5ff. the verdict sadiq hu‫ י‬leads to hayôyihyeh. Moreover the connection between qûm and yahah is clear (cf. Hos. vi 2, 1 Sam. ii 6). The question of raising is linked to having life and, as W I J N G A A R D S has shown, covenant 2 J In the eighth century, the question put by Amos is the desperate question of survival. Thus the question mîyaqûm is closely related to kî qaton hu\ At every stage in Israel's precarious history she has been raised to life at the moment of death. In each case Yahweh has acted to give life 3 ). Israel in her littleness lives only by his life-giving intervention. Thus there is an antithesis between qaton and qûm. On the one hand Israel is helpless and dependent. On the other hand Yahweh is committed to sustaining and maintaining the helpless, dependent one. The phrase of intercession is a question of great seriousness. We may seek illumination for it in the same context as the declaratory formula. Thus it is plausible that mîyaqûm is a disputation word, i.e., a rhetorical question which argues a court case and may serve as an accustaion against the one addressed 4). The use of the form is apparent in two literary groupings. 1

) Cf.VON RAD, "Faith Reckoned as Righteousness," p.128, and " , Righteousness' and 'Life' in the Cultic Language of the Psalms," ibid., pp. 243ff. 2 ) "Death and Resurrection in the Covenantal Context (Hos VI 2)", V T 1967, pp. 226ff. Thus the question about raising is linked to the problem of restoration of covenant. The curses in Amos vii 1, 4 indicate that the covenant has been voided and Israel is destined for death. Amos' intercession responds to that situation. He asks Yahweh, as befits his intercessory responsibility : must the curse be implemented or will Yahweh act to prevent Israel's death and restore Israel to life in the covenant? Edwin M . G O O D , "Hosea 5:8-6:6; An Alternative to Alt," JBL 1966, pp. 273ff., has indicated a like understanding of Hosea ν 8-vi 6 in terms of covenant renewal. That raising belongs to covenant is also indicated by V R I E Z E N , "Exodus Studien, Exodus I," VT 1967, pp. 338ff., in arguing that mûth-qúm is a formula of succession. This supports the judgment of W I J N G A A R D S that qûm relates to new life, new covenant, and now V R I E Z E N adds, new king. Perhaps this illuminates the reaction of the royal establishment in Am. vii 10-17, for it hints that the king is gone and a new one must be raised. 3 ) In the following discussion, I emend the text to read yaqim in the hiph'il. The qal can of course be retained but it is admittedly an awkward reading. The parallels cited are less than satisfying. A parallel which I will cite later in Ps. xciv 16 has the qal but there the object is followed by a preposition which is missing in our text. The hiph'il reading is preferred by the versions and has been followed by numerous scholars. See H A R P E R , A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Amos and Hosea, p. 160. With this reading the question is rendered, "Who will cause Jacob to rise?" 4 ) See W E S T E R M A N N , "Sprache und Struktur der Prophetie Deuterojesajas," Forschung am Alten Testament (Theologische Bücherei 24), pp. 124ff., and more

In the Psalms of lament, rhetorical questions addressed to the deity play an important role. The simplest use of the rhetorical question is a doxology which affirms the uniqueness of Yahweh, mî-kamôka (Pss. xxxv 10, lxxi 19, lxxxix 7, 9) 1 ). Closely related to these is an affirmation that Yahweh does care and can be trusted (Pss. lxxiii 24, lxxvii 14). But the uses which concern us most directly are the cries of despair and abandonment or the assurance of trust which ask in faith but sometimes faith which is far from certain : Who gives from Zion the salvation of Israel (Pss. xiv 7, liii 7) ? Who will give me wings like a dove (lv 7)? Who will lead me to a fortified city? Who will lead me to Eden (Pss. lx 11, cvii 11)? Who rises up for me against the wicked? Who stands up for me aganist evildoers (Ps. xciv 16)? These questions have the interrogative pronoun followed by a verb. The substance of each question is deliverance from a situation of helplessness and despair. Characteristically the question occurs as motivation, i.e., an attempt to move Yahweh to answer the plea 2). Indeed, even the doxologies and affirmations mentioned above serve in a similar way to urge Yahweh's intervention in a moment of helplessness 3 ). The mood of the question varies. Sometimes it is quiet and confident. At other times it is hostile and harsh so that the question is not simply lament but becomes disputation, i.e., protest that Yahweh has not acted in keeping with his covenant commitments. specifically Egon P F E I F F E R , "Die Disputationsworte im Buch Maleachi," EvT h 1959, pp. 546ff. 1 ) Cf. C. J . L A B U S C H A G N E , The Incomparahility of Yahweh in the Old Testament, pp. 16ff. 2 ) In Ps. xciv 16, our closest parallel in the Psalms, M O W I N C K E L , The Psalms in Israel's Worship I, p. 206, regards the question as an expression of confidence in Yahweh, in light of v. 17. 3 ) In any case the lament occurs when the covenant relation is not properly functioning and therefore covenant blessings are not given as expected. When that happens it must be determined who has disrupted covenant. If Israel affirms her guilt, then she can confess and repent. When Israel claims innocence she must somehow make Yahweh responsible for the disruption. In the latter case, the lament vascillates between Klage and Anklage. Thus the question of mtyaqim in Amos vii 2, 5 and Ps. xciv 16 is in the form of a lament or disputation question which belongs to the lament. It is an attempt to get Yahweh to act for his covenant people. It appeals to Yahweh to act because it is his obligation and it hints that there are no alternatives for Israel. If Yahweh does not act, "little" Israel is lost.

The second group of texts which employs the interrogative mt are in 2 Isaiah 1 ). The questions function in the same way, but now the accusation motif completely subordinates that of lament. The issue is no longer between Yahweh and Israel and the question of covenant faithfulness as in the Psalter. Now the issue is between Yahweh and other gods, a question of power and sovereignty. But the function is the same. The deity who cannot or does not answer the question effectively is declared either unfaithful or impotent (cf. the verdict in response to the question, e.g., Is. xii 24, 29). The counter-theme of 2 Isaiah is that Yahweh in contrast to the other gods is both powerful and faithful. In the Psalter the same affirmation comes in the assurance of being heard 2). The interrogative form in both kinds of literature raises doubts as to the relevance of the other gods. N o w Amos employs the form to raise the same question about Yahweh. In the more direct materials of the lament, the purpose is to move Yahweh to act. In 2 Isaiah the purpose is to move Israel to trust. Both mean to clarify the covenant relation. The rhetorical question in Amos is similar in form and serves as in the laments, the attempt to move Yahweh to act in terms of his commitment. Thus Amos uses a quite appropriate form for his intercession : Disputation word to move Yahweh to act: mtyaqtmJacob Solemn particle to stress oath: kî Declaration formula which sets forth Israel's need and Yahweh's responsibility : qaton hu‫ג‬ This is a bold intercession for Amos opposes the judgment message of the preceding vision which announces covenant curse 3) Amos 1

) See W E S T E R M A N N , op. cit., pp. 124ff., and E. VON W A L D O W , Der traditionsgeschichtliche Hintergrund der prophetischen Gerichtsreden, pp. 42ff. The question in this context means, "who is in charge here, Yahweh or someone else?" That is the question 2 Isaiah explores. It is also the question asked in the "murmur tradition" of the sojourn materials, on which see von Waldow, pp. 33ff. It is Amos' question in his intercession. 2 ) See W E S T E R M A N N , The Praise of God in the Psalms, pp. 52ff., and more directly H . G U T H R I E , Israel's Sacred Songs, pp. 166ff. On pp. 168., in his discussion of the "oracle of reassurance," G U T H R I E refers to Is. xliv 2-8 which contains the^' Verdict" to which we have referred. 3 ) On the curses here see C. F E N S H A M , "Common Trends in Curses of the Near Eastern Treaties and Kudurru-Inscriptions Compared with Maledictions of Amos and Isaiah," Ζ AW 1963, pp. 155-175, and on this text," H I L L E R S , op. cit. Though H I L L E R S does not read rîv, his emendations support the notion that this is treaty curse.

does so not on grounds of compassion and tenderness. Rather his appeal is rooted in the covenant tradition and is made on the basis of clear legal precedents and formal commitments 1 ). The form approaches an accusation against Yahweh on behalf of Israel : mijaqtm: Has he abandoned his commitment? kî qaton hu‫ ־‬: Israel is his responsibility. We are now able to understand the imperative mood of selah-nal and h^dal-na1 which precede our formula. Hadal is used by Isaiah, Amos' closest prophetic counterpart, to summon Israel away from false covenant (Is. i 16, ii 22). It refers to covenant transgression in 2 Chr. xxxv 21, and in Ps. xxxvi 4 it is used to describe the covenant violator as one who has ceased in covenantal actions. Only in Ex. ix 29, 33, 34 is it used in relation to Yahweh. There it refers to the cessation of covenant curses. Though the precise meaning is not clear, it appears a) to call for a cessation of a pattern of action b) which is a betrayal of covenant expectations. Amos' use thus may suggest Yahwe should desist from actions (curses) which are inappropriate in covenantal terms. The use of salah is richer and more complex 2). Frequently "forgiveness" is Yahweh's response to Israel's repentance (1 Kg. viii 30, 34, 36, 39, 50; 2 Chr. vi 21, 25, 27, 30, 39, vii 14; Is. Iv 7; Jer. xxxvi 3; Lam. iii 42). At other times there is a radical proclamation of newness which gives no hint of any previous repentance (Jer. xxxi 34, xxxiii 8). Most in keeping with our passage is the intercessory prayer of Moses : . . . Ο Lord, let the Lord I pray thee, go in the midst of us, although it is a stiff-necked people and pardon our iniquity and our sin and take us for thy inheritance (Ex. xxxiv 9). Here there is no surprising assurance, nor a promise of repentance, only a passionate petition. The same is apparent in Num. xiv 19 3), 1

) Walter B A U M G A R T N E R , Die Klagegedichte des Jeremia, had already demonstrated the dependence of the prophet on the older forms. He showed that a) the individual uses older forms and b) the forms are probably derived from the cult. Thus it is plausible that Amos also utilized older cultic forms. Specifically B A U M G A R T N E R notes Ps. 94 (pp. 6, 10), which has close parallels to the formula of Amos. It remained for R E V E N T L O W , Liturgie und prophetisches Ich bei Jeremia, pp. 216ff., to show that the laments as utilized by the prophets take place in the context of lawsuit. See also S. B L A N K , " T h e Confessions of Jermiah and the Meaning of Prayer," HUCA 21 (1948) pp. 331-354, and R A I T T , op. cit., p. 84. 2 ) R A I T T , ibid., pp. 3 4 , 2 9 7 , and passim has explored this motif with great care. 3 ) R A I T T , op. cit., p. 70, boldly places this kind of text in a cultic setting. For our total argument, this is an important point.

Ps. XXV 11, Dan. ix 19. In Num. xiv 18 appeal is made to the character of Yahweh as forgiving and in Ps. xxv 11, Dan. ix 19 the basis of appeal is "for thy name's sake, for thy own sake." The appeal is grounded in Yahweh's inclination and not in Israel's repentance. These uses of salah suggest Amos here acts in the role of covenant mediator and appeals to Yahweh on the basis of his own concern for covenant. There may be the hint that Yahweh owes Israel this, but the stronger note is that Yahweh wants covenant and so must act according to the intercessory formula. Thus the appeals are close correspondents to the naham of vv. 3, 6. Yahweh turns from covenant curses to covenant blessings (cf. Ex. ix 29ff. on hadal and Ex. xxxiv 9 on salah as well as Num. xiv 19, Dan. ix 9, 19) because he wills covenant and keeps his oath to have it 1 ). The locus of Amos in the David tradition is reenforced by this line of interpretation. Amos can speak so forcefully not because he asks a favor of Yahweh but because he appeals to him on the basis of his formal obligation. The effect of this form is to make rejection of intercession in Am. vii 8 more decisive and devastating. Israel has no ground for such an appeal, according to the tradition. Now Yahweh voids even his oath to maintain covenant, so unfaithful is Israel. The third vision exonerates Yahweh. 4. Amos as covenant mediator N o w we are able to reappraise the role of Amos as intercessor. The traditional reference to "little" and the form of his intercession place his words in a covenant context, certainly in imitation of cultic forms if not actually in a cultic setting. The tone of the prayer is not simply tenderness and compassion, but a vigorous, bold affirmation of Israel's rights : 1. The tone is not begging, but a confident assertion. It is complaint which moves toward accusation 2). The complaint concerns broken 1 ) In a recent paper, Edward C A M P B E L L Jr. has analyzed several covenant terms including naham which he shows to belong to the treaty relation. Thus the naham of Yahweh in Amos vii 3, 6 in response to the intercessory formula is not simply a change of mind but a decsion by Yahweh to act in ways appropriate to his treaty obligations. It is this that delivers the words of Amos from simple romantic appeal. See the curious use of naham in 1 Sam. xiv 29, 35. In the first of this it is parallel to "false," but in the second the term has a quite different meaning. 2 ) It is difficult if not impossible to draw a line between lament (Klage) and accusation (Anklage). W E S T E R M A N N , "Struktur und Geschichte der Klage im Alten Testament", Forschung am alten Testament, pp. 273ff., in exploring the form of the

covenant and the formula suggests Yahweh has violated the covenant by sending the curses. The verdict, kî qaton hu*, places the responsibility on Yahweh because Israel is helpless and dependent. Israel expects Yahweh to act. Covenant is broken and Yahweh must renew it. 2. The language supports the notion that the issue is covenant renewal 1 ). Qaton speaks of Israel's precariousness. He is unable to renew covenant. Yaqûm, closely paralleled in Ps. xciv 16, speaks of intervention of Yahweh on behalf of the complainer. Thus Yahweh is to act on behalf of the one about to perish because of covenant curse 2). 3. The appeal to Yahweh's power appeals to the southern covenant tradition which stresses Yahweh's unilateral action for his covenant partner 3 ). Thus the qaton motif which is important in David theology is employed here. The intercession functions dramatically to stress the reversal in vii 7ff. when the theology of grace is superseded by Yahweh sentence in the third vision. It remains to assess the implications of this study for the exegesis of Amos. The conventional view sees in these verses a mood of tenderness, but this must be rejected. His speech with traditional allusions in protest form means the thrust of the prayer is more formal than is commonly recognized. Thus our analysis supports the notion of Amos' involvement in the institutional life of his day. In this case the tradition behind the prophetic speech is covenantal and not sapiential 4). Obviously in wisdom traditions there can be lament shows that the lament characteristically includes a complaint against Yahweh expressed in such questions as " w h y " and "how long?" Clearly this question is an accusation, suggesting that Yahweh has not honored his vow and so is guilty of covenant violation. On the speech of accusation see H . J . B O E C K E R , Redeformen des Rechtslebens im Alten Testament, pp. 71ff., and Ε . VON W A L D O W , op. cit., pp. 25ff., in commenting upon the murmur tradition in Ex. xviii 7 is really whether or not Yahweh will honor his covenant obligations. Thus it is a lament about the present state of things but also an accusation that Yahweh has failed his covenant partner. The formula of Amos reflects the same ambiguity. X ) R A I T T , op. cit., pp. 6 9 , 1 5 6 , following T H O R D A R S O N , rightly argues that covenant renewal and forgiveness are inextricably related. 2 ) The classic use of labad is of course Deut. xxvi 5 in which Israel is set in a context of very precarious existence and is rescued by Yahweh's powerful intervention. The term refers to a situation of curse (death) and prepares the way for blessing (life) from Yahweh. Amos employs the same term (i 8, ii 14, iii 15) in the context of curse but his preferred word is 'naphal' (iii 14, vii 17, viii 14, ix 11). The use of both terms in Amos (together in iii 14f.) prepare for the urgent demand of intercession. 3 ) See F R E E D M A N , op. cit., pp. 419ff., C L E M E N T S , op. cit., pp. 61ff., and C . J . L A B U S C H A G N E , op. cit., pp. 86ff. 4 ) In the argument for the sapiential antecedents of Amos, the intercessory formula has played almost no role. It is not mentioned by T E R R I E N nor

no intercession. The forms strongly support the suggestion of a covenantal base in this instance. Though the intercession is not grounded in sentimentality, there is hope for restored covenant. As I have argued, Amos is primarily concerned with covenant renewal 1 ). Moreover, the covenant in which he stands is the gracious relation of the southern tradition, for he appeals to the unilateral action of Yahweh 2). Perhaps this comes to fulfillment in ix 1 Iff. which alludes to the David promise, mentions Edom which is implicit in our word qaton, and employs the same verb, qûm. If Amos can thus be interpreted in light of the tradition of Jacob and in terms of covenant renewal at a moment when the question of survival was acute, then a quite different understanding of Amos is called for. It means that the conventional exegesis which stressed righteousness and justice and held the formula of intercession to be exceptional has not appreciated the traditional, institutional or historical roots of Amos. Perhaps the center of Amos is not to be found in chapters iv-v where we have usually located it but in the promise of ix 11-15 where the fidelity of Yahweh is affirmed and therefore the future of Israel is secured. What had seemed to be an embarrassing gloss, in light of the meaning of the intercession of vii 2, 5, may be the central kerygma of the tradition of Amos. nor in the summary of C R E N S H A W , op. cit., W O L F F , op. cit., p. 4 9 , does suggest the formula kî qaton hu' is closely paralleled in Prov. xxii 22, kî dal-hW and so he concludes, " E r erinnert nicht an Erwählung, nicht an Jahwes Erbarmen, bringt keine im grossen Kultus üblichen Vorhaltungen, sondern diesen schlicht weisheitlichen Hinweis auf die Wehrlosigkeit des Betroffenen." I do not find this argument persuasive. It presumes the point in question. Clearly the same form is used in Prov. xxii 22, but it does not follow that this is a wisdom form. R I C H T E R , Recht und Ethos, p. 144, notes the formula in Lev. xviii 22, 23b, 17b. He observes that E L L I G E R , ZAW 1955, pp. 15f., relates the form to cultic-sacral law, but R I C H T E R connects the vocabulary of these formulae to the tradition of wisdom. R I C H T E R does not claim that the form is to be understood as sapiential. In light of the role of intercession, the priestly form of the "verdict" and the traditional meaning of qaton, the covenantal and perhaps cultic context seem more appropriate. See the general argument of R E V E N T L O W , DasAmt des Propheten bei Arnos, pp. 32ff., and W A T T S , op. cit., pp. 16, 20, 23, 46f. 1 ) See my discussion in "Amos iv 4-13 and Israel's Covenant Worship." 2 ) This basis for covenant renewal is of course more boldly stated in Ezekiel's "for the sake of my name," but Amos surely stands in the same tradition in this respect. W. Z I M M E R L I , "The Word of God in the Book of Ezekiel," History and Hermeneutic (Journal for Theology and the Church IV), pp. 12f., indicates this way of thinking is a "curious and strange formulation of sola gratia." Perhaps the antecedents are to be found in an unlikely place like the intercession of Amos. GERSTENBERGER

T H E

E L I J A H - E L I S H A

P R O P H E T I C

S A G A S :

S U C C E S S I O N

IN

S O M E

R E M A R K S

A N C I E N T

O N

I S R A E L

BY

R. P. CARROLL Glasgow

I The sacral traditions underlying the book of Deuteronomy have their origins in the pre-conquest period and in the settlement in Canaan period of Israel's early history. The compilers and editors of Deuteronomy were concerned with presenting these traditions in a form which would recall the Israel of their day to a renewed experience of Yahweh's covenant with his people. Thus Deuteronomy took the form of a series of sermons given by Moses to Israel just prior to the entry into Canaan. However much of the material in these sermons reflected developments in Israel's culture characteristic of later periods. Two post-conquest institutions which provided the Deuteronomists with no legal precedent to fall back on were prophetism and the monarchy. The paucity of references to these institutions was due to the emphasis placed on the sacral traditions in the formulation of Deuteronomy. The main approach to the legislation for king and prophet was a pragmatic one. 1 ) The authors were concerned with some of the abuses of the monarchy and the problems posed by false prophets. The essential point made about the king was his status as the person chosen to be king by Yahweh 2 ). The legislation for the prophet dealt with the problem of identifying the authentic prophet of Yahweh amid the prophetic activity in Israel. The observations show an obvious adaptation of Israel's experience of prophetism over the centuries. A significant section in the regulations for the prophet provides the initial basis for this study. 1

) For the king see Dt. xvii 14-20; cf. 1 Kings x. 28; xi 3. For the prophet see Dt. xiii 1-5; xviii 15-22. 2 ) "you may indeed set as king over you him who Yahweh your God will choose.", xvii 15.

"Yahweh your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your brethren-him you shall heed-just as you desired of Yahweh your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly, when you said, 'Let me not hear again the voice of Yahweh my God, or see this great fire any more, lest I die.' And Yahweh said to me' 'They have rightly said all that they have spoken. I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him.' " 1 ) This statement provides both the sole reference and the locus classicus for the concept of prophetic succession in the Old Testament. There are two possible interpretations of what precisely was envisaged by the Deuteronomists in their sketch of the prophet. They may have intended their statement to be a prediction with a single fulfilment in the future, namely, the coming of an eschatological figure 2). However the view taken in this paper is that they had in mind a succession of prophets of which Moses was the prototype 3 ). The institution of prophecy was to be a continuous and permanent office constantly supplying the people of Israel with a covenant mediator who would recreate the role of Moses for the nation 4 ). Two factors emerge from this passage which are relevant and important for a discussion of the notion of prophetic succession in the Old Testament. They are, the idea of continuous action on the part of Yahweh in raising up prophets to meet situations, and the Mosaic nature of such prophets. The idea of continuity is conveyed by translating the terms ,āqīm and yāqīm in a distributive sense, that is, " I will raise up/he will raise u p " from time to time. The words kām0nī and kānwkā demonstrate that Moses is to be the model for these prophets. Thus Deuteronomy set forth a series of Mosaic prophets as an image of prophetism in Israel. The statement in Deuteronomy does not make clear whether the prophetic office was to be a continuous line of prophets extending 1

) xviii 15-18. ) See G. VON RAD, Deuteronomy, London, 1966, pp. 123f. This is the view taken by the early church, Acts iii 22; vii 37. 3 ) Cf. H-J. K R A U S , Worship in Israel, Oxford, 1966, pp. 106ff.; also E. W. N I C H O L S O N , Deuteronomy and Tradition, Oxford, 1967, pp. 77, 117. 4 ) Cf.". . . the 'prophet' contemplated is not a single individual, belonging to a distant future, but Moses' representative for the time being, whose office it would be to supply Israel, whenever in its history occasion should arise, with needful guidance and advice: in other words, that the reference is not to an individual prophet but to a prophetical order.", S. R . D R I V E R , Deuteronomy,3 ICC, Edinburgh 5th Imp. 1960, p. 229. 2

from Moses down through Israel's history, each prophet succeeded by the next prophet, rather similar to succession in the monarchy, or a series of prophets with the individual prophet emerging to meet a given situation, in the same fashion that prevailed during the period of the judges. The legislation was an attempt to fit the phenomenon of prophecy into an ideological scheme. This scheme was probably more ideal than actual 1). Deuteronomy sought to give order to a movement in ancient Israel which defied such systematic treatment. The desire to anchor all of Israel's institutions in the pre-conquest period led to the formulation of prophetism in terms of a series of Mosaic prophets mediating Yahweh's covenant to his people Israel. There was a tradition in the northern kingdom of Israel which regarded Moses as a prophet 2 ). This tradition informed the Deuteronomists and provided sufficient authority for them to assert that Moses was the prototypical prophet. Thus they were able to place the whole phenomenon of prophetism within the context of Israel's sacral traditions belonging to the Mosaic period. Moses can hardly be considered a prophet in the normal Old Testament sense. Yet certain features of the portrait of Moses in the Old Testament link him with the prophetic figures of the post-conquest history of Israel. The prophets of Israel had some shamanistic functions in common with Moses 3 ). For example, prayer and healing were aspects of the prophet's role in Israel 4 ). In this sense Moses may justifiably be called a prophet. However it would probably be more accurate to see his claim to be a prophet as resting in his role as the mediator of the word of Yahweh to Israel. Moses mediated the covenant to Israel at Sinai and spoke the word of Yahweh to the people there. Therefore his prophetic role lay in being a spokesman for Yahweh. At this level Moses was the outstanding prophet in the history of Israel's religion. Hence the essential point in Deuteronomy's regulations for the 1 ) Cf. the remarks of Μ. N O T H , "Office and Vocation in the Old Testament", The Laws in the Pentateuch and Other Essays, Edinburgh X London, 1966, p. 247. 2 ) Hos. xii 13 (Heb. 14). The Ε tradition viewed Abraham as a prophet, Gen. xx 7 ; both traditions belonged to the north and this is a further factor in accepting the northern provenance of Deuteronomy. 3 ) It is part of the function of this paper to discuss some of the common features which linked Moses to the later prophets in the Old Testament. For the role of the shaman in religion see M . E L I A D E , Shamanism. Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy, London,1964. 4 ) Cf. Gen. xx 7; Exod. xxxiii; 2 Kings vi 17; these prophetic functions will be discussed more fully below. It is significant that the reference to Abraham as a prophet was related to his role as healer and intercessor, see Gen. xx 7, 17.

prophet was the demand that the authenticity of any prophet arising in Israel should be proved by his functioning as the mouthpiece for the words of Yahweh. In so far as the prophet declared the word of Yahweh he was a true Mosaic prophet. The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to the Mosaic parallels and office depicted in the Elijah-Elisha sagas. II The Elijah-Elisha sagas provide a scenario of prophetism in Israel which is relevant for a study of prophetic succession in the Old Testament 1 ). The two important factors which emerged from our consideration of Deuteronomy, namely a series of prophets and the Mosaic pattern of prophetism, may be applied to the sagas to see what their significance for the idea of prophetic succession is. The traditions gathered around Elijah the prophet and his successor Elisha belonged to the northern kingdom. Thus the sagas had the same background as Deuteronomy. This fact may account for the inclusion of such an extensive group of prophetic traditions in the Deuteronomistic books of Kings. The compilers of the books of Kings were interested in the Elijah-Elisha sagas because they gave weight to the Deuteronomistic thesis of a Mosaic prophetic succession. The sagas dealt with some of the exploits of the Transjordanian prophet Elijah, especially the conflict between Yahwism and Baalism, and his successor Elisha, who also came from the territory east of the Jordan 2). These sagas provide the only example in the Old Testament of a prophet appointing his own prophetic successor 3 ). Hence they are of paramount importance for this investigation. The relationship between Elijah and Elisha represents a single example of prophetic succession and needs to be studied as such without succumbing to the temptation to generalise on the strength of it. The main problem is whether this specimen of succession is to be understood as a definitive act, chatacteristic of prophetism in general, or simply an isolated case with no more significance to it. It is therefore necessary to examine the sagas in a context of prophetism in ancient Israel. Israel shared the phenomenon of prophecy with many nations in the Ancient Near East. The institution in Israel first appeared just 1

) The sagas are contained in 1 Kings xvii-2 Kings xiii. ) Elijah came from Gilead, 1 Kings xvii 1 ; and Elisha from Abel-meholah, 1 Kings xix 16. 3 ) 1 Kings xix 16. 2

before the emergence of the monarchy 1 ). Bands of mantics roamed the countryside manifesting aspects of an ecstatic nature 2). The first prophet of note to appear in Israel was Samuel. His career was intricately bound up with the rise of the monarchy and he was responible for the anointing of the first two kings of Israel 3). The next prophet of note was Nathan, the man who provided prophetic approval for the Davidic dynasty 4). Behind Jeroboam's assumption of power in the north was the word of the prophet Ahijah 5). Jehu ben Hanani was involved in Baasha's leadership, though his function was one of pronouncing Yahweh's judgment against the king G ). The next prophet to appear was Elijah the Tishbite. Thus there was a succession of prophets in Israel whose role at times was that of kingmaker. The prophetic bands were part of the social and religious life of the nation and formed a background for the activity of those major individual prophets who had such a decisive influence on political life in Israel. There is, however, no evidence to suggest that each prophet was specifically succeeded by another prophet, for example, we cannot say that Samuel passed on the office of prophet to Nathan. It is, perhaps, possible that these prophets occupied the office of prophet and that after their demise the next major prophet automatically found himself the occupant of that office by virtue of his possessing the word of Yahweh. The charisma and the word of Yahweh identified the prophet as the man of God and he became Yahweh's spokesman and messenger for his generation. The crux of the problem is whether there was a definitive prophetic office in Israel and whether the occupant of that office anointed his successor to be its next occupant. This problem is accentuated, rather than solved, by the instance of direct prophetic succession in the case of Elisha. After fleeing from Jezebel's persecution the prophet Elijah arrived at Horeb in a state of despondency. There Yahweh ordered him to return and anoint Hazael to be king over Syria, Jehu to be king over Israel, 1

) 1 Sam. iii 20; χ 5, 10ff.; xii 1. ) 1 Sam. χ 5, 10-13. 3 ) 1 Sam. χ 1, 25; xii 1; XV 1 ; xvi 13. Samuel was the link between the old institution of the judge and the new one of the prophet, for he was both prophet and judge, 1 Sam. vii 15ff. 4 ) 2 Sam. vii 4-17; he was also involved in Solomon's succession to the throne of David, 1 Kings i 22-40. 5 ) 1 Kings xi 29ff. ; xii 15; xiv 2. β ) 1 Kings xvi Iff. 2

and Elisha to be prophet in his place 1 ). Elijah returned from Horeb and found Elisha ploughing so he "passed by him and cast his mantle upon him" 2). Elisha's reaction to this act was the instigation of a communal meal made from the ploughing team he had been using in the fields. At the end of the meal, shared with the local people, "he arose and went after Elijah, and ministered to him" 3 ). Thus there was the investiture by virtue of casting the prophetic mantle followed by what was probably a sacrificial meal. The mantle of Elijah also figured in the delegation of Elijah's power to his successor at the time of Elijah's translation 4). Elijah appointed his successor, who then became his servant until the prophet had disappeared from the scene. Elisha did not assume power until he had received the double share of Elijah's spirit. This reception of the double share identified Elisha as the first-born among the prophets, that is, as the one entitled to become the new leader of the prophetic guilds in the place of the departed leader 5). So when Elisha returned from the other side of the Jordan, after Elijah's departure, with his master's mantle, the sons of the prophets were compelled to acknowledge "the spirit of Elijah rests on Elisha" 6). Having set Elijah and Elisha in the general context of prophetism in Israel, it is necessary to enquire how typical were they as prophets. The prophet in Israel functioned in a number of roles, mainly in the sphere of the cultus 7), and in political life. The political involvment of the prophet often made him a kingmaker 8 ) and a royal counsel lor 9). There were groups of prophets attached to the palace who advised the king on policy and matters of war 10). In cultic matters

1 ) 1 Kings xix 15f. The use of the word "anoint" in this context may simply have been carried over from its occurrence with reference to the two kings;

c f . N O T H , op. cit., 2

p. 246.

) 1 Kings xix 19. s ) 1 Kings xix 21. 4 ) 2 Kings ii 8-14; the mantle was part of the insignia of the prophet. This mantle may have been Elijah's "hairy garment" 2 Kings i 9; cf. Zech, xiii 4; Matt, iii 4; also the cloak worn by the Sufis of Islam. 5 ) First-born is used here in its metaphorical sense, in the same way that Israel was Yahweh's first-born, Exod. i v 2 2 ; the first-born was entitled to a double share of the inheritance, Dt. xxi 17. ") 2 Kings ii 15. ') See A . R . J O H N S O N , The Cultic Prophet in Ancient Israel2, Cardiff, 1962. 8 ) 1 Sam. χ 1 ; xvi 13; 1 Kings xi 29ff., xix 15f. 9 ) 2 Sam. xxiv 11 ; 1 Kings i 22ff.; xxii 8. 10 ) 1 Kings xxii; cf. 2 Kings iii l l f f .

the prophet might offer sacrifice 1) or prayer 2 ). In the social domain the prophet, or seer, could be of assistance in domestic affairs 3). In certain circumstances the prophet was associated with healing 4 ). The nebî'îm in ancient Israel shared some religious characteristics with the shamans of Siberia, North America, South America, Indonesia, Oceania, and other countries 5 ). The main phenomenon in common was the ecstatic nature of their religious experience 6 ). Ecstasy was a marked feature of Israelite prophecy from its beginnings in the pre-monarchy period 7). From the mantic bands, who moved about the country prophesying, to the canonical prophets, whose oracular proclamations raised prophetism in Israel to such a distinctive level, ecstasy was an integral part 8 ). Sometimes this ecstatic experience was induced by music, 9) and sometimes by concentration on objects to such a degree that the prophet entered a trance and perceived visions 10). However, in the later great prophets, such as Amos, Isaiah, or Jeremiah, ecstasy was a less marked phenomenon than in the earlier bands of dervishlike individuals. It is usual to differentiate between the prophetic guilds and the canonical prophets. Allowance must be made for degrees of difference in the wild mantics whose behaviour when in a trance made prophetism a byword for madness ‫ ) ״‬, and the quiet visionary experiences of an Isaiah in the temple 12), or the poetic creativity of a Second Isaiah. Yet throughout the history of prophetism in Israel there was always an element of ecstasy. In order to distinguish between the early nebVim and the later 1

) 1 Sam. vii 9; 1 Kings xviii 30ff. ; cf. I Sam. ix 13. ) 1 Sam. vii 5ff. ; xii 18, 23; II Kings vi 17. 3 ) 1 Sam. ix 6; 1 Kings xvii; II Kings iv. 4 ) 1 Kings xiii 1-10; xiv; xvii 17ff.; 2 kings iv; v. 5 ) See E L I A D E , op. cit.; also A . S. K A P E L R U D , "Shamanistic Features in the Old Testament", Studies in Shamanism, ed. C-M. E D S M A N , Stockholm, 1967, pp. 90-96. e ) Hence the comparison between prophetism and shamanism in this paper. 7 ) 1 Sam. xlOff. ; see J. L I N D B L O M , Prophecy in Ancient Israel, Oxford, 1962 pp. 46-65 for a discussion of ecstasy in Israel. 8 ) Cf. 1 Sam. χ 10ff. ; xix 20ff. ; and Ezekiel's experiences. 9 ) 1 Sam. χ 5; 2 Kings iii 15; among the shamans the drum was used to make ecstatic experiences possible, see E L I A D E , op. cit. pp. 1 6 3 - 8 0 , esp. pp. 174f. 10 ) Cf. 2 Kings viii 1 Iff.; Jer. i 11-14; Am. vii 1-9; it is suggested in this paper that these visions of Jeremiah and Amos came about by their concentrating on such objects until they went into a trance and received Yahweh's message. ‫״‬ ) Cf. 2 Kings ix 11 where the gibbering of the young prophet was associated with madness, the same word was used of Jehu's wild chariot driving, 2 Kings ix 20. 12 ) Is. vi Iff. 2

canonical prophets we have introduced a comparison between prophetism and shamanism. These two phenomena belonged to totally different cultures and probably were completely unrelated to each other. But prophetism in the Ancient Near East displayed many of the epiphenomena characteristic of shamanism in Central and North Asia, the Artie, and other parts of the world. Therefore we have felt justified in referring to the ecstatic in prophetism in terms of shamanism in order to isolate the element common to all the various types of prophet in the Old Testament 1). In Israel the shamanistic features of prophetism were subordinated to Yahwism, so that eventually major religious figures emerged in the nation's history. These individuals gave Israelite prophetism a distinctive significance that it never achieved in other Canaanite cultures. Though prophecy never lost its shamanistic strain it transcended its primitive origins and culminated in such outstanding prophets as Isaiah of Jerusalem, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Second Isaiah. Therefore the prophet in Israel was a composite personality made up of shaman, cultic figure, politican, royal counsellor, healer, intercessor, poet, and supremely, Yahwist. This brief consideration of some of the aspects of Israelite prophecy demonstrates that Elijah and Elisha were fairly typical prophetic figures. They displayed shamanistic features 2), they were involved in kingmaking 3), healing 4), prayer 5), sacrifice 6), the promulgation of the word of Yahweh 7 ), domestic affairs 8) and were the champions of Yahwism in Israel 9). They worked in a context of prophetic groups, especially Elisha who appears to have had a peripatetic ministry 10). Elijah was a more solitary figure, disappearing from time to time 11). 1

) The emphasis placed on shamanism in this paper is mainly due to the fact that it is about the Elijah-Elisha sagas; these sagas present prophetic figures whose religious psychology is akin, in many ways, to the shamans of other cultures. The sagas, with the possible exception of the Samuel narratives, are the most comprehensive picture of the prophet within a historical and social context in the Old Testament. 2 ) 1 Kings xviii 12; 2 Kings ii 11; iii 15; for his comment on shamanism see L I N D B L O M , op. cit. 3

) 1 Kings 4 ) 1 Kings 1 ‫ף‬ β ) 1 Kings 7 ) 1 Kings 8 ) 1 Kings 9 ) 1 Kings 10 ; ) 2 Kings 1(‫״‬Kings

p p . 6ff.

xix 15f. ; 2 Kings viii 13; ix 1-3. xvii 17ff. ; 2 Kings ii 19-22; iv 32ff.; v. Kings xvii 20; 2 Kings iv 33; vi 17, 18. xviii 30ff. ; cf. xix 21. xvii 2; xviii 36ff.; xxi 20íf.; 2 Kings vii Iff. xvii 8-24; 2 Kings ii 19ff.; iv; vi 1-7; cf. viii 1-6. xviii; 2 Kings i 3; iii 13ff. iv 8-10; 38ff.; vi 1-7; viii 7ff. cf. note 2, p. 9 below. xviii 7-16; 2 Kings ii 16.

Although Elijah had contact with the royal house 1), it was Elisha who often became a resident of a town and was available for royal consultation 2). They were not the only individualistic prophets of the period for Micaiah ben Imlah was regularly consulted by king Ahab 3). The Elijah-Elisha sagas provide a definite example of prophetic succession but in spite of their being typical prophets it still remains uncertain whether there was a well defined official status for the prophet in Israel. The prophet Gad was known as "David's seer" which suggests that he had a permanent position at the court 4 ). Nathan was associated solely with the affairs of David, and his important oracle 5) gave a prophetic foundation for the Davidic dynasty in the southern kingdom. The prophets in the court of king Ahab appear to have been led by Zedekiah ben Chenaanah, though Micaiah was constantly consulted 6). These prophets may well have been office bearers, and though it is possible to regard Elisha in a similar position, Elijah cannot be put into such a category. To summarise this section of the paper it may be said that there are indications in the Old Testament to support the idea of prophetic succession in ancient Israel, and also signs that some prophets had official status 7). But whether these two aspects of prophetism were coincidental must remain an open question, because the data available in the Old Testament is not comprehensive enough to supply a satisfactory answer to the problems posed in this part of the article. Ill The sagas must now be examined in the light of the second aspect of the Deuteronomic legislation for prophetism, namely the Mosaic character of the prophet. T w o incidents in the life of Elijah reveal him to have been a prophet of such calibre that a comparison with Moses becomes inevitable. The background to his career was that 1

) ) 3 ) 4 )

1 Kings xviii 2ff. ; xxi 20flf. ; 2 Kings i. 2 Kings xii 9ff. ; ν 8ff. ; vi l l f f . ; 32ff. ; viii 7ff. 1 Kings xxii, esp. v. 8. 2 Sam. xxiv 11. 2 ‫ף‬ Sam. vii 4ff. β ) 1 Kings xxii 8, 24. ') Apart from the group of prophets attached to the cultus or the court, there were individual prophets functioning at the same time as other notable prophets. Thus David was associated with Nathan and Gad, and Ahab had dealings with Micaiah as well as Elijah. It may have been a case of official prophets having status and nonofficial prophets without status, cf. Am. vii 10ff. 2

period in Israel's history when Yahwism and Baalism had reached the apex of their conflict. Ahab's consort, Jezebel, had established a clique of Baal-Melqart's devotees in the kingdom and was intent on replacing the Yahwistic religion with her own version of Baalism. Ahab, himself a Yahwist, had built an altar for Baal and a temple in Samaria 1). Hence there was a prevailing tendency towards a syncretistic form of religion in Israel at that time. The fanaticism of Jezebel found an outlet in the persecution of those prophets whose devotion was to Yahweh the ancient God of Israel 2). So Elijah appeared at a period of crisis for the ancient faith of Israel. Under the threatening aegis of Jezebel the religion of Israel could have been reshaped until Yahwism became simply a strand of tribal tradition in another Canaanite religion. Yahweh would then have become another god in the Canaanite pantheon. The conflict reached an either-or climax when Elijah summoned the prophets of Baal to a contest on Mount Carmel 3). The issue at stake was the people's commitment to Yahweh-"How long will you go limping with two different opinions? If Yahweh is God, follow him; but if Baal, then follow him." 4) The outcome of the trial was a triumph for the forces of Yahweh. The popular reaction was a declaration of faith in Yahweh- "And when all the people saw it (the fire of Yahweh), they fell on their faces; and they said, 'Yahweh, he is G o d ; Yahweh, he is God.' " 5) This achievement was important because it clarified the issues involved. It was a case of choice, the people had to decide whether their loyalty was to Yahweh or Baal. If they were under the impression that Yahweh and Baal could be worshipped together then it was Elijah who underlined the basic idea of Israel's religion, namely, that Yahweh was a jealous God who would brook no rivals. This was a restatement of the original Mosaic faith-"I am Yahweh your God . . . you shall have no other gods besides me." 6) In confronting Israel with the essential feature of 1 ) 1 Kings xvi 32; in spite of his wife and his official involvment in Baalism Ahab was a sincere Yahwist. This is evidenced by the Yahwistic names of his children, 1 Kings xxii 51; 2 Kings i 17; viii 18, 26. Some weight must be given to the remark "Ahab served Baal a little", 2 Kings χ 18. 2 ) 1 Kings xviii 13; xix Iff. 3 ) 1 Kings xviii 19ff. 4 ) 1 Kings xviii 21. 5 ) 1 Kings xviii 39. ·) Exod. xx 2, 3 cf. Dt. ν 6, 7; vi 4. The defeat of Baalism should not be exaggerated, for throughout the lives of Elijah and Elisha Baalism was a feature of Israelite social life. Thus one stage of Jehu's revolution involved the destruction

their faith Elijah was defending the faith against the inroads being made in it by the Canaanite religions, and this was the action of a spiritual successor to Moses. Hence Elijah on Mount Carmel may be viewed as a clear instance of a Mosaic prophet proclaiming the word of Yahweh to the people and mediating the covenant between Yahweh and Israel his people 1 ). The second incident in Elijah's ministry which marked him as a prophet like Moses occurred when he fled from Jezebel's threats to the desert. From the wilderness he travelled to Horeb, the mount of God, where centuries before Moses had met with Yahweh 2). There he experienced a theophany-" And Yahweh passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and broke in pieces the rocks before Yahweh, but Yahweh was not in the wind ; and after the wind and earthquake, but Yahweh was not in the earthquake; and after the earthquake a fire, but Yahweh was not in the fire; and after the fire a still small voice . . ." 3) The phenomena associated with theophanies were similar in this instance to those of Moses' theophany though the divine message was different. The theophany was a further parallel between the experience of Elijah and that of Moses. A further incident in Elijah's life suggests a parallel with Moses. A certain amount of mystery surrounded the death of Moses 4). But the tradition relating to Elijah's end was not one of death but a legend of translation 5). Thus Moses and Elijah shared unusual retirements from active service. This lack of a death notice for Elijah was a seminal point in the prophet's later development as an eschatological figure 6). Post-exilic prophecy saw Elijah as the forerunner of the day of Yahweh 7). In the New Testament both John the Baptist and Jesus were considered by the public to be Elijah 8 ). Because he had of the temple Ahab had built for Baal, and the massacre of a large number of Baal worshippers, 2 Kings χ 18íf. 1 ) Cf. "Without Moses the religion of Yahwism as it figured in the Old Testament would never have been born. Without Elijah it would have died.", H. H. R O W L E Y , "Elijah on Mount Carmel", Men of God, London, 1 9 6 3 , p. 6 5 . Cf. also the remarks of T H . C. V R I E Z E N , The Religion of Ancient Israel, London, 1 9 6 7 , p. 1 9 1 . 2 ) 1 Kings xix; cf. Exod. xix 16ff.; xx 18. 3 ) 1 Kings xix l l f . In the case of Moses Yahweh thundered his answer; whereas for Elijah it was the noise of silence which prefigured the divine presence. 4 ) Dt. xxxiv 5, 6. 2 ‫ף‬ Kings ii 9-12. e ) See notes and 8 below. Presumably it was believed that as he had never died he was still in a position to re-enter the human sphere. ') Mai. iv 5,6 (Heb. iii 23f.); cf. Ecclus. lviii 10. 8 ) Matt, xi 14; xvi 14; xvii 3,4 !Off. ; Mk. ix 4, 5 Luk. i 17; ix 8; Jn. i 19-23.

never died his return was constantly expected. His return became a literary phrase in the Mishnah denoting the end of time 1 ). The mystery surrounding the burial of Moses gave rise to a legend of a dispute between the archangel Michael and the devil over the body of Moses 2). Furthermore the pseudepigraphical work The Assumption of Moses was written around this particular legend 3 ). Thus the two major characters in the establishment of Yahwism in Israel became significant figure in the development of eschatological concepts. They were finally grouped together with Jesus in the scene on the mount of transfiguration 4), It may, therefore, safely be concluded that Elijah was a prophet of the line of Moses; in fact he might be termed a 'second Moses'. But to what extent may Elisha be called a Mosaic prophet? Apart from the possible theophany at Elijah's translation there were no outstanding scenes parallel to Moses in his career. However there were some minor incidents in his life which have their parallel in the work of Moses. On the day of Elijah's translation the two prophets crossed the Jordan by the agency of Elijah's mantle 5). After Elijah had disappeared in the windstorm, Elisha returned across the Jordan using Elijah's mantle which he had now inherited. In the exodus from Egypt Moses had parted the waters of the Reed Sea with his rod 6 ). After his death his successor Joshua took the children of Israel through the Jordan 7). There is an obvious parallel between the actions of Elisha the successor of Elijah and the actions of Joshua the successor of Moses in the crossing of the Jordan 8 ). A further parallel may be seen in Elisha's role in providing water for the armies of the three kings and the provision of water in the wilderness of Zin by Moses for the people of Israel 9). Both men provided water under the directions of Yahweh. A notable feature of the early tradi1

) Baba Metzia i 8; Shekalim ii 5; Eduyoth viii 7; Sotah ix 15. ) Cf. Jude 9. 3 ) For this book see The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English, vol. II, Pseudepigrapha, ed. R. H. C H A R L E S , Oxford, 1963 reprint, pp. 407-24. 4 ) Matt, xvii 1-8; Mk. ix 2-8. 2 Kings ii 6-14. e ) Exod. xiv 16. 7 ) Jos. iii. 8 ) Of course this parallel can be overexaggerated. There were major differences in the various crossings, especially in the instruments used to divide the waters. 9 ) Cf. Num. xx 2-13; 2 Kings iii 9-20. The comparison only holds good for the supply of water. The tradition about Moses was used to explain why Moses never led the children of Israel into the land of Canaan. 2

tions of Israel was the supply of bread, or manna, gathered each day by the Israelites 1 ). The miraculous element in this tradition was the never-ending supply of manna. Certain miracles associated with Elijah and Elisha utilised this principle of an unceasing supply of goods. Elijah's stay with the widow at Zarephath resulted in her reserves of meal and oil being extended for the duration of the famine 2). A parallel miracle in the life of Elisha was the incident with a prophet's widow, when her supply of oil was increased until it afforded her enough money to pay her debts. 3) In another situation Elisha received bread of the first-fruits, twenty loaves, which provided enough food for a hundred men *) This paper suggests that these miracles in the sagas were an extension of elements in the legends grouped around Moses. One final example of a possible parallel situation between Moses and Elijah concerns their authority as men of God. On the occasion that the king sent soldiers down to take Elijah to the palace the prophet called down fire on two bands of fifty soldiers 5 ). When Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, offered unholy fire to Yahweh, fire from Yahweh's presence consumed them 6 ). The rebellion of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram against the authority of Moses resulted in fire from Yahweh consuming two hundred and fifty of their followers 7). The challenge to Elijah's authority was answered by divine fire as was the revolt against the leadership of Moses 8 ). Without wishing to force similarities and parallels between two areas of popular tradition, it is suggested that there may have been an attempt by the compilers of the books of Kings to draw attention to the resemblance between Moses and Elijah by including these anecdotes in their history. T o conclude this section, it is fairly clear that Elijah was a religious leader of the calibre of Moses. As the leader of militant Yahwism 1 ) Exod. xvi; the term manna probably was derived from man, a word, which does not occur elsewhere in the Hebrew, perhaps used in Canaanite dialects, see M. N O T H , Exodus, London, 1962, p. 135. 1 ‫ף‬ Kings xvii 8-16. 3 ) 2 Kings iv 1-7. 4 ) 2 Kings iv 42ff. 2 Kings i. e ) Lev. χ 1-3. This incident was related in order to establish the rights of the post-exilic Aaronic priesthood. However there may have been such a tradition known to the compilers of Kings. ') Num. xvi. 8 ) We assume that Elijah's reaction to the soldiers was due to an affront to his dignity and a challenging of his authority as a prophet of Yahweh, rather than an act of pique, or a caprice.

his career echoed that of Moses in a number of important ways. He was the first really major prophet of the monarchy period. He passed on his prophetic leadership to his servant Elisha 1). In appointing a successor Elijah was also like Moses, who appointed Joshua as his successor 2). The theophany at Horeb and the mystery surrounding his end made him like Moses as well. However Elisha was not cast in the same mould as his master. He stood in the Mosaic role in so far as he declared the word of Yahweh. Any other similarities between his work and that of Moses must be tentatively inferred from the information given in the sagas. The anecdotes about Elisha in the sagas contained legendary and historical material. Stories of miracles and supernatural incidents naturally gather around a religious figure of Elisha's calibre. The relevant question at this point is-why were these particular anecdotes included in the edition of Kings? Of the many stories attributing wonderful deeds to the prophet only some will have been chosen for inclusion in the biography of Elisha 3). But there is no data available to posit a theory of decision making underlying the choice of such stories in the Old Testament. However certain patterns may be discerned which can give some idea of the presuppositions which informed the editors of the sagas. It is suggested in this study that part of the motivation behind the selection principles employed by the compilers of the volumes was the desire to present prophetic material shaped by the model of the Mosaic prophet. Thus the legends of Elisha's miracles were selected to illustrate certain Mosaic features in that prophet's work. There is another possibility, namely, that the legends arose in the northern kingdom already shaped by a myth of prophetic succession of a Mosaic order. Therefore the sagas might almost be regarded as an experiment, or model, based on a dogma of the prophet being like Moses. They provided the fullest account available of the lives of Yahwistic prophets and exhibited the dogma of the Deutero-

1 ) Elisha was known as he " w h o poured water on the hands of Elijah", 2 Kings iii 11; cf. 1 Kings xix 21. ‫־‬ ) Num. xxxiv 9; it is not without significance to note that in the famous "let us now praise famous men" sequence in Ecclesiasticus xliv‫־‬L, Joshua was known as "the successor of Moses in prophesying", xlvi 1. 3 ) The stories may have been taken from hagiographies of the prophets; different editors may have added material to the various editions of Kings in the process which finally produced this post-exilic edition. See O. E I S S F E L D T , The Old Testament·. An Introduction, Oxford, 1965, pp. 291ff., for his remarks on this aspect.

nomists so well that they were worked into their edition of the history of Yahweh's people. IV One problem that confronts the scholar in a study of the Old Testament is the amount of random information available on the culture of ancient Israel. Yet out of all this information it is very difficult to form reliable patterns that reflect what Israelite religion and civilisation were about in any comprehensive way. This problem is exemplified by the above discussion on the notion of prophetic succession. From the data considered there is certainly evidence to confirm the viewpoint that there was such a succession operating among the prophets. But there is no conclusive evidence that would provide an adequate diagram for the idea. There is also a case to be made for the theory that the succession was of a Mosaic order. But not sufficient to guarantee that it was a factor in the forefront of prophetic activity. There is very little information available to decide whather the Deuteronomists were demanding an ideological conformity in their legislation for the prophet, or were trying to describe the authentic prophet in the light of Israel's experience of prophetism. This study suggests that both ideas are valid for a discussion of the subject. Reality and the ideal were combined in the attempt to deal with a movement which in its essence defied any such legislation. The independence of the prophet accounts for the lack of uniformity in the traditions surrounding the individual prophets in the Old Testament. This prophetic independence was one of the major elements in the struggle to keep Israel loyal to Yahweh. For the official prophets could be relied on to support popular measures 1 ), or maintain the status quo 2). Whereas the great canonical prophets spoke the word of Yahweh in spite of the reception afforded them 3). Thus the prophet Amos dissociated himself from the official prophets yet maintained his right to prophesy because he had been commissioned to do so by Yahweh 4). It was this independence of the individual prophets 1

) Cf. Mic iii 5; 1 Kings xxii 6ff. ; Jer. ν 31; vi 13ff. ) Cf. Am. vii 10ff. ; Jer. xxviii 10f. 3 ) The experience of the great prophets was one of obloquy throughout the history of prophetism in Israel. Perhaps Jeremiah's life is the best example of it, Jer. xx Iff.; xxvi; xxxiii 1; xxxvii llff. 4 ) Am. vii 10-17. Amaziah's complaint was partially due to the seditious nature of Amos' prophecy, and partially because he was off-limits in Amaziah's estimation of the situation. 2

over against the groups of cultic, or royal, prophets which creates some of the problems inherent in this subject. In the final analysis the prophet of Yahweh could not be organised into an office bearing group. Thus on one side there was an official line of prophets, and on the other side the individual prophet speaking to specific situations, and then retiring from the scene. So all comments on prophetic succèssion in Israel must leave room for the charismatic personality to function outside the ideological framework set for the prophet by Deuteronomy. Eventually the independence of the prophet ceased to be valuable in the period of national restoration after the return from the exile, and he became part of the Temple choir 1). Yet the model of Moses for the prophetic figure was a seminal idea in Israel. Much of Jeremiah's self-understanding was based on it 2) The figure of the Suffering Servant in Second Isaiah poses a possible source of study in the light of it. The early church based some of its messianic beliefs on the identification of Jesus with the Mosaic prophet. This paper has limited itself to some considerations of the Elijah-Elisha sagas in the light of Deuteronomy, but further studies could be applied to Jeremiah and the picture of prophecy given in the appendices to the book of Second Isaiah with, perhaps, constructive results. 1

) Cf. the remarks of A. R. J O H N S O N on this point, op. cit. pp. 68ff. ) See W. L. H O L I . A D A Y , "The Background of Jeremiah's Self-understanding: Moses, Samuel, and Psalm 22", JBL, 1964, pp. 153-64; also his "Jeremiah and Moses-Further Observations", JBL, 1966, 17-27. 2

2 K I N G S

III A N D

G E N R E S

O F

P R O P H E T I C

N A R R A T I V E

BY

B U R K E O. L O N G Brunswick, Maine

Narrative genres in the Old Testament have of late become a problem for form critics. Increasingly, scholars are unsure of presumed sureties: what after all is a narrative? And what terms best describe narratives attested in the Old Testament? The dimensions of the problem are only now emerging fully. This tardy awareness is probably attributable to the vast shadow cast by G U N K E L , when he long ago laid down the main lines of classification for various types of narrative 1 ). The effect was to provide a kind of orthodox view of saga, legend, and historical narrative, which still persists substantially unaltered in many standard works 2). Yet, ambiguities were always inherent in G U N K E L ' S program. Most scholars admit their uneasiness; and the terms have not always been carefully distinguished from one another, in usage or in translation 3 ). The study of narratives about prophets has been largely carried out within this context. Naturally the ambiguities persist here, too. Recently there has been more of a tendency to speak only of prophetic legend, or legends about holy persons. These are stories which seek in some way to glorify the man of God, or perhaps better, the power of God which is operative in him 4 ). S T E C K has abandoned legend ) H. G U N K E L , Die Israelitischer Literatur (Kultur der Gegenwart I, 7. 1925). Cf. also his Genesis (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 3rd ed., 1910). 2 ) Cf. for example, G. F O H R E R , Introduction to the Old Testament (Nashville: Abingdon, 1 9 6 8 ) , 8 5 - 9 5 ; O. E I S S F E L D T , The Old Testament·. An Introduction (New York: Harper, 1 9 6 5 ) , 3 4 , 3 8 - 4 7 . C. K Ü H L , "Sagen und Legenden" Εν KL I I I / 1 (Göttingen 1 9 5 9 ) , 7 4 3 ff. H . W I L D B E R G E R , "Sage und Legende" BHHW III (Göttingen, 1 9 6 6 ) , 1 6 4 1 - 1 6 4 5 . E . J A C O B in RGG3 V , 1 3 0 2 - 1 3 0 8 basically updates the older G U N K E L position (RGG2 V , 4 9 ff.), but retains Saga as the chief category for Old Testament Narratives. 3 ) So G. T U C K E R , Form Criticism of the Old Testament (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971), 26-41. R. H A L S , "Legend : A Case Study in Ο Τ Form Critical Terminology," CBQ 34 (1972) 166-176. 4 ) For example, K . K O C H , The Growth of the Biblical Tradition (New York: Scribners, 1969), 184-205. 1

altogether and called the Elijah stories "didactic narrative" (lehrhafte Erzählung), i.e., stories which provided instruction for seeing in the work of Elijah, Yahweh's judgement on one's own times 1 ). Earlier, P L Ö G E R had also sought to specify matters more closely, and refused to rest content with saga or legend 2). Very recently, R O F É , sensing the difficulties at the doorstep of form critics, aligned himself more closely with modern literary critics. Assuming prophetic stories to be simply literary creations, R O F É attempted to describe genres and their histories on the basis of content alone 3). Exclusive attention to content does not yield a sufficient base for genre analysis, or for answering questions about the history and development of a generic type. After all, structure is an important key to what is essential content and what is not. Moreover, it has become increasingly clear that genre analysis cannot be carried out satisfactorily apart from detailed attention to the history of traditions which are embodied in certain structures. Narratives may function simultaneously at several levels; they may have had various intentions at discrete times in the history of their transmission. It is important, therefore, to learn as much as possible about this history, and its interrelation with visible structures of the material at various stages in its development 4). Finally, if one takes this route, it becomes obvious that Oberbegriffe such as legend, saga, and the like, leave the essential descriptive task undone. What is needed are more precise ways of describing narrative genres as they actually appear in the Old Testament. This is the general context in which I have analyzed 2 Kings iii. The way goes from literary, through tradition, form (structure), and genre analysis δ ). ) Ο . Η . S T E C K , Uberlieferung und Zeitgeschichte in den Elia-Erzählungen (Neukirchen: Neukirchener, 1968), 142-144. 2 ) O . P L Ö G E R , Die Prophetengeschichten der Samuel- und Königsbücher (Dissertation, Griefswald, 1937). 3 ) A . R O F É , " T h e Classification of Prophetical Stories", JBL 89 (1970), 1

427-440. 4 ) The work of W. R I C H T E R , above all, is instructive in this regard : Traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zum Richterbuch (Bonn: Hanstein, 1966); " F o r m geschichte und Sprachwissenschaft" ZAW 82 (1970), 216-225; Exegese als Literaturwissenschaft. Entwurf einer alttestamentlichen Literaturtheorie und Methodologie (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1971). 5 ) An earlier version of that which follows was read before the Task G r o u p on Narratives, of the Society of Biblical Literature, and appeared in pre-publication f o r m in Seminar Papers, vol. I (Society of Biblical Literature, 1971), 183-

205.

I. LITERARY

AND

TRADITIO-HISTORICAL

ANALYSIS

There is general agreement that 2 Kings iii 1-3 stem from the Deuteronomistic hand. This leaves vss. 4-27 substantially unified, a part of the raw material out of which the larger composition was forged 1 ). Apart from a few minor glosses, and G R E S S M A N ' S conjecture that vss. 18-19 were glossed by the Dir. hand 2), there is no obvious break suggesting a literary seam. This is not the end of the matter, however. Certain thematic inconsistencies, or tensions, lurk beneath the surface. (a) the prediction in vs. 18 seems fulfilled in vs. 24, and then —curiously—qualified substantively in vs. 27. (b) vss. 4-19 focus the drama on individuals and the dialogic relations between them. The pace and focus shift suddenly in vss. 20 ff. Here there are sweeping military events, relations between groups, or at best "kings" (plural), without dramatic dialogue. Note in vss. 24, 27 the collectiveyišrā^ēl, (cf. vs. 6) and no mention of Edom at all in vss. 21-25. (c) The oracle in vss. 16-19 seems to have undergone expansions. The following observations support this judgment 3 ). (1) There is a double messenger formula in vss. 16a and 17a. An oracle is introduced by the usual ko 'āmar YHWH\ this in turn is followed by kî ko ‫ג‬āmar YHWH and another divine oracle. This situation should not be confused with an explanatory use of kî ko 'āmar YHWH, seen in narrative contexts in Josh, vii 13; 1 Kings xi 13; xvii 14; 2 Kings iv 43. (2) There is a stylistic shift: vs. 16 is compressed, (typical of ecstatic speech? cf. 2 Kings iv 43). Vs. 17 is more expansive, and picks up a plural address in contrast to the singular in vss. 13-14. (3) The image of the "miracle" shifts: vs. 16 imagines water holes or cisterns filling up, while vss. 17 (20) seem to envision the entire 1

) Among the standard commentaries, cf. especially : R. K I T T E L , Die Bücher der Könige (Göttingen, 1 9 0 0 ) ; Α. Š A N D A , Die Bücher der Könige, 2 vols., (Münster, 1911-12); J . M O N T G O M E R Y , A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Books of Kings (Edinburgh: Clark, 1951); J . G R A Y , I & II Kings (Philadelphia: Westminster, 2nd ed., 1 9 7 0 ) . 2 ) H. G R E S S M A N N , Die Alteste Geschichtsschreibung und Prophetie Israels (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1921), 285 ff. 3 ) My analysis follows somewhat that of W. R E I S E R , "Eschatologische GottesSprüche in den Elisa-Legenden", Γ Ζ 9 (1953), 321-338, especially 322-325, 328-330.

wadi flooding with waters from afar. These motifs are not necessarily or logically inconsistent. But the images are sufficiently different to raise questions of continuity. (4) Vss. 18-19 suddenly take up the theme of victory over the Moabites, linked almost word for word to vs. 25, and quite independently of the "thirst" motif of vs. 171). It appears, therefore, that vs. 16 must be separated from vs. 17, and that vss. 18-19 belong in yet another stage in the development. Vs. 17 can be an explanatory elaboration on the mysterious gēbîm gēbîm of vs. 16, while vss. 18-19 may very well presage the victory so graphically depicted in vs. 25. (d) The "miracle" functions dramatically in two ways: to assuage the thirst of the armies, and to deceive the Moabites, who, seeing the water in the morning sun, saw red, and thought blood (pun on *edôm and Ìadummîm), and were defeated. Furthermore, vss. 9-10 imply that water will serve only to counter the ill effects of a weakened and thirsty army. So far as I can see, none of these thematic tensions suggests a literary splice in the present text. The exception might be vs. 19, which because of its close relationship with vs. 25, could reflect an editorial expansion. I would judge that such tensions as I have been able to isolate were produced in the pre-literary growth of the tradition. Gaining a comprehensive and detailed picture of this process is a futile effort. Nevertheless, a few modest observations on certain aspects of the Traditionsgeschichte might be in order. First, vss. 26-27, because they relate a less than total defeat of Moab, conflict directly with vss. 18, 19, 25, which promise or imply complete victory for the Israelites. These verses make a perfectly understandable conclusion to an account of war between Moab and Israel. Perhaps they are vestigial remains of a fuller account long since obscured by other developments. Verse 26 mentions the "king of E d o m . " In fact, >edôm in various expressions is one constant element in the whole chapter: vss. 8, 9a, 12, 20 and 26. At least vs. 20 is probably to be connected with the pun observed in vss. 22-23 (,6dorn, Ìadummim, dām). Hence we must assume that at least vss. 20-24, 26-27 belonged in one main tradition. Yet the figure of the "king of E d o m " has shallow roots. He is 1 ) This sudden shift may have been the reason that took vss. 18-19 as glosses.

GRESSMANN,

op. cit., 285 if.,

suddenly mentioned in vs. 9a, and is almost an afterthought in vs. 12. He plays no direct role in the drama, and in fact is absent in the climactic battle scene. This is consistent with vs. 26 where the king appears not as enemy, but as an ally of Moab, if the M T is to be trusted. One might suppose, therefore, that the mention of the king in vss. 9a and 12 is secondary, and that probably the place name E d o m in vs. 8 and 20 belongs with the original tradition. We can probably safely assume, finally, that something like vss. 4-7 belonged with the original tradition. Perhaps there was also included a meeting with a prophet. Vs. 16, which now floats somewhat independently of its context, relating directly neither to the "thirst" (vss. 9b-10) or the "ruse" (vss. 22-23) motifs, may preserve something of an oracle given in such a scene. Thus, I would count as original tradition that material which lay behind the present vss. 4-9a, perhaps 16, and vss. 20-24, 26-27. I doubt that one can justifiably be any more precise. But what of vss. 9b, 10-15, 17, 18-19, 25? A few observations. Vss. 19 and 25 correspond practically word for word, and together dramatize the motivai conflict with vss. 26-27; the "thirst" motif is prominent in these verses, especially, vss. 9-10, 17b; the mention of "three kings" in vss. 10,12b, and 13b—if the figure of the Edomite king is a secondary development—must likewise reflect secondary tradition. Finally, one can observe again, as have many, the striking similarity between vss. 11-12 and 1 Kings xxii 7-9. The supposition is close at hand that vss. 9b, 10-15, 17-19, 25 form a separate layer of tradition, an expansion on the somewhat obscure original battle account. The intent and direction of this particular growth c a n be specified with more accuracy pending an analysis of form and genre. Suffice it at this point to draw attention to the special interest in prophetic encounter, in polemic against the northern royal house (vss. 13-14), and in a clear, overwhelming victory for the Hebrew forces (vss. 18-19, 25) 1 ). II.

FORMAL

ANALYSIS

Since the earlier stages in the development of 2 Kings iii remain unclear, I intend to shift now to the final, substantially unified, text, 1 ) Ο. P L Ö G E R , op. cit., 27, views the present text as a later creation by southern authors, in which Elisha rather than the king is made the central character, and showing a pro-Judean bias. Cf. similarly, J . S C H U P P H A U S , Richter- und Propheten·, geschichten als Glieder der Geschichtsdarstellung der Richter- und Königszeit (dissertation, Bonn, 1967), 72.

in order to consider the questions of form and genre. But we shall see that the results of this analysis will finally have implications for those aspects of the Traditionsgeschichte sketched above. In describing form, I think it most useful to use W E S T E R M A N N ' S basic criterion for genuine narrative (Erzählung): there must be movement from a dramatic tension to its resolution, what loosely could be called plot 1 ). It is also useful to reserve the term, narrative, for those prose materials which have a clear beginning and ending and a clear sequence of scenes2). In this light, 2 Kings iii has a clear beginning (vs. 4) and ending (vs. 27), and a dramatic middle point (vss. 9b-20) which spans the way from tension (lack of drinking water and impending military disaster) to resolution (miracle of water, and routing the Moabites). The highpoint is clearly the audience with Elisha, where both the prediction of water and victory are given. The structure of this narrative therefore can be outlined as follows : I. Opening situation (vss. 4-9a) A. Moab's revolt B. Response and preparations for battle II. The Crisis (vss. 9b-10) A. No water B. Lament (vs. 10), impending defeat III. The Resolution (vss. 11-27) A. Audience with prophet 1. Preparation (vss. 11-12) 2. Audience (vss. 13-18, 19?) a. Initial dialogue and reception of oracle b. Proclamation of oracles (first, vs. 16; second, vss. 17-18) B. Fulfillment of oracular prediction 1. Water (vs. 20) 2. Victory (vss. 21-25 [26-27]) The most important scaffolding that supports this structure turns out to be, naturally enough, the middle point of the narrative—the audience with the prophet. It is here that the drama is concentrated. Thematically, the main question is whether or not Yahweh himself will provide the means for victory, effectively neutralizing the balance weighing against the Israelite forces. The audience with the prophet 1 ) C . W E S T E R M A N N , "Die Arten der Erzählung in der Genesis" in his Forschung am alten Testament (Munich: Kaiser, 1964), passim. Note the care with which he describes Genesis 1:1-2:4 as a "narrative" (Erzählung) with certain qualification (Genesis, Neukirchen: Neukirchener, 1967—), 111 ff. 2 ) I have taken a few generalizations from W . R I C H T E R , which he, however, first used in his study of Judges, (Untersuchungen zum Richterbuch, op. cit., 376-378).

provides the occasion to demonstrate that theme, and to portray Elisha as the legitimate means by which Yahweh makes his plans known. In this way, what appears from a traditio-historical point of view as the original conclusion of one narrative tradition (vss. 26-27), is given a perspective and point quite removed from a simple historical report. All this is reflected in a formal structure, in what I call the prophetic inquiry schema (dāraš schema). The constitutive elements are as follows : I. Setting (Situation) and preparation for inquiry. II. Audience with prophet (a) request for oracle (b) delivery of oracle III. Fulfillment of oracle Cf. 2 Kings viii 7-15; 1 Kings xiv 1 ff. ; xxii 4ff. Elements of the schema are present in 2 Kings i 1-17; xxii 13 ff.; 1 Sam. ix 1 ff. and Gen. XXV 21-34. We have to do with a broad thematic pattern, involving certain recurring images and motifs arranged in a conventional sequence. Nearly always, the verb dāraš, with reference to "inquiring of Yahweh through a prophet" appears. The clearest example comes in 2 Kings viii 7-15, where the dāraš schema fully shaped the tradition. The following features are noteworthy: I. Setting (situation) and preparation for inquiry (vss. 7-9a) lēk liqra^t ‫י‬// hāÌelāhîm wedāraštā ‫נ‬et YHWH mpôtô II. Audience with prophet (vss. 9b-13) (a) Request for oracle : NN šelāhanî iPmôr . . . (question follows) (b) Delivery of oracle lèk ‫י"־‬mär . . . hir'anî YHWH kî. .. (vss. 10, 13b) [here follows the oracle] III. Fulfillment (vss. 14-15) Despite the complexity of the middle point (vss. 9b-13), where subject matter going far beyond the crisis posed by Ben Hadad's sickness is introduced, the inquiry pattern seems clear enough. A messenger is sent to the Ts hâ^lôhîm to inquire (dāraP) of Yahweh whether or not the king will recover from his illness. The audience with the prophet becomes an occasion for further pronouncements,

likely based upon an ecstatic vision, not reported. One of these ("you shall be king of Syria", vs. 13b) is succinctly fulfilled in vs. 15. In the case of 1 Kings xiv 1-18, matters are less clear. Taking vss. 1-6 (7a), 12, 17-18 as the earliest visible layer of tradition 1 ), it is obvious that the inquiry schema at this early stage was very important in defining the tradition. Allowing for dramatic variations, the fundamental elements, Setting and Preparation, Audience with Prophet, and Fulfillment, are visible. And there are some typical motifs and vocabulary: hlk, drs, ko ''āmar YHWH, gifts for the prophet. The final form of the tradition, under the influence of the Dtr. redactor and his special view toward the northern dynasty, has brought about significant modifications in the schema. The most important is that the fulfillment of the prediction of the child's death now serves as a kind of attestation to the trustworthiness of the more ambitious prophetic (Dtr.) indictment against the house of Jeroboam. The prophetic inquiry schema also played an important role in 1 Kings xxii 4 ff. This text is composite, and has undergone complicated development 2 ). In any case, the first two elements of the schema appear in vss. 4-6, and are repeated in vss. 7-9, 15-18; the fulfillment comes in vss. 29-36. T o a lesser extent, 2 Kings i 2 ff. ; xxii 13-20 preserve features of the schema. Finally, Gen. xxv 21-23, 24-26a, 27-28, 29-34, though a Yahwistic collection, may very well have been arranged according to the prophetic inquiry pattern 3 ). Enough has been said to secure the place of 2 Kings iii in this discussion. The dāraš schema has in fact played a major role in shaping 1 ) Most commentators agree that vss. 1-6.17 f. arc early (cf. Μ. N O T H , Könige 1 (Neukirchen: Neukirchener 1968), 310 ff.; G R A Y , op. cit., 304; M O N T G O M E R Y , op. cit., 266; K I T T E L , op. cit., 116 f. With the exception of K I T T E L , these critics also agree that vs. 12 belongs in the original layer. In other details, there are vast uncertainties. 2 ) Cf. recently Ε. W Ü R T H W E I N , " Z u r Komposition von I Reg. 22:1-38" in Das ferne und Nähre Wort: Festschrift Leonard Rost (Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 1967), 245-254. 3 ) Assyrian materials seem especially rich in allusions to royal figures "inquiring" of the gods, using various means of divination. Aside from literary references, note the Assyrian "queries of the gods" (E. G . K L A U B E R , PolitischReligiöse Texte aus der Sargoniden%eit (Leipzig: Pfeiffer, 1 9 1 3 ) , 1 - 9 6 ) , and reports of extispicy, including sometimes the question put to the god ( K L A U B E R , ibid., 9 7 - 1 5 6 ) . Cf. also the Babylonian tamitu texts, which record oracular questions addressed to Šamaš and Adad ( W . G . L A M B E R T , " T h e Tamitu Texts", RAI 1 4 ( 1 9 6 5 ) , 1 1 9 - 1 2 3 . In epic literature, a remarkable picture emerges from the Legend of Naram-Sin. Cf. O. R. G U R N E Y , " T h e Cuthaean Legend of Naram-Sin" AS 5 ( 1 9 5 5 ) , 9 3 - 1 1 3 and a new fragment published by H . H O F F N E R , JCS 2 3 ( 1 9 7 0 ) ,

17-22.

that narrative, and is now the most prominent structural feature of the whole. Thus it is crucial for a proper understanding of the genre to which the text belongs. III.

GENRE

ANALYSIS

Generally speaking, the problem of genre for 2 Kings iii has of late failed to spark major disagreement. But that is probably largely due to a certain vagueness in the discussion. M O N T G O M E R Y is typical. He wrote about a "prophetic popular story of an actual historical event." 1 ) G R A Y spoke of "primarily historical narrative," and following Šanda, brought this passage into the company of 2 Kings v-viii under the rubric, "Elisha in the Setting of Contemporary History" 2 ). Thus we are left with what the German form critics know as "historical narrative," a narrative which is not fiction, and which purports to adhere closely to actual events or to describe real situations. Of course, this designation does not exclude legendary or saga-like features in a given historical narrative. Indeed, most critics freely admit their presence in 2 Kings iii. The question remains, however, whether or not the term itself is adequate. Aside from the problems with terminology raised in the introduction to this essay, it is certainly doubtful whether the term "historical narrative" is really adequate for describing the purpose or goal of this particular story. In light of the formal analysis, where the inquiry schema was revealed as a most prominent feature, some new directions are now open for identifying genre. The main point of 2 Kings iii has to do with a correspondence between Yahweh's word, as spoken by the nābV, and the actual events related. Of course, we must remain sensitive to the various levels at which this narrative may "mean something"—dramatizing Jehoshapat's piety over against the impious family of Ahab; or the veneration of Elisha, who plays out his role at a crucial juncture in Israel's history, and may thus be shown to be the legitimate successor to Elijah; or simply relating an encounter with the Moabite armies. Yet these functions, or levels of interest, are subordinate and are not really tied to the final form of the narrative. Here, the weight falls 1

)

MONTGOMERY,

op. cit.,

358.

op. cit., 465 ff. Cf. Α. Š A N D A , op. cit., I I , 81. P L Ö G E R , op. cit., 63, with reservations, wound up by discussing 2 Kings iii in a similar context. K I T T E L , op. cit., 192, seems to belong here. O . E I S S F E L D T , Introduction, op. cit., 295, more definitely assigns the passage " t o the type of historical narrative." GRAY,

on a prophetic announcement and its actualization. Already the scaffolding, the inquiry schema, shows this. Oracle and actualization as a theme is of course well known. The Dtr. redactors used it as an important perspective upon older tradition (1 Kings XV 29; xvi 12, 34; xxii 38; 2 Kings χ 17; xiv 25; xxiii 16, xxiv 2). But the theme also appears as an indigenous motif in narrative materials as well (1 Kings xiii 26; xx 35; 2 Kings i 17; ν 14; vii 16; ix 26; Jer. xxxii 8). Most interesting for our purposes, is that 1 Kings xvii 8-16; 2 Kings ii 19-22; iv 42-44 all seem to be short narratives defined by this theme. Each involves a crisis, to which the prophet responds with a divine oracle. Each concludes with a confirmation of a miracle which resolves the crisis; each explicitly acknowledges the correspondence between divine word as spoken, and its actualization in event (kdbr YHWH 1 Kings xvii 16; 2 Kings iv 44). In these latter cases, the prophet's action appears to discount the reality of the situation: Elisha orders victuals for three when there is barely enough for two; he feeds one hundred with bread for twenty. In these situations the oracle gives a reason for the puzzling orders, and hence shows the prophet's knowledge from God that a miracle is about to occur. On the other hand, 2 Kings ii 19-22 may have been originally a simple etiological report 1 ). Its root are shown most clearly in the fact that the oracle functions as a magical spell, accompanying the throwing of salt into (the water. (Cf. Ex. xv 24-25a) Nevertheless, whatever its original form, the tradition has been reworked in light of a theological pattern: Yahweh's word is fulfilled. All three passages, in fact, agree in showing the effect of a divine word spoken by the wandering man of God (cf. 2 Kings ii 23-24). The magical features recall other stories which tell of the prophet's mighty acts (2 Kings viii 4-5 ; ii 23-24; iv 1-7, 38-41 ; vi 1-7). But in these, the interest is in venerating the holy man and his exelusive, awe-inspiring powers. The oracle-actualization stories ought to be considered separately. They demonstrate not the prophet's power, but the power of Yahweh's spoken word. They make an abstract theological point, and so have moved quite away from what A. R O F É called "simple Legenda." 2)

1 ) Β. C H I L D S , " A Study of the Formula 'Until this day' " J B L 82 (1963) 279-292, especially 288-289. 3

) R O F É , op. cit.,

430-433.

N o w 2 Kings viii 7-15, in which the prophetic inquiry schema structures the whole, makes a similar theological point: it demonstrates the power of Yahweh's word, or a correspondence between divine oracle and subsequent events. So too, 2 Kings iii 4-25, because of the particular perspective which the inquiry schema (excluding vss. 26-27) gives to the material. Of course, the examples adduced involve diverse motifs; not all tell of miracles, and formulaic expressions are not common to all. They do, however, follow a common pattern (situation/crisis; divine oracle; fulfillment/resolution of crisis), and they do make a common demonstration—the correspondence between word and event. Not veneration of the prophet, not remembrance of history, but demonstrative theology is the key to their form and function. I therefore wish to propose the term, oracle-actualization narrative, as the genre to which these texts belong. I believe that this term comes closest to describing their form, while allowing for variations, and their chief function in the circles which preserved them. From this perspective, it is now possible to see that the earlier tradition in 2 Kings iii was not only elaborated and shaped by the inquiry schema (vss. 9b-19, 25), but was fundamentally shaped in accord with this narrative genre. Vss. 26-27 were not completely neutralized in the Traditionsgeschicbtliche process, nor was the basic genre essentially modified by such a stubborn vestige recounting incomplete victory. It may have been the case, however, that the tradents sought to bring the battle story into closer harmony with this generic type of oracle-actualization narrative. Space prevents a lengthy exploration of the question of Sit^-imLeben. Unfortunately, solid evidence is lacking. One might conjecture that prophetic groups would have created such a didactic genre. We have the example of Nathan using a parabolic narrative in demonstrating a theological judgment, (2 Sam. xii) or of Isaiah imitating a love song with parabolic intent (Isaiah v). It is not unreasonable, then, to suppose that there were other narrative forms by which prophets might make demonstrative points. On the other hand, one can imagine that such narratives could have lived among the admirers of prophets, recalling stories about oracular inquiries and fulfillments as they in their own day sought a prophet's counsel. In any case, the chief feature of the narrative type should remain clearly before us: a demonstration of the power of Yahweh's word, and the correspondence of oracle with event. In this, the genre

fully developed motifs scattered throughout the prophetic traditions. One might say finally that oracle-actualization narrative remains one of Israel's models for conceiving divine power in the midst of human affairs.

A N C I E N T IN

N E A R

E A S T E R N

P R O H E T I C

P A T T E R N S

L I T E R A T U R E

by MOSHE WEINFELD Jerusalem

Almost every one of the literary types of the Old Testament has its prototype in the ancient Near Eastern literature. Law, epic, historiography, psalms, wisdom, all of them are established literary genres in the civilization of Mesopotamia and Egypt. Furthermore in some cases it is even possible to prove direct dependence of the Biblical creation upon foreign sources as for example in the case of Prov. xxii 17-xxiii 11 which is dependent on the Proverbs of Amenem-opet. The only exception is Classical Prophecy which has always been considered an original creation of ancient Israel. Indeed there is no doubt that the religious moral pathos pervading classical prophecy as well as the prophetic ideas about the end of idolatry, universal peace and world salvation, reflects the genuine spirit of classical prophecy. The question is whether the literary conventions out of which classical prophecy has been formed were unique. Now, close investigation and constant follow-up of the ever growing literature of the ancient Near East show that basic forms as well as basic motifs of classical prophecy are rooted in the ancient NearEastern literature, and it is my purpose to illustrate and exemplify this thesis. Let us start with a problem which lies at the roots of classical prophecy : the prophet as a messenger. Y. Kaufmann, for example, argued that the characteristic feature of the Israelite prophet was his total dependence upon G o d ; he was a messenger sent to Israel by God in contrast to the pagan prophet who acted by a divine power which had become embodied in him 1 ). Now, the Mari texts from the 18th century B.C. which have been published in the last decades revealed to us a type of prophet-messenger not unlike the one familiar to us 1

) Y. Kaufmann, The Religion of Israel, translated and abridged by M. Greenberg, (Chicago, 1960), pp. 212 ff.

from ancient Israel 2). As A. Malamat has indicated, we find there the god Dagan sending prophets to convey messages to the King, and as in Israel the messages were delivered by means of prophetic frenzy 3) (cp. ARM II 90 :19; III 4 0 : 1 3 ; Rev. Ass. 42 (1938), 1. 32) 4). W. L. Moran, however, still argues that the "mission" in Mari is secondary and even incidental 5). But in respect to this problem attention should be paid to some key terms or conventions which are decisive. In the revelation of Dagan to Malikdagan his prophet we find a messenger-formula verbally identical with the missionformula found in Exod. iii 10 in the vision of the burning bush. There we read w'-th Ikh w'lihk 7 prlh " N o w go, I send you to Pharaoh", and in the revelation to Malikdagan 6) : inanna alik astaparka ummami. . . 7) " N o w go I send you, thus s a y " . . . A similar convention is attested in the revelation to Isaiah: 7 my Jslh wmy ylk Inw " w h o m shall I send and who will go for us?" (vi 8). This convention is found in the Akkadian Maqlu text and there also in connection with imposing a mission upon a man by the supreme gods Anu and Antu : mannu lušpur " w h o m shall I send?" 8 ), which shows that the type of divine messenger was prevailing for a long time in Mesopotamia (cp. also Jer. i 7; Ezek. ii 3 if.). Signs and portents In connection with his mission Moses is given signs or portents: otöt (Ex. iv 1 ff., 21 ; vii 8 f.). These also play an important role in

‫ג‬

2 ) Cp. A. !Malamat, "Prophetic Revelations in New Documents from Mari and the Bible", SVT 15 (1966), pp. 207 ff. 3 ) Compare the mu^um in Mari whose function overlaps that of the Hebrew migc, 'yf hrwb (= mtnb*) (Jer. xxix 16, Hos. ix 7), and see Malamat, pp. 210-211, and note 4. mefyû in Akkadian is wind or storm, and the verb ma\)û in the Nif'al form: namhû (cp. ARM X. 7 : 6 ; 8:7) equals hyh lyw hrwb (== btnb'). 4 ) Cp. Ā. Malamat, p. 221. 5 ) W. L. Moran, "New Evidence from Mari on the History of Prophecy", Biblica 50 (1969), p. 26, n. 2. In a sense Moran strengthens Kaufmann's position; see esp. Kaufmann's reaction to the Mari discoveries in Religion of Israel, p. 215, n. 1. e ) RA 42 (1938), line 32. ') From the grammatical point of view aštaparka equals ilhtyk (as in v. 12) and not Ύ/Μ. Functionally however there is no distinction, both refer to the present, aštaparka as well as ašpurka both express the Koinzidenzfall: "I hereby send you" (see Heimpel-Guidi ZDMG 17 (1968), pp. 151 f.), and the same applies to the Hebrew Hhtyk compare e.g. in the message to Gideon (Judg. vi 14): Ik ... hl· Slhtyk. 8 ) Cp. G. Meier, Maqlu, AFO, Beiheft 2 (1937), p. 9, 1. 53.

the Mari prophecies 9), and here again a similar literary convention is employed: lü ittum "let it be a sign" 10), which is the equivalent of w%h ([Ik) h^wt found in the revelation to Moses (Ex. iii 12) and in other prophetic passages 11). Furthermore the sign or portent is asked for in Mari (the verb ša^ālu) 12) as in the Bible (Isa. vii 11), and is also awaited and longed for {qtfuu) 13), a phenomenon encountered in Isa. viii 17 14) and Hab. ii 3. Purification of the Mouth Before undertaking his mission, Isaiah (ch. vi) undergoes a purification ceremony which is not unlike the ceremonies of mis pi 15) known to us from Mesopotamia. A striking parallel to this is to be found in an Old Babylonian Prayer of a diviner (barûm) published recently by A. Goetze 16 ). Thus we read at the beginning of the text: Ο Samaš, I am placing in my mouth pure cedar (resin) 1 7 ) . . . I wiped (akpur) my mouth with . . . cedar (resin) . . . Being (now) clean, to the assembly of the gods I shall draw near 18). Like Isaiah, whose mouth has to be purged in order that he may participate in the divine council, the Babylonian prophet also declares that having cleansed his mouth he is ready to draw near to the divine assembly. Although no cedar is mentioned in Isa. vi, we learn from Num. xix 6 that "cedar w o o d " (V V^ = is erinni) was used in purification ceremonies in Israel 19), and it is quite possible that the live coal 9 ) For ittum in the Mari prophecies see Moran, Biblica 50, p. 39, n. 3; W. H. Ph. Römer, Frauenbriefe, A O A T 12 (1971), p. 30. 10 ) Moran. Cp. also in Nuzi: annūtu lū ittu = "this is the sign," ( H S S 15 291:4, 8 and 19); compare CAD I, p. 308, 3. " ) Cp. 1 Sam. ii 34; χ 1 (LXX); xiv 10, 2 Kgs. xix 29, xx 9. 12 ) ARM X, no. 4:6,10. The verb appears frequently in connection with omina. 13 ) Cp. Römer, p. 50, n. 8, reading with von Soden apud Berger UF 1, p. 221. 14 ) Note wqwyty, whkyty associated with ,twt wmmptym in the next verse. 15 ) Cp. G. Meier, "Die Ritualtafel der Serie 'Mundwaschung'," AFO 12 (193739), pp. 40 ff., and se also E. Ebeling, Tod und Leben etc. (1931), pp. 100 ff. For the ritual in connection with idols as well as with diviners, cp. the references in Sjöberg fNES 26 (1967), p. 211. 1e ) JCS 22 (1968), pp. 25 f. 17 ) (is)erinnam ellam (obv. 1. 1), in the continuation we find ia-bi-im is erinnim (1. 6) which according to Goetze means compact/solid cedar (resin). 18 ) ana pufyur iii etefofoi (1. 9). 1e ) Compare the purification ceremony in Lev. xiv 4, 6, 49 f., where together with cedar wood, crimson stuff (šny ta>lct) is taken. For cedar and antimony in the covenant ceremony described in the Stele of the Vultures (Eannatum of Lagash) cp. M. Weinfeld, Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School (Oxford, 1972), p. 7, n. 5.

which had been taken from the altar by the Saraph in order to touch with it the lips of the prophet came from burned cedar wood i0 ). It is also significant that the altar out of which the coals were taken for the purification of Isaiah's mouth, as well as for the ceremony of the Day of Atonement (Ex. xxx 10), was made of cedar; cp. 1 Kgs. vi 22 f. 21). Ecstasy The mantic frenzy is also described in a similar manner in both cultures and one may even learn from the Biblical descriptions of the prophetic ecstasy about the proper nature of the activity of the muhhû, i.e. the Mari prophet. The literary convention in Mari for the ecstatic action is imahhi (he went into a trance), itbe 22) (arose) 23 ) ki'amidbub nmmami (thus said) 24). The same situation is met in the Biblical descriptions of ecstasy, and even identical phraseology is employed here. The prophets and the divine men are seized by the spirit, and this is expressed by hyh (lyw rwh Num. xxiv 2, Judg. iii 10, xi 29, 2 Chr. xx 14, si h (lyw rwh Judg. xiv 6, 19; xv 14; 1 Sam. χ 6, 10; xi 6; xvi 13; b' bw rwh (Ezek. ii 2, iii 24); npl llyw rwh CEzek. passim), lbs rwh (2 Chr. xxiv 20); nhh Hyw rwh (Num. xi 17, 25, 26), and as in the Mari texts we hear that the prophet rises (compare itbe) or stands up on his feet for hearing or delivering the word of God. This is clearly expressed in Ezekiel whose ecstatic activity is most vividly described: he sees the vision, then falls upon his face, the spirit enters him, wtb' by rwh which equals imahhi, and makes him stand on his feet wtlmdny Ί rgly, which corresponds to itbe (i 28, ii 2, iii 22-24). 20

) Cedar wood occurs as wood qualified for the altar in Jubil. xxi 12. ) Noth's contention that m^bh here means š/hn and that it refers to the "table of the bread" has no basis, see S. Yeivin, Enc. Miqr. s.v. mqdi, col. 342. 22 ) According to Moran (pp. 25 f.) itbe is said of professionals and imaÌjf)i of laity. This distinction is dubious however in the light of Biblical evidence quoted below. It seems that when the m u ^ û appears in the text, the act of going into trance (namfrû) is selfunderstood and only itbe is mentioned. On the other hand, imabbi refers to the whole process and therefore when it occurs no itbe needs to be mentioned. 23 ) P. R. Berger (Ug .Forsch. 1 (1969), p. 209) compared this with qm in Deut. xxxiv 10, however qm in such context is interchangeable with hyh (compare e.g. 2 Kgs. xviii 5 with xxiii 25) and means just "exist" (derived from ex -f sistere). More relevant to itbe is the causative hqym which is used in connection with appointing prophets and charismatic figures; cp. Deut. xviii 15, 18; Judg. ii 18; Am. fill; Jer. xxix 15 although the same usage is also found in connection with Kings and priests (1 Sam. ii 35; Deut. xxviii 36; 1 Kgs. xiv 16; Jer. xxx 9). 24 ) For this typology, cp. Moran, pp. 24-25. 21

Similarly we read in 2 Chr. xxiv 20 that the spirit seized (rwh yhwh Ibsh) the prophet Zechariah and he stood up (wy (md) above the people and s a i d . . . The traumatic experience of the prophet involved in ecstatic visions comes to clear expression in Daniel viii 17 f., χ 4 if. There we read that Daniel lay sick for a few days (viii 27) or that his strength failed him and no breath was left in him (x 17) 25 ). There we also find instructive details about the way the prophet gets his vision, which recalls the visions of Ezekiel and which might supply more evidence about going into trance in Mari: I was left alone gazing at his great vision . . . I became a sorry figure of a man, I retained no strength . . . I fell on the ground . . . Suddenly a hand grasped me and pulled me up on to my hands and knees ; he said to me : Daniel attend to the words I am speaking to you and stand up where you are . . . I stood up trembling . . . and he said: Do not be afraid etc. Here again, as in the Mari letters and in Ezekiel, going into trance and rising up, when the message is proclaimed, are presented conspicuously. Moran is therefore quite correct when he contends that "he arose" (= itbe in the Mari prophecies) implies "that the professional was usually sitting, kneeling or crouching until inspiration seized him . . . Here we may imagine him arise and facing with the statue towards the worshipers . . . For the witnesses this must have been an impressive and at times even terrifying experience" 26 ). Ecstatic activity amongst prophets in Mesopotamia (of later times) is also reflected in terms like %abbu and eHebu. The former seems to be associated with dirt and self-inflicted wounds 27) while the latter was characterized by the way he let his hair grow 28 ). Such attributes are indeed ascribed to the ecstatic prophets in Israel (2 Kgs. i 8; Zech. xiii 4, 6; 1 Kgs. xx 35 ff. Self mutilation of ecstatic prophets is also attested in the Canaanite milieu. In 1 Kgs. xviii 28 we read about the Canaanite prophets mutilating themselves, a custom mentioned in the Ugaritic text about the Righteous Sufferer: My brothers washed in their blood like the ecstatics 29). 26 ) Cp. Kaufmann, Toledot ha‫־‬,emimah hayisr^elit 1, p. 529, and see the apocryphal references there. 2 ‫ )>׳‬P. 26. " ) Cp. CAD Z, p. 7. 28 ) Cp. CAD E, p. 371. 29 ) Afyūa kima mahhê dāmišunu rāmku (Ugaritica V, p. 267:11).

Salvation oracle A full account of an oracle given in the precincts of the temple by a person who was seized by the spirit of God is found in 2 Chr. xx 14 ff. At the time of war with the Ammonites and Moabites, Jehoshaphat and the people gathered in the temple for prayer, and all of a sudden a Levite by the name of Yahziel was seized by the spirit of God in the midst of the assembly hyth llyw rwh yhwh btwk hqhl 30) ; he s a i d . . . " T h u s said the Lord : Have no fear, do not be dismayed by the great horde, for the battle is in God's hands . . . G o down to them tomorrow . . . you will find them at the end of the valley . . . stand firm and wait and you will see the deliverance". Next morning we hear Jehoshaphat saying to the people : "have faith in your God . . . , in his prophets and you will prosper". This type of prophetic encouragement in war is found in the mouth of the prophet in the Mari letter ARM X, 4: "his (Isme-Dagan's) auxiliary troops will be scattered, furthermore, they will cut off the head of Išme-Dagan and put (it) under the foot of my lord. Thus (my lord may say) : 'the army of Išme-Dagan is large and if I (arrive), will his auxiliary troops be scattered from him?' 31) It is Dagan, Adad . . . who march at my lord's side . . ." (11. 23-24). The idea of God going out to war with the Israelites and marching at their side and saving them from the enemy's multitudes is very common in the Bible, and ecpecially instructive in this context are the military exhortations in Exod. xiv 13, Deut. vii 17 ff. 32), xx 1-4, xxxi 1-8, etc. 33 ). The promise of scattering (sapāhu) the enemy's troops is also characteristic of the ancient salvation oracles of the holy war as for example in Num. χ 35: "Stand up, Ο Lord, may your enemies be scattered" qwmh yhwh wypsw ‫־‬,ybyk (cp. Ps. lxviii 2), Ps. cxliv 6: "Make lightning flash and scatter them" (cp. 2 Sam. xxii 15, = Ps. xviii 15 and Ps. lxxxix 11). The promise that the head of the enemy will be put under the foot 30

) Compare, in a neo-Assyrian text: the prophetess prophesied (raggimtu tartaggumu) in the assembly of the land (ina U K K I N ία KUR) (ABL 437, Rev. 1-2, cp. Β. Landsberger, Brief des Bischofs von Esagila (1965) p. 48); compare also ABL 149:7, 121:9. 31 ) On the interrogative nature of the sentence, see Moran, p. 48, and note 1 there. 32 ) Note the interrogative opening which recalls the Mari passage (see previous note). 33 ) See G. von Rad, Studies in Deuteronomy (London, 1953), pp. 51 ff., and cp. Weinfeld, Deuteronomy, pp. 45 ff.

of the King in the letter just quoted 34) is also known to us from the Biblical sources: Deut. xxxiii 29; Ps. xiv 6; xviii 39; Jos. χ 24-25. In Jos. χ 24 this is even executed in a dramatic way: Joshua calls his officers to put their feet on the necks of the defeated Kings and declares that so will God do to all the enemies of Israel (v. 25) 35 ). Another literary convention found in the context of the prophetic salvation oracle in Mari is: "I shall deliver your enemies into your hand" (nakrêka ina qātīka umalla) (ARM X 8:12-14) 36 ), an exact equivalent of the Hebrew hnnj ntn V *wybyk bjdjk which is a stereotyped formula in the war orcales of ancient Israel (cp. 1 Sam. xxiii 4, xxiv 5, xxvi 8, Judg. vii 7, 1 Kgs. xx 13, 28) and once even related to the Philistines (Judg. xvi 24) 37 ). This is accompanied in the Bible by V tyr' "do not fear", a phrase widely attested in the salvation oracles of the ancient Near East 38 ) and according to some is also found in the prophetic texts of Mari (ARM XIII 114:13-16) 39 ). False Prophets An important point in the Mari letter quoted above ( A M R X, 4) is the sentence: "I am not making them speak, on their (own) they agree" (mimma ul ušadbabšunūti šunūma idabbtíb/4, sitnüma imtahharii) (11. 37-39). This reminds us of the prophets who prophesy "with one voice" (ph ,hd) to Ahab that (the enemy) will be given into the hands of the King (1 Kgs. xxii 13). The messenger of the King who comes to Micaiah in order to persuade him to predict favorably employs a device similar to that of Šibtu in her letter to Zimrilim. In order to disperse doubts about authenticity Šibtu adds "that nobody makes them speak". This tendency is also implied in the words of the messenger to Micaiah in 1 Kgs. xxii 13. In this respect one could learn something from neo-Assyrian texts. Esarhaddon tells 34

) Compare also ARM X, 6:4'-8': u eliiu tazxaZ, "you will stand over him". ) This motif is most common in the Egyptian pictures of war and also in the written Sumerian, Akkadian and Phoenician sources; cp. Kramer, Weinfeld, Beth Mikra 57 (1974), pp. 157-158. 36 ) Cp. RA 42 (1948), pp. 128-32, 11. 30-31; ARM X 7:20-22; ARM XIII 23:14-51. For an iconographie illustration of this idea in the ancient Near East cp. most recently O. Keel, Wirkmächtige Siegeszeichen im AT (1974), pp. 47 f. (note), and there also an Egyptian literary parallel. 37 ) See J. G. Heintz, SVT 17 (1969), p. 128. 38 ) Cp. Jonas C. Greenfield, The Zakir Inscription and the Danklied, Proceedings of the Fifth World Congress ofJewish Studies, Jerusalem 3-11 August 1969, pp. 180 ff. 39 ) lā if)âš; cp. also 1ä taltanarrar (ARM X 80:27); see Heintz, pp. 122 f., but see Greenfield, p. 185, n. 28. 35

us 40) that before entering the bit mumme (the temple workshop) he divided the shares (lists?) between the diviners separately (qātāte ahennâ ukînma) 41) and they gave identical answers, literally: "they agreed with one voice" (kî pi išten indaharama ( = Gt j/ mahāru). The verb mahāru is used as in the Mari passage, and the idiom: pi isten which is employed too in 1 Kgs. xxi 13: ph 'hd. This procedure of dividing the diviners into groups in order to get independent results is known to us also from other neo-Assyrian texts. Thus for example Sennacherib says that he divided the diviners into three groups in order to get the right answer 42). It seems, therefore, that Ahab acted in a similar manner with his prophets and only after identical answers were given (ph 'hd) he decided to go to battle. Dream and Vision Another feature common to the prophecy in Mari and the Bible is the dream 43), and here also identical conventions are employed. The opening formula for the dream revelation in Mari is: ina šuttiya "in my dream" 44) which is exactly like the formula in the dreams of Pharaoh and his servants ‫( בחלומי‬Gen. xl 9, 16; xii 17, 22). And as in Pharaoh's dreams so also in Mari we find the repetition of the dream (ARM XII, 112) 45 ) which implies a strong confirmation of the oracle 4 6 ). This is even explicitly expressed in Gen. xii 32: "As for Pharaoh having had the same dream twice it means that the matter has been confirmed by God ‫ נכון הדבר מעם האלהים‬and that God will soon carry it out". The word ‫ נכון‬used in this context is identical with the word kinu used in connection with reliable dreams in BabyIonia : šunāt šarri kSnā = "the dreams of the King are reliable" 47 ). This verse may also teach us that although the dreams of Pharaoh are not dreams of a prophet they nevertheless are of prophetic significance since they convey to Pharaoh the will of God, which is evident 40

) Borger, Asarhaddon, 82:21 f. ) Cp. CAD A, I 4ennā, p. 184; cp. CAD Κ kānu A 3a 4‫׳‬, p. 163. 42 ) H. Tadmor, Eret^-Israel 5, p. 156, rev. 7-8. 43 ) Cp. A. Malamat EI 8 (1967), pp. 237 ff. 44 ) Cp. e.g. Moran, p. 28. After submitting this article, I came across the article of J. F. Craghan, Journal of the ANE Society of Columbia Univ. 6 (1974), op. 39 ff., who brings up this analogy and elaborates the notion, suggested by M. Held, that ina hittiya is a West Semitism, see pp. 43 f., and note 32 there. 45 ) Cp. A. Malamat, pp. 238 ff. 4e ) Cp. the two dreams of Gudca; see Weinfeld, Deuteronomy, p. 248. 47 ) For references, cp. Moran, p. 23, n. 2. 41

from v. 28: " G o d has revealed to Pharaoh what he is about to d o " 48 ). Another convention belonging to dream revelations in Mari is the figure in the vision which "stands u p " or "steps u p " beside the seer o n e case it is a deity ( A R M X 51 :9), in the other it is (,'ΖφΦ 49)· a man ( A R M X 94 rev. 6). This convention is similarly attested in the revelations in the Bible and likewise in reference to the deity, (Gen. xxviii 13 tisb, 1 Sam iii 10 htysb·, cp. Exod. xxxiv 5, Am. vii 7, ix 1) as well as to a man or angel (Ezek. xliii 6; Zech, i 8, 10, 11, iii 5; Dan. χ 16). In the Bible dreams and visions go together (e.g. Num. xii 6). In Mari too we find accounts of prophetic visions ( A R M X 10) 50) and in one case ( A R M X 9) it seems that we encounter a vision of the assembly of gods in heaven 51) which is to be compared with the vision of Micaiah in 1 Kgs. xxii and the vision of Isaiah in chap. vi. An interesting Biblical parallel to the way divination was practised in Mari may be found in the Balaam story in Num. xxiii 52). Balak and his entourage are said to be "standing beside the sacrifice" nsbjhtysb 7 lltw (Num. xxiii 3, 6, 15, 17). This seems to be equivalent, in our opinion, to: ina têrētim ittana^a^ in connection with the prophetic utterances of the āpilū 53). It seems that the persons on 48

) Cp. also v. 25 V ,/r tPlhym '//; hfydlprch which is to be compared with Amos iv 7 and Gen. xviii 17. 49 ) Moran, p. 28. 50 ) ina bit Itur-Mer imur ummami (11.6-7) = he saw "(the vision) in the temple of Itur-mer as follows". 51 ) The gods and the goddesses drink and swear not to harm the brickwork of Mari; see Moran, Biblica 50, pp. 50-52. This is a kind of ordeal; see Weinfeld, "Ordeal", Encycl. Judaica. 52 ) On Mesopotamian parallels to Balaam's practice of divination see D. Daiches, Hilprecht Anniversary Volume (1909), pp. 60-70; J. Liver, EI 3 (1954), pp. 97 ff. (especially p. 99 in connection with the sacrifices); R. de Largement, "Les Oracles de Bileam et la mantique suméro-akkadienne", Mémorial du Cinquantenaire de l'École des langues orientales anciennes de Γ Institut Catholique de Paris (1964), pp. 35-51. (Cf. also Diet, de la Bible, Suppl. 8, 904 f.) Especially instructive are the parallels concerning the building of seven altars and the sacrificing of seven animals (Num. xxiii 1, 4, 14; cp. Anat. St. 5, 104:108). 53 ) Cp. the text published by G. Dossin apud A. Lods in H. H. Rowley (ed.), Studies in Old Testament Prophecy presented to T. H. Robinson (Edinburgh 1950), p. 104, lines 24-5. The phrase occurs after "thus the prophets said" and has to be translated—in my opinion—"while he (the representative of the King?) was standing at the omens". Note that ittanazz^z (Gtn of uzz‫״‬z u ) corresponds grammatically to htysb, cp. E. A. Speiser, " T h e Durative Hithpa c el: a tan form", J AOS 75 (1955), pp. 118-121. For t'ertum as sacrificial entrails, cp. ARM X 87:7: têrētum lupputa "the entrails (liver) was stricken/infected" (compare ngwi in Hebrew); see also Ludlul 1:51, and Lambert's remark in BWL, p. 284.

whose behalf the sacrificial omens were prepared had "to stand", in other words " t o be present" at the sacrifice while the diviner was watching and expecting the oracular response. (Compare the Rabbinic dictum in connection with the mlmdwt i.e. people's representatives "standing at" the daily services in the Temple: " h o w can a man's offering be offered while he does not stand by it?" (Mishnah Ta'anit iv 2)). Indeed the sacrifices of Balaam and Balak involve constant watching and looking out for the oracle (xxiii 3, 14, 28). This seems also to be implied in the Mari passage just referred to. Immediately after the indication of the âpi/û's prophetic utterances we read that the āpilum of Adad is watching (inassar) at the maškānum which according to A. Malamat equals mskn "tabernacle" 54) (for the "tabernacle" in Israel as an oracular pavilion compare Exod. xxxiii 7 f.) The Rib pattern Prophetic admonition dressed in the form of a lawsuit has been recognized since the 1930's 55 ), although the lawsuit convention has been limited to marital formulae. Hosea's proclamation: "Plead (rjbw) the cause with your mother because she is not my wife and I am not her husband . . . or I will strip her naked and expose her as in the day of her birth" (iii 2-3) had been seen as containing two formulaic elements : 1) the term rib which has forensic overtones 56 ) ; 2) stripping of the divorcee of her garments which is attested in the documents of Mari and Nuzi and in an almost identical context. Thus we find in an Old Babylonian document from Hana 57) : "and if P N the woman says to P N her husband 'you are not my husband' she shall go out naked and they shall take her up to the upper storey of the palace (i.e. expose her)", and in a Nuzi document 58) : "(if after my death she intends to contract another marriage) my sons will strip my wife of her garment and send her out of my house". However a third for54 ) J AOS 82(1962), p. 149, n. 30. However it is also possible to understand maikanum in its conventional meaning "threshing floor" ( A H W , p. 626) which also served for the purpose of hearing oracles (1 Kgs. xxii 10). 55 ) Cp. C. Kuhl, Ζ AW 52 (1934), pp. 102-109, and C. Gordon, Ζ AW 54 (1936), pp. 277-280. 56 ) Cp. J. Limburg, JBL 88 (1969), pp. 301 ff. See especially Jer. iii 1-10, where Jeremiah develops more fully the Hoseanic theme and refers to a written legal document spr krytwt. 57 ) u Summa ΡΝλ aššassu ana PN2 mutiša ul mutimi at ta iqabbi erišifa ussi ana bit rugbat ekallim uhllûSi (BRM IV 52:14, cp. CAD E, p. 320); cp. for discussion, S. Greengus, HUCA 40 (1969), p. 41, n. 21. 58 ) TUG -Šu ía aŠŠatiya mārēja iha?nmasu u uštu bitiya t1šessù (JEN 444:21 cp CAD A / / , p. 464).

mulaic element is to be added and that is the verba solemnia : "She is not my wife and I am not her husband" which is now attested as a legal formula of divorce or of marriage—if put in the positive form—from Old Babylonian times 59) on and down to the Persian period ( 60 ). This formula lies behind the phrase " I will be to you a God and you will be a people tome", which appears in a covenantal context in the Law and in the Prophets 61). In the last fifteen years a new dimension has been added to the problem of rib. It has been argued that the rib admonition reflects the lawsuit of the vassal type 62). The prophets consider the violation of the covenant by Israel as the abrogation of the treaty with the sovereign God-King. This contention was based mostly on the witnesses in the rib speech, which are the same as those of the vassal treaties: heaven and earth, mountains, etc. 63 ). But here again the decisive parallel should be the literary convention. In the Hittite treaties we find, in the context of keeping loyalty to the sovereign, the motif of "the cattle choosing (lit. recognizing) their stable" 64), which is reproduced almost literally by Isaiah in the opening of his lawsuit: "the ox recognizes its master and the donkey its master's crib. Israel does not recognize, my people does not know . . . " (i 3). Besides the images of husband-wife, master-vassal, a third image exists and that is the image of father-son, the relationship of which was also based on verba solemnia·. "You are my son" creating adoption, and "You are not my son" when breaking it 65 ). As in the marriage 59 ) Cp. S. Greengus, "The Old Babylonian Marriage Contract," J AOS 89 (1969), pp. 515 ff. e0 ) Cp. A. Cowley, Aramaic Papyri, 15:3 ff.; E. G. Kracling, Brooklyn Museum Aramaic Papyri, 2:3 ff. ; 7:4; 14:3 ff. 61 ) Cp. Weinfeld, Deuteronomy, pp. 80-81, and the reference to Y. Muffs there (p. 81, n. 1). 62 ) See J. Harvey, Biblica 43 (1962), pp. 172-196, and, in more detail, in his book, Le plaidoyer prophétique etc. (1967). 3 ‫)״‬ M ) alpê bit alpēšunu uwaddimimmi (Weidner, Polit. Dokumente aus Kleinasien (1923), no. 7, 1:17 f., 30 f.). The correct interpretation of the phrase was seen by A. Goetze (Ki?uwatna (1940), pp. 36, note 38; (1CAD A /, p. 372; II, p. 190; 1, p. 32 misses the point). Compare also in the Hittite prayer to Arinna: "I am thy servant from old, a heifer from thy stable" (KUB XXI, 27 T:8; see translation bv A. Goetze ANET2, p. 393). βδ ) Cp. CH § 170, where the father legitimizing children born by a slave girl says to them "you are my children" (märü'a), and the Sumerian family law (ana ittišu tablet 7 11. 34-39): "if a father says to his son: "You are not my son' " (ul māriatta). For a thorough discussion of verba solemn'a in adoption see Greengus, J AOS 89 (1969), pp. 517 ff.

dissolution so also in the case of the dissolution of parental relationship the son forfeits house and property and leaves the house naked 66 ). This might be compared with Hosea ix 15: "I hated them . . . I will drive them from my house, I will love them no more" 67 ). Marriage, enslavement ( = vassal relationship) and adoption representing not genetic-natural but artificial formalized relationship, suited well the depiction of the relationship between God and Israel which was formalized by Covenant and thus liable to dissolution following the breach of the Covenant. We must admit however that beyond the judicial formulation which the prophets adopted for depicting the relationship between God and Israel, a strong emotional factor prevails. The love of God for Israel be it depicted as the love of a husband for his wife or of a father for his son is full of emotions and personal sentiments. We are dealing then with legal conventions which were turned into metaphors 68 ). Finally, it should be said that the lawsuit form is not limited to the classical prophets. It is found in ancient poetry (Deut. xxxii) and in the Psalmodie literature : Ps. 1, lxxxi, xcv. Furthermore, the lawsuit is also found in the prophetic messages ascribed to the times of the Judges (Judg. ii 1-5; vi 8-10; χ 11-15; 1 Sam. vii 3 ; xii 6 ff.), and it indeed seems that the lawsuit type was carystalized amongst the popular, so called cultic prophets 69 ). The fact that the lawsuit is found in ancient poetry as well as in historiographical accounts would be sufficient to prove that it is not genuine in classical prophecy but was taken over by them from tradidition although embellished with literary motifs of a different kind. Morality versus Cult In the lawsuit speeches we often find arguments against cultic 66 ) Cp. in the a.m. Sumerian family law: ina biti u tgarum iteli "he forfeits house and wall"; and in a contract from Ugarit: nahlaptašu išakkanma ana sikkuri u ipattar ana sūqi "he (the son who shows disrespect) will put his garment on the (door) bolt and go out into the street" (Thureau-Dangin, Syria 18 (1937), p. 249, 1. 22-23. Compare Ugaritica V, no. 83:8-10 (p. 177)). Cp. R. Yaron, Journal of Juristic Papyrology 15 (1965), pp. 179 if. For the document of Alalah (Wiseman, AT 1953, No. 16) where the son leaving is deprived of everything (ša(jit) see A. Draffkorn-Kilmer, J AOS 94 (1974), pp. 177 ff. e7 ) " L o v e " and "hate" are taken here in the sense of loyalty and disloyalty; cp. Moran, CBQ 25 (1963), pp. 77 ff., for "love" and for "hate" (/«'); cp. j«> in the Aramaic papyri in connection with divorce (Cowley, A P 15:22-29, et al.); and zß ru ί η Akkadian in connection with divorce as well as cancellation of adoption; see references in Greengus, JAOS 89 (1969), p. 518, n. 61. 68 ) Cp. M. Weinfeld, Biblica 56 (1975), p. 125. 69 ) Cp. J. Jeremias, Kultpropbetie und Gerichtsverkündigung etc. (1970).

worship: Observing the moral commandment is the wish of God rather than sacrifice (Isa. i 11-17, Jer. vi 20, vii 22; Mic. vi 6-8 [cp. Ps. 1 18 ff.], Amos ν 21-25). The arguments are usually dressed in the form of a rhetorical question: " T o what purpose are all your sacrifices?" (Isa. i l l ) : " T o what purpose is the incense which comes from Seba?" (Jer. vi 20). "Does God want thousands of rams?" (Mic. χ 6-7), " D o I consume the meat of oxen and blood of the goats?" (Ps. 1 13 f.); "Did you bring me sacrifices and gifts in the desert?" (Amos ν 25). Now the idea of the primacy of morality is also known from Wisdom literature—e.g. Prov. xv 8: "The sacrifice of the evildoer is an abomination to God, the prayer of the upright is his wish" 70 ); "The doing of right and justice is more pleasing to the Lord than sacrifice" (xxi 3); " T h e wicked man's sacrifice is an abomination to the Lord, how much more when he offers it with vileness" (xxi 27; cp. xxviii 9). The same idea comes to expression in the Egyptian wisdom literature. Thus we read in the Instruction to King Merikare : Make firm your place (— grave) with uprightness and just dealing for it is on that which their hearts rely; more acceptable is a loaf 71) of the upright than the ox of the wrongdoer 72). The futility of multiplying sacrifices and ritual is clearly expressed in the admonition of the Egyptian sage Ipuwer 73) : All the amulets/carved figures (twtw wd31v) are insufficient and meaningless. Is it by sacrifice and cleaving asunder to the crocodile? 74) Is it by slaying and roasting to the lion? 75) Is it by pouring libations 70

) φ h rs'-ym twcbt yhwh wtplt yirym rswniv. Compare Isa. i 11 ff., where ^bh and tplb are juxtaposed (vv. 11,15), and similarly / ' bpsty and sn'b npšy (vv. 11, 19), coupled with tw'bh (v. 13). 71 ) According to M. Lichtheim in Ancient Egyptian Literature I (19 73), p. 109, n. 28, which translates bit "loaf" rather than "character" (based on a suggestion of R. Williams, Essays, p. 19). 72 ) " T h e Teaching for Merikare", AN ET2, p. 417. 73 ) Translation: G. Fecht, Zeitschrift fur Ägypt. Spr. 100 (1973), p. 12. According to Fecht this passage is a quotation which shows that the theme was a prevalent one in Egyptian literature. 71 ) The Crocodile-god (alluding to Osiris) before whom the dead are offered, see Fecht, pp. 13-14. 75 ) Alluding to the goddess Sachmet, p. 14. As Fecht remarked (p. 15), it seems that the author deliberately uses the pictures of crocodile and lion in order to indicate that the offerings to the gods are like prey for the wild beasts. Compare the Midrashic saying ascribed to Rabbi Pinehas: "Just as the wolf snatches so the altar snatches the offerings" (Bereschit Rabba, ed. Ch. Albeck, p. 1276) and for the altar being called λύκος " w o l f " cp. Tosefta Sukkah iv 28, and see S. Lieberman, Tosefta Ki-fshutah 4 (1962), p. 909.

(and sacrificing) to the god Ptah? Why do you give it to him?, it does not suffice for him 76). It is misery/sadness (indw) that you give to him. The idea is expressed in the most clear manner in the Egyptian story of the shipwrecked sailor 77) which in the light of the comparison with the psalms quoted below should be seen as a thanksgiving 78). The sailor saved from disaster says there: I shall have brought to you . . . incense for the temples to satisfy every god .. . You will be thanked in my town in the presence of the magistrates (knbt) 79) I shall sacrifice to you oxen as burnt offerings . . . and I shall wring the necks of birds for you . . . Then he (the serpent-god) laughed at me and said : I am the Prince of Punt, myrrh belongs to me . . . Place my good reputation in your town, this is all I ask from you . .. This passage is very close in its concepts and expressions to several passages in the thanksgiving Psalms in the Psalter. Thus we read in Ps. 1 8 ff. : I do not reproach you for your sacrifices . . . I claim no bull from your estate, no he goats from your pens, for mine is every animal of the forest, I know every bird of the mountains . . . Were I hungry I would not tell you for mine is the world and all it holds, do I eat the meat of bulls or drink the blood of he-goats? (Cp. Mic. vi 6 ff.). 76 ) Compare Isa. xl 16: "And Lebanon is not sufficient to burn, nor are the beast of it enough for burnt offerings". It is of interest to note that after this verse comes a passage about the vanity of carved figures and statues not unlike our Egyptian passage. " ) See Faulkner, Wente, Simpson, The Literature of Ancient Egypt (1972), pp. 50 ff. 78 ) The meaning and tendency of this story has not yet been established; cp. W. K. Simpson, p. 50: "The real import of the tale perhaps escapes us." In my opinion, however, the tendency of the story is expressed by the recurring exhortations to praise and give thanks for salvation: " H o w happy is he who tells what he has experienced (lit. tasted)" (1. 124): " I shall tell what happened to me, what I saw of your power, you will be praised in the city before the magistrates {knbt) of the whole land" (140 f.); "Place my good repute in your town, this is all I ask from you" (1. 160), "I placed myself upon my belly to thank him" (1. 168), "I gave praise upon the shore to the lord of this island" (171 f.). Thanksgiving psalms on the occasion of coming back alive from a dangerous journey by sea were common in ancient world; cp. the Psalm of Jonah (ii 3-10), and Ps. cvii 23-32 where the rescued person praises God in the presence of the congregation and the elders (v. 32) as in the Egyptian text quoted above (11. 170 f.). Ps. cvii, which enumerates four cases for thanksgiving, is paralleled by a passage in the Šamaš Hymn where Šamaš is extolled for saving the traveller on a difficult road, the seafarer in the dreadful waves, the prisoner in jail and the sick (Lambert, Babylonian Wisdom Lit., p. 131, 11. 65-78), the same cases found in Ps. cvii. For miracles of the same type recorded in Roman Egypt (for the glory of the deities), cp. A. D. Nock, Couversion (1933), pp. 83 ff. 79 ) Knbt are the councillors and the judges, who parallel the z1 n y m Ps. cvii 32; see previous note.

Like the Egyptian text the Psalms which indulge in polemics against sacrifice also stress the idea that God wants to be praised and thanked rather than offered sacrifices. Thus we read in Ps. li 17-18: Ο Lord, open my lips and let my mouth declare your praise. You do not want me to bring sacrifices. You do not desire burnt offerings 8Ω). and in Ps. lxix 31 : I will praise the name of God with a song and will extol him with thanksgiving (hymn) and this will be more favorable to him than an ox with horns and hooves. It is not without significance that both in Israel and in Egypt the problem of the religious value of sacrifices is dealt with in Wisdom literature, in texts of prophetic nature 81) and in hymnodic-thanksgiving literature. What is common to all these sources is the juxtaposition of spiritual worship with cultic worship and this is expressed by rhetorical questions like "do I eat them?", "why all the sacrifices and incense?" Is it by sacrifice (that one can satisfy God)? It is worthwhile to note that in this respect we encounter in the Psalmodie literature the same difficulties which occur in the Egyptian texts. Thus we find immediately after the passage quoted from the Instruction for Merikare about the loaf of the just man which is more acceptable than the ox of the wrongdoer: "Serve God . . . with offerings and with carving. . . God is aware of whoever serves him" (129-130). We face a similar problem in Ps. 1 82). After speaking about the vanity of multiplying sacrifices (vv. 8-13) the psalmist states surprisingly: "Sacrifice a thank offering to God etc." (v. 14); and also at the end of this Psalm: " H e who sacrifices a thank offering honors me" (v. 23). It seems as if by these additions both authors wanted to make themselves clear that they do not reject sacrifices totally. Their aim was only to stress that sacrifice has no value when accompanied by evil 83). 80 ) Following the translation in The Book of Psalms by Greenberg-GreenfieldSarna JPS (1972). 81 ) For the messianic nature of the Admonitions of Ipuver, cp. M. Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, Vol. I (1973), pp. 149-150. 82 ) Ps. li 20-21, which also seems to contradict the previous section, has long been recognized as an addition; see Ibn Ezra ad loc. See, however, the next note. 83 ) S. Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel's Worship 2 (Oxford, 1962), pp. 21-22, explains li 20-21 in like manner, and does not see any contradiction with what is said before: "When God has looked in mercy upon the sinner and upon his people, and restored normal relations, then offerings, too, are a normal expression of the grateful homage and honour which the congregation owes to him" (p. 22).

One has to admit that there is a difference here between the prophetic attitude and that of the Psalms. The prophets are concerned with morality versus cult while the Psalmist is mostly concerned with praise versus cult. But this difference can be explained by the very nature of the Psalms. Songs and Thanksgiving are the most characteristic part of the Psalms (cp. the name thlym), and it is only natural that the problem of praise versus sacrifice should be given expression here. In fact the moral issue comes to expression also in the Psalms (1 16 ff, li 19) though in a less explicit way than in Prophecy. In contradistinction to the Psalms the book of Proverbs like the Prophets juxtaposes morality versus cult. A similar difference actually exists in Egyptian literature. In the "Instruction for Merikare" the issue is righteousness versus sacrifices whereas in the "Shipwrecked Sailor" which bears the character of a thanksgivings, the issue is praise versus sacrifice. It is clear then that the prophets were not the first to undermine the value of sacrifice in worshipping G o d : this was already stressed hundred of years before the prophets by the Egyptians and also by the Psalmists and wise men in Israel. Furthermore, in the light of the aforementioned parallels there is no basis for Gunkel's contention that the Psalms which take issue with sacrifices are prophetic. On the contrary it turns out that the prophets developed a motif which was current in popular admonition in Israel as well as in ancient Egypt. Violation of Morality as cause for destruction Another feature which has been seen as characteristic of classical prophecy was morality as a national historical factor. Kaufmann 84), for example, argues that classical prophets were the first to consider sins of individual nature like deceit, bribery, exploiting the poor etc. as determining the fate of the nation. According to Kaufmann, the Pentateuch and the Former Prophets see in idolatry and cultic deviation the cause for destruction while the prophets saw in the social crimes the main cause for destruction and exile. One must say that although this distinction is generally correct it cannot be seen as valid all along the line. For example, in the most ancient code we find that if the people maltreat widows and orphans they will be killed with the sword (Ex. xxii 23-24) that is: they will perish in 84

) The Religion of Israel, pp. 157 ff.

battle, which is not unlike the prophetic warnings (e.g. Isa. ix 15 ff.) 85 ). However, surprisingly enough the idea of moral behaviour as a decisive factor for the survival of the nation is found even in pagan literature. Thus when describing the moral decay of Babylon before its destruction the Esarhaddon inscriptions 86 ) tell us: the people living in it (Babylon) answered each other Yes, (in their heart): No 8 7 ); they plotted evil . . . they (the Babylonians) were oppressing the weak/poor and putting them into the power of the mighty, there was oppression and acceptance of bribe within the city daily without ceasing; they were robbing each other's property; the son was cursing his father in the street . . . then the god (Enlil/ Marduk) became angry, he planned to overhelm the land and to destroy its people. This passage reminds us especially the prophecy of Micah vii 1 ff. : there is no upright man, people hunt each other, the officer and the judge ask for bribe, the son despises the father, the daughter rises against her mother . . . The Isaianic concept of Jerusalem as the city of faithfulness and justice ((yr hsdq qryh η Ìtnntí) is also not unique to classical prophecy. Similar attributes were ascribed to Nippur the city of Enlil in the Sumerian Hymns. Thus we read in the Hymn to Enlil 88 ): Hypocrisy, distortion, abuse, malice . . . enmity, oppression, envy, (brute) force, libelous speech, arrogance, violation or agreement, breach of contract, abuse of (a court) verdict, (all these) evils the city does not tolerate . . . the city endowed with truth where righteousness (and) justice are perpetuated. The last sentence reminds us of sdqylyn bh in Isa. i 23. The phrase 85 ) Cp. also Gen. xviii 19, which clearly indicates that the realization of the promise to Abraham is conditioned by the establishment of righteousness and justice. 86 ) nišē āÍib libbišu anna 1dla ahameš etappulu, idabuba sūrrati . . . enšu i^abbilu, šarraku ana danni, ina qereb āli dullulu, mahar katrê ibbasima, ūmišam la naparkā imíu^u būiê ša aframeš, māru ina sūqì itarrar abašu, igugma dEnlil . . . ana sapān māti bulluqu nišēša iktapud lemuttim (R. Borger, Die Inschriften Asarhaddons (Graz, 1956), p. 12, Ep. 3, Fassung a, b, c, 11. 7-14; p. 13). 87 ) For this interpretation cp. Borger, p. 12, note 00. 88 ) Cp. S. N. Kramer, ANET3, pp. 573-74. For the Sumerian text (with translation and annotations), cp. D. Reisman, Two Neo-Sumerian Royal Hymns, (University Microfilms, Ann-Arbor, Michigan, 1969), pp. 44 f., 11. 20 ff.

"city of justice, the faithful city" ljr bsdq qrjh n^mntì) found in Isa. i 26 (cp. Jer. xxxi 22 mvh hsdq) is also attested in the Assyrian literature in reference to the Babylonian city Borsippa: in Borsippa, the city of truth and justice (àl kitti u mīíati)

89

).

A similar attitude is reflected in the so called "Advice to a Prince" in the Babylonian literature 90). There we read: If a king does not heed justice, his people will fall into anarchy and his land w‫־‬ll be devastated . . . if he does not heed his nobles, his life will be cut short. If he does not heed his adviser, his land will rebel against him . . . If citizens of Nippur are brought before him for judgment and he accepts bribe and treats them with injustice, Enlil, lord of the lands, will bring a foreign army against him . . . If he takes the money of his citizens and puts it into his treasure . . . Marduk . . . will give his wealth and property to his enemy. If he mobilized the whole of Sippar, Nippur and Babylon and imposed forced labour on the people . . . Marduk . . . will turn his land over to his enemy . . . This passage has broad implications for the law of the king in Deut. xvii, for the story of the disruption of the Kingdom in 1 Kgs. xii, and also for the admonition of Jeremiah in Jer. xxii 13 ff., which cannot be discussed in the framework of the present study 91). It is true we lack in the Mesopotamian literature the moral pathos and the vehemence of expression found in classical prophecy and there is no indication that these ideas were disseminated there not to speak of an ideology which shaped the life of the nation as it was the case in Israel. One must admit, however, that the very notion of social justice as determining the fate of a nation is found in Mesopotamian literature. We have seen that basic procedures of prophetic activity as well as basic patterns of the prophetic message are found in the ancient Near East, especially in Mesopotamia. We intend in the future to show that basic ideological concepts—such as the metropolis as world centre, messianic hopes, the appearance of the deity for world judgement—also have their roots in the ancient Near East, though their development and realization in Israel remain unique. 89

) See W. G. Lambert, J AOS 88 (1968), p. 126, 11. 16 f. ) W. G. Lambert, Babylonian Wisdom Lit., pp. 112 f. al ) Cp. provisionally my article in Leshonenu 36 (Oct. 1971), pp. 5-6. 90

F R O M

E A R L Y

T O

C L A S S I C A L

C O N T I N U I T Y

A N D

P R O P H E C Y :

C H A N G E

by MENAHEM HARAN Jerusalem

It is an indisputable truth that classical prophecy, which made its appearance in Israel in the second half of the 8th century B.C., was preceded by long preparatory stages of spiritual growth, formation of patterns of activity and refinement of means of expression. Classical prophecy is only the direct continuation of early prophecy, whose beginnings were rooted in much earlier times than the 8th century B.C., and which, for its part, was certainly related to some forms of mantic and ecstatic activity which were found in the ancient Near East and preceded the emergence of prophecy itself. A number of specific features serve to distinguish early from classical prophecy, and several of these will be discussed below. I One such particular feature of early prophecy is its mode of activity in bands with collective ecstasy accompanied by rhythmic movements and disorientation of the senses—an ecstasy which is apt to infect even the uninvolved onlooker and to drag him into the group (1 Sam. χ 5-6, 10-13, xix 20-24). The case of Eldad and Medad is said to have been somewhat unusual in that these two were far away from the company, but as "they were among those registered", that is, were intended to be included among the elders who prophesied, the ecstatic frenzy infected them as well (Num. xi 24-30). Another feature of early prophecy is the use of musical instruments and the notion that music is a means of awakening ecstasy and attracting divine inspiration (2 Kgs. iii 15; cf. 1 Sam. χ 5). Most probably, this use of musical instruments was also accompanied by rhythmic movements and tended to develop into dance (cf. Exod. xv 20)1). 1

) A method of producing ecstasy mentioned as Baal was that of cutting themselves "with swords gushed out upon them". The text points out that custom", implying that the prophets of Yahweh did xviii 28).

typical of the prophets of and lances until the blood this was done "after their not act in this way (1 Kgs.

Such features would certainly have been inconceivable within the domain of classical prophecy. A further feature of early prophecy is its propensity to special places of oracular activity. Particularly conspicuous in this respect is its affinity to Mount Horeb (Sinai), which in the circles of early prophets was certainly conceived of as the place par excellence at which to attain divine revelation. Accordingly, Elijah goes all the way to that mountain, a distance of forty days and forty nights, and there he receives by divine command the main mission of his life: to lay upon Israel terrible sufferings until the people dwindle in number as a punishment for worshipping Baal in the days of Ahab's dynasty (1 Kgs. xix 8-18). It seems likely that the image of this mountain in the Exodus narratives, with the descriptions of theophanies taking place on it, is drawn mainly from the concepts of early prophecy, or at least is recast in its spirit, while the mountain itself, as a site of prophetic sacredness, was one of the central symbols of that early prophecy. Indeed, in this manner this mountain is depicted particularly by E, which in character is an evidently prophetic (that is, early prophetic) source. An additional feature of early prophecy—which, in a way, is related to its proclivity to prophetic holy-places or is just another manifestation of that proclivity—is its peculiar attraction to permanent institutions of oracular activity. One such institution is, for example, the 'ôhel mô^êd, "tent of meeting", particularly as described in Exod. xxxiii 5-11; Num. xi 16-17, 24-30, xii 4-10; Deut. xxxi 14-15 (all of which are E, either directly or indirectly). The tent of môiêd is conceived of as an institution placed at a distance outside the settlement. It is a site of group ecstasy as well as of individual inspiration; Moses, together with his attendant, and also "everyone who seeks the L o r d " go there to acquire a link with the divine. This tent, with the portrayals of theophanies occurring beside it, is only an "institutionalized" reflection of the revelation on Mount Horeb (or rather, to the contrary: the theophany on the mountain is patterned upon the particular features that were ascribed to this institution of oracular activity) 2 ). Such a connexion with special institutions, whose sole purpose was, as it were, to stir up the prophetical capacity itself, is totally unknown to classical prophecy (just 2 ) The character of this institution was the subject of my discussion in JSS 5 (1960), pp. 50-65; in a rewritten form it will constitute a chapter in my forthcoming book Temples and Temple-Service in Ancient Israel.

as the latter became entirely foreign to group ecstasy), for, as we know, the classical prophets were capable of receiving divine revelations in almost every place, even by the river Chebar in Babylonia. Another expression of early prophecy's proclivity for special institutions is its connexion with houses of God and the notion that the temple's holy-of-holies can serve as a place of divine revelation to prophets. Samuel hears the voice of God calling to him when he is "lying down within the temple of the Lord, where the ark of God was" (1 Sam. iii 3-10) 3). As regards Isaiah, who "saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and his train filled the temple", it is nowhere stated that this prophet entered the temple; what Isaiah saw was nothing else than the visionary, heavenly throne, for the seraphim standing in attendance upon God and declaring his holiness (Isa. vi 1-3) only confirm that it is just a prophetical vision which has nothing to do with the material cherubim of the holy-of-holies. Yahweh's calling to Samuel from the place of the ark corresponds to the cloud of glory, which, according to P's tradition, constantly rested upon the wings of the cherubim on the kappnret, the ark-cover, and from which Yahweh would speak to Moses (Exod. xxv 22, xl 34; Lev. xvi 2; Num. vii 89). There should be no doubt that this tradition is based on the presumption that the temple was also a suitable place for divine communication, and it was for this reason that the priestly writers saw fit to refer to the tabernacle by the term "tent of meeting", which originally—as the use of this term by Ε shows—denoted not the temple (although the temple, too, could function as a place of divine communication) but the oracular institution the location of which was "outside the camp, far off from the camp" (Exod. xxxiii 7). It is therefore not surprising that in the narrative of Samuel the temple at Shiloh is 3

) The purport of this statement is: within the temple of the Lord, in the inner room of which (in other places this room is designated debtr or qūdeí baqqodāSim, "the holy-of-holies") was the ark of God. There is no basis for inferring from this narrative, as some scholars have done, that the early Israelite sanctuaries consisted of only one room in which the ark was stored. This narrative, which attained its literary formulation not earlier than the beginning of the monarchy (when the internal division of the temple into an inner and an outer sanctum was already well recognized—if it had not been accepted in Israel even before that time) has the simplicity and vagueness of a folk story. As concerns the plan of the Israelite temple it would be better to resort to all the other evidence (not necessarily that of Ρ alone) which, for the most part, is also quite early, and even though it may be somewhat later than the narrative of 1 Sam. i-iii it still contains clear and reliable information on this matter.

also referred to as the "tent of meeting", and that in an abrupt priestly remark tacked on to the narrative (1 Sam. ii 22) 4). The tradition itself, which conceives of the temple as one of the prophetic "institutions" and regards the focal point of cultic sanctity as a place of divine communication, is certainly early, viz. it is rooted in the world of early prophecy. In the spirit of early prophecy was certainly shaped even the figure of Moses himself, in Ρ and a fortiori in the other pentateuchal sources. It is obvious that to the world of classical prophecy the afore-mentioned conception of the temple looks entirely foreign. Such a conception could not possibly have arisen and taken shape in the world of the Latter Prophets. II An outstanding feature which typifies classical prophecy is the use of the written word as a medium of expression and creativity. Classical prophecy is, therefore, mainly literary prophecy—in contrast to early prophecy which was not. N o one would deny that alongside their literary work the classical prophets also engaged in oral and rhetorical activity. Moreover, it was rhetorical characteristics that shaped the form and style of the works of literary prophecy, and some of these works may indeed sound like pieces of real speech. What lends support to such an impression is the conventional introductory formulae employed in the prophetical writings : "Thus spoke Yahweh", "Hear the word of Yahweh", "Give ear (ha,a%inü) . . .", as well as the concluding f o r m u l a e : ne*um

Yahweh,

‫ג‬

āmar

Yahiveh,

" f o r (Yahweh's, my) m o u t h

has spoken", or such expressions as " G o and proclaim in the hearing 4 ) The end of this verse: "and how they lay with the women who served at the entrance to the tent of meeting" (1 Sam. ii 22) is missing in L X X (and also in 4QSam a ), which has led modern scholars to claim that this is a later addition after Exod. xxxviii 8. However, it is hardly conceivable that a sentence stamped with P's style should be considered a mechanical addition originating from the post-canonical phase of the transmission of the Bible. It is much more reasonable to consider this a sign of priestly "editorial" activity, which means that the sentence is an integral part of the text in the form it has come down to us. In this part of the composition of the Former Prophets, though, the priestly "editing" consists of only very slight pen-strokes (similar to what occurred in the first verses of 1 Kgs. viii, or in the Deuteronomistic editing of the whole of the Book of Samuel). The L X X and Qumran versions, however, omitted this sentence— perhaps in order to turn a blind eye to a very distasteful act of the priests (cf. Α. Geiger, Urschrift und Übersetzungen der Bibel2 [Frankfurt a. Main, 1928], p. 272) or because of the palpable tension between this sentence and the rest of the narrative.

of . . .", " G o and say . . .",yö^mar Yahweh, and indeed the expression iPmör, "saying'' itself which betrays a clear oratorical character. For all this, however, there can be no doubt that the writings of the classical prophets available to us are literary works which, by their very nature, were intended for the reader, not for the listener. It would be inaccurate to consider them orations committed, as it were, to writing. The rhetorical form which is stamped on many of these works is certainly not fortuitous ; it has something to do with the historical fact that literary prophecy was only the continuation of hundreds of years of prophetic activity which had expressed itself in an oral context. However, the form impressed upon these works does not endow them with an authentic rhetorical quality. One could provide quite a few examples from world literature of the use of rhetorical forms merely as a literary device. (This is actually what happened even to Deuteronomy, the rhetorical form of which is only a literary design, while its words are put in the mouth of Moses, which to a certain extent makes it even a pseudepigraph.) In the case of the works of the literary prophets 5 ) there is a concrete historical reason for their rhetorical form. However, the exquisite refinement of these works, the erudition with which they are loaded, the verbal selectivity and balance ingrained in them, the striking artistic intensity which distinguishes them—all these qualities serve to attest, beyond any doubt, that the form of these works is the accomplishment of the pen alone. None of them can possibly be regarded as an oration taken down in a kind of "shorthand". The literary work of a classical prophet, if preserved, is available to us in writing, but the live address, which preceded it, was never recorded by any kind of phonograph and we certainly have never heard it. With regard to its form, scope, and nature one can only grope in the dark. It is a widely accepted opinion that the prophetic speech was mainly short and compact, cast in a poetic mould, but on being written down it became longer and even took on prose elements. As against this, the opposite view has already been expressed, that the prophetic speech might have occasionally reached the proportions of a real composite address, with transitions and changes of style within one rhetorical framework. However, even 5

) Perhaps also in the case of Deuteronomy—at least according to G. von Rad's theory; see the first chapter of his Deuteronomium-Studien2 (Göttingen, 1948), Ε. Tr. Studies in Deuteronomy (London, 1953); Gesammelte Studien zum AT (München, 1958), pp. 33-41.

if we accept this second view (which is also a mere conjecture), it would still not provide an answer to the question before us 6 ). For only if we were to suppose that the prophetic oration was immediately and accurately written down, would we be able to learn from the written prophecy about the form of the oration which preceded it. But this is just the point: such writing down did not take place, and the question is whether or not the written prophetic work reflects the live oration—is there any congruence between the two, if not verbal then at least real and adequate? The answer can only be negative. That is to say, the prophetic activity, in fact, found its expression in two different channels: the prophet spoke and the prophet wrote, and the correlation between these two means of expression was neither complete nor even substantial. Substantial correlation between the prophet's speech and his written work is inconceivable just for the reason that, on account of the simplicity and lack of sophistication of scribal techniques in those times, there was no possible way by which a live oration, if it attained any considerable length, would have been faithfully and precisely recorded. This is the rule in the Old Testament books in general, that when the content of an oral speech is reported in any of them—a speech which is not just a literary moulding (for example, in the Deuteronomic style), but is a part of a narrative framework— it is extremely short, sometimes extending to only a verse or two. This is not because the actual speech tended to be "short and compact", as one might be led to think, but rather because it was recounted in a short and compact form. Thus, for example, in Jer. xxvi it is related that the prophet delivered a fateful address in the temple court in which he compared Jerusalem to Shiloh and declared, 6

) The former view has been propounded mainly by H. Gunkel and his school; see, e.g., his Die Schriften des AT in Auswahl, II, 2 (Göttingen, 1915), pp. XL-XLIV. But it is also found in the writings of scholars who preceded Gunkel. Y. Kaufmann, Tôledôt Hā^Emûnāh HaY!ire V/7 3 (Tel Aviv, 1947), pp. 49-50, was attracted to the second view. Kaufmann also maintained that the prophetic address and the written prophecy were coexistent and complemented each other. The prophet delivered his address before a rather small circle of listeners. When he wrote it down, it reached distant readers, and occasionally it was redelivered by being read aloud from a text. "The prophet had, then, a narrow circle of listeners, a wider circle of readers and still wider circle of those who heard what was written" (pp. 53-4). One may agree or disagree with this description as well (about reading aloud of a prophecy from a written text, we have no evidence but the incident mentioned in Jer. xxxvi 1-18, which was definitely exceptional). However, the question still remains whether at the time the prophet wrote down his words the essential form of the live address was substantially preserved.

for the first time in his mission, that total destruction awaited Jerusalem and its temple, in reaction to which the people sought to have him executed. The extent of this address is here less than three verses (see vv. 4-6) which can be read at a glance, although before that Yahweh warns Jeremiah to speak "all the words that I have commanded you to speak to them, do not keep anything back" (v. 2), as if they attained some length. In another place in the Book of Jeremiah (vii 1-20), we find a rewritten version of the prophecy whose original form relates to the focus of the story in Jer. xxvi 7 ). However, it would be precipitate to claim that the version of Jer. vii 1-20, even in its primary form, is the genuine address which according to Jer. xxvi 4-6 the prophet delivered in the temple court. For the prophecy Jer. vii 1-20 is only a literary work which took its verbal shape at the writer's desk, and is in no way a recorded oration (for an actual piece of rhetoric even the passage Jer. vii 3-15 would be too meagre, and a speaker would certainly have finished these verses before he had attracted the attention of a handful of listeners). From this point of view, complete correlation between the prophet's address and his literary work would be possible only if the writing preceded the speech, that is, if the written work served as a kind of previously "prepared text" of the oration. However, in this matter, those scholars are certainly in the right who have already pointed out that in biblical times this was not the normal order (unless it was a special case which was explicitly regarded as out of the ordinary, such as the one described in Jer. xxxvi 1-18), and the sequence prevailing in the Old Testament is as a rule one of speech preceding writing. Moreover, even if the prophet had it in mind to write down his oral speech, there certainly must have been a span of time, great ') The verses following Jer. vii 15 are a lyric "response" to the announcement of calamity made before—a response examples of which are to be found in the literary formulations of Jeremiah's prophecies (see below); for this particular form of appendage to an announcement of calamity ("As for you, do not pray for this people" etc.), cf. xii 14; also xiv 11. Further on the text merges into a description of the worship of the Queen of Heaven "in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem". Consequently, the whole passage consisting of vv. 16-20 is connected to what precedes it and there is no reason to see here the beginning of a fresh literary unit. Note also the wāw copulative in w^attāh, "as for you" (the following unit consists of vv. 21-28). At the same time, in the unit vii 1-20 as a whole one can discern certain signs of rewriting and expansions which suggest that this is not the primary version of this prophecy. Cf. W. Rudolph, Jeremia3 (Tübingen, 1968), pp. 51-3.

or small, between the delivery of his speech and the writing. This span of time, even if it was short, was a matter of significance. It meant that, in a sense, at the time of writing the prophet was already a "different person"—in a different state of mind and mental constitution, which definitely removed him from the excitement he had experienced while speaking. Inasmuch as it is unthinkable that an ancient writer would have even a small portion of the modern proclivity for precision and the eagerness to preserve, as accurately as possible, each phrase just as he had uttered it—it is clear that the act of writing with the circumstances surrounding it would already be enough to shift him away from the tumult of oration and toward the literary undertaking which involves exertions and limitations of its own. At the time of writing he already directs himself to the reader, not to the listener, and being liberated from the agitation of oral speech he must now seek the artistic and polished idiom by which to give expression to his prophetic experience. This would be the case all the more so the longer became the delay from the oral speech, for then the difference between the speech and the written propecy would only be expanded and the relation between them might only be general. What is, then, the relationship between the prophetic literary unit and the address that preceded it? It may be said that the written prophecy contains, at the most, among other things, a kind of paraphrase of the content of the actual address, but in a summarized form and only in a literary recasting. In addition, it is only natural that such sorts of elements should have cropped up in the written prophecy which were literary in their intrinsic quality and were directed solely to the reader. This was not an "expanding" of the prophetic address with the help of literary components, but rather a direct moulding of the prophetic unit in a literary shape and in such a way that an echo of the speech was still heard in it. Obvious literary components, which would clearly have nothing to do with the living address, are, for example, the well-known "monologues" (or "confessions") of Jeremiah, which sometimes take on the character of prayers and by which the prophet gives us a glimpse of the conflicts within his soul and of the tragic breach between the inevitability of his mission and his personal suffering 8 ). Modern commentators 8

) There are those who maintain that the monologues, scattered between chapters ix-xx of the Book of Jeremiah, were originally assembled in a special collection; cf., e.g., O. Eissfeldt, Einleitungin das AT3 (Tübingen, 1964), pp. 481-2;

regard these monologues as independent literary units—to my mind, however, quite without justification. From a typological point of view, these components are certainly very particular, as they do indeed stand out from the context in their peculiarity. However, it is impossible to excise them from the literary units without, in every case, destroying the continuity of the literary texture. These monologues are direct, instantaneous responses to the terrifying content of the divine message. Consequently, not only should they not be removed from the literary context, but, quite the contrary, in each instance we should search for the oracle of doom to which the prophet could not help responding by giving expression to his personal grief in his lyric complaints to heaven. Again, it is worthy of mention that there are to be found literaryprophetic units, and even whole divisions of prophetic material, which, in the nature of things, could not possibly be preceded by any rhetorical activity whatsoever, but rather represent simple literary works (which, of course, serve as expressions of prophetic also Y. Kaufmann, ΤôIedot Hā^Emúnāh HaYišre>ēlít 3 (Tel Aviv, 1947), pp. 411, 444-5. Passages of analogous character which appear in previous chapters, such as iv 19-21, viii 18-23, are defined as "laments" (Eissfeldt, pp. 483-4). It seems to me, however, that from a typological, or at least from a functional, point of view, there is no real reason to make a distinction between these two types. In their character, the "laments" no less than the monologues come near to prayers, while tones similar to those of the laments are also found in the monologues (for example, xiv 17-18, xv 18; cf. also xii 7-11). Besides, before as well as after chapter xi we find, in similar contexts, passages that in every respect can be regarded as prayers (for example, χ 23-24, xvi 19-20, xvii 12-14), and prayers also appear in this part of the Book of Jeremiah in other places—not necessarily in the special context of the "response" (for example, the prayers in which the prophecies "concerning the drought" in chapters xiv-xv are enclosed; in xvii 5-8 a prayer serves as a form of prophecy). It will be more to the point, therefore, to maintain that the laments as well as the monologues, both of which basically relate to prayers, and occasionally also ordinary psalmodie prayers, appear in the literary formulations of Jeremiah's prophecies in at least identical function—inasmuch as they give expression to his personal lyric response to the announcement of doom embodied in the word of God. After chapter xx, however, there are no more examples of such a phenomenon. (The reason is that chapter xxvii already marks the beginning of a new division in the Book of Jeremiah, the one of consolation prophecies [xxvii-xxxv], followed by the divisions of stories about the prophet [xxxvi-xlv] and prophecies against the nations [xlvi-li], as is explained in my book Teqûpôt Û-Môsâdôt BaMiqrā'' [Tel Aviv, 1973], pp. 269-278; and in the material pervading these divisions there is no place for such a lyric response). Thus, the suggestion that the monologues were originally assembled together in a special collection must be rejected—at least for the reason that in every case the monologue (as also the lament and most of the prayers) actually serve as an inseparable part of the literary unit (see also below).

inspiration). Such are the descriptions of the prophets' calls in general and Ezekiel's "chariot vision" (Ezek. i-iii) in particular, the latter's detailed visionary programme (Ezek. xl-xlviii), Zechariah's series of prophetic dreams (Zech, i 4-vi 8), to all appearances—also the first division of the prophecies of Second Isaiah (Isa. xl-xlviii), the category of "oracles against the nations" in its entirety, and other things of this kind 9 ). Since the category of "oracles against the nations" presents itself already in the works of the earliest classical prophets, it follows that this sort of basically literary opera, which was not preceded by any oral address, was in existence from the very beginning of classical prophecy. This inference could be strengthened by additional considerations, so that it would be preferable not to speak of a process of "literarization" which prophecy, as it were, underwent (as has been suggested by scholars) but rather to say that the phenomenon of writing underlay classical prophecy from its very outset. Since this phenomenon was one of the features which distinguished classical from early prophecy, one may deduce that the adoption of the literary medium was not so much a process (even when viewed within the broader framework of the prophetic movement in general) as it was a turning-point. Ill

Another important question is whether the ecstatic element itself, which was so deeply ingrained in early prophecy, was still preserved in classical prophecy. In this regard, there is a significant difference of opinion between modern scholars. There are those who claim that the ecstatic element left its imprint on the classical prophets as well, and psychologically speaking there was no difference between the activity of these prophets and the activity of those who preceded them (or those popular prophets who remained active down to later times). There are, on the other hand, those who deny, or minimize, the existence of abnormal psychological elements in the activity of the classical prophets, and from this point of view (even from this one) find a great difference between the classical and the early prophets 10 ). 9 ) I find that J. Lindblom, in one of his first works, already took a position close to this. See his Die literarische Gattung der prophetischen Literatur—Eine Iiterargeschichtliche Untersuchung χμηι AT (Uppsala, 1924), pp. 1-7, 57-8. However, our arguments are not similar, and our general conceptions are not similar either. 10 ) Among those who hold the first view, mention may be made of A. Lods, H. Gunkel, G. Hölscher, T. H. Robinson. Among those who entertain the

S. Mowinckel, for his part, devoted a number of studies to this subject, and though his opinion generally fluctuated between the two opposing views, it actually came nearer to the second position. On the one hand, he emphasizes that whenever the classical prophets uttered the word of God they, no less than the prophets who preceded them, were in a mental state which was definitely far from the normal and they surely must have been subject to a certain ecstasy. On the other hand, he emphasizes the difference between the classical and the other prophets, and contends that the fundamental drive behind their experience and activity derived not from the inspiration of "Yahweh's spirit (rûah)", which was irrational in nature, but from the power of "Yahweh's word (dābār)", which they grasped in the clear light of reason. In his view, the classical prophets avoided ascribing their experience to the "spirit of Yahweh" just because they wished to dissociate themselves from the popular prophets whose ecstatic behaviour was indeed related to the inspiration of the spirit. The "word of Yahweh", by contrast, which the classical prophets conceived of as the prime impulse of their mission, was dominated by a rational, sober and enlightened principle. Ezekiel's ecstatic behaviour indicates a regression to early prophecy, since the impact of the "spirit of Yahweh" returns as a salient characteristic of his behaviour and experiences—though with respect to his religious and moral standard this prophet, too, belongs to classical prophecy. It is Mowinckel's contention that the general course of the prophetic movement is an evolution from ecstatic intoxication to divine revelation in the sphere of quiet contemplation and mental clarity11). Interestingly enough, a similar conception—but second view H. Wheeler Robinson and A. Jepsen are to be listed. The latter, in his work Nabi (München, 1934), devoted to this subject, even attempted to distinguish between the prophets, who were only professional, ecstatic soothsayers and had branched off from ecstatic movements in northern Syria—and those great personalities who originally were not given any special designation, but after their warnings of destruction were fulfilled, were included among the prophets. The ("genuine") prophets represented the national religion, continued the old charismatic leadership, and appeared particularly in times of crisis. The great (classical) personalities, on the other hand, who did not call themselves prophets and only contended with the prophets, were never thrown into a state of ecstasy, and the word of God was delivered to them and transmitted by them in a clear and intellectualized manner. An admirable survey of these views is to be found in O. Eissfeldt's article, "The Prophetic Literature", in H. H. Rowley (ed.), The OT and Modern Study (Oxford, 1951), pp. 135-9. ‫״‬ ) Mowinckel's most outstanding studies on this subject are: "The 'Spirit' and the "Word‫ ׳‬in the Pre-exilic Reforming Prophets", JBL 53 (1934), pp. 199-227;

as a result of an entirely independent line of reasoning—was also held by the Israeli scholar Y. Kaufmann. He maintains that the essential characteristic of Israelite prophecy (not necessarily of classical prophecy alone) is the proclamation of the "word of Yahweh". The effect of the "spirit of Yahweh" on people, which leads them to a state of ecstasy, is regarded in the Old Testament not as the cause of prophecy but, at the very most, as a by-product of prophetical experience. "The word of God is not the outcome of the spirit, but rather the spirit is the outcome of the word of God" 1 2 ). I would argue that the two opposing views mentioned above— both the one which claims that the ecstatic element was a determining factor even in classical prophecy, and the one which totally denies the existence of such an element in that prophecy, are rather wide of the mark. And that, because both the opposing views hold germs of truth, which means that neither of the views by itself presents the whole truth. There was an ecstatic, hallucinative, irrational element in the classical prophets' mode of action, but it also had a rational and lucid sober-mindedness. Only we need not imagine that these two features materialized at one and the same time, for in the activity of every prophet they were detached from each other by a certain span of time. The prophetic experience itself was certainly ecstatic in character, obscure and irrational, and, to all appearances, the classical prophets underwent it mostly in the form of dreams (in the early prophecy it probably was not connected with this form alone) 13). But the literary expression which was given to this ex"Ecstatic Experience and Rational Elaboration in O T Prophecy", AcOr 13 (1935), pp. 264-291; "Postscript", JBL 56 (1937), pp. 261-265; Die Erkenntnis Gottes bei den alttestamentlichen Propheten (Oslo, 1942). See also Eissfeldt, pp. 139-141, where several additional references are made. 12 ) Y. Kaufmann, Tôl'dôt Hā^Emûnāh HaYišreēlít 1, pp. 511-30 (the quoted sentence is from p. 528). This part of Kaufmann's work was first printed in 1938, but the ideas were formulated several years before. It is therefore obvious that the two scholars were at work on this problem almost at the same time. Indeed, Kaufmann does not avail himself in this context of Mowinckel's studies (while it goes without saying that Mowinckel, for his part, did not make use of Kaufmann's writings). Perhaps it would not be an exaggeration to say that, as far as Kaufmann is concerned, his view is at least in some way a transformation (phrased, of course, in terms of modern biblical research) of the old rationalistic definition which Maimonides gave to the phenomenon of prophecy (Guide for the Perplexed, II, 36, 38). 13 ) For the dream as the principal, if not the only, ecstatic form which remained to the classical prophets of all the early prophecy's modes of exstatic activity, see, for the present, the comments I made in my aforementioned book Teqûpôt Û-Môsâdôt BaMiqrā‫'־‬, pp. 329-31. I have already pointed out there, that he who

perience is certainly sober, clear and rational. There should be no doubt that at the time the prophet sat down to commit his words to writing and to set his experience in a literary-artistic form, he was already liberated from the "trance" which had siezed him at the moments of the experience. The time of writing was of necessity one of mental clarity and lucidity, when the prophet had to struggle with the literary idiom, which calls for precision and polish. Thus, it was the use of the literary medium, which distinguished the classical from the early prophets, that also increased—if indeed it did not altogether determine—the rational and intellectualized basis of the verbal expression which the classical prophets had to provide for the "word of G o d " (in the case of the early prophets, the span of time which separated the prophetic experience from the oral pronouncement of the "word of Yahweh" may have contributed to the intelligibility of their addresses). IV Still another feature which typifies classical prophecy is that it reveals a particular system of values and an extraordinary moral vision. These qualities, by virtue of which the classical prophets have transcended their own time, deserve special discussion, which may be reserved for another occasion. states "I saw Yahweh standing by the altar" (Am. ix 1), or "I saw Yahweh seated on a throne, high and exalted" (Isa. vi 1), or other visions of this sort, only testifies that he was not in a state of sober-mindedness and lucidity.

T H E

P U R P O S E O F

O F

T H E

T H E

" E D I T O R I A L

B O O K

O F

F R A M E W O R K "

H A G G A I

1

)

by R. A. MASON Oxford

The aim of this article is a strictly limited one. It is to look again briefly at the so-called "editorial framework" of the book of Haggai and ask afresh whether there can be detected within it any discernible exegetical purpose, by which we may decide whether there is here early commentary on, and interpretation of, the ministry and oracles of the prophet. Clearly, in so brief a space, we cannot conduct anything like as intensive and thorough an examination of the material as Beuken has done 2) as to the nature and identity of the circles in which the tradition was moulded and passed on, nor even offer an adequate criticism of his conclusions. But if we are able to ask what was being attempted and achieved in this material, we should be in a better position from which to offer such criticism or even to offer different conclusions where such might be deemed appropriate. Most commentators have agreed that the material within which the oracles of Haggai have been "sandwiched", with its datings, its introductory formulae, its report on the effect of the preaching on the hearers and references to the prophet in the third person as "Haggai the prophet", cannot be the work of Haggai himself, but must come from an editor, who is responsible for the final form of the book. One most notable dissentient from this view is Eissfeldt who, without quite ruling out the work of an editor, questions whether Haggai may not have chosen the third person form "to enhance the complete objectivity of his report", and he believes in any case that the report as we have it "was written down very soon after the event" 3 ). It will be argued here that certain differences between the 1

) A paper read to the Winter Meeting of the Society for Old Testament Study, London, December 1975. 2 ) W. A. M. Beuken, Haggai-Sacharja 1-8 (Assen, 1967). 3 ) Einleitung in das Alte Testament (3rd edn., Tübingen, 1964), § 58; Ε. Tr. The Old Testament: an Introduction (Oxford, 1965), pp. 428-9.

oracles and the framework in terminology, style and outlook, testify against Eissfeldt's view, without prejudging the question of the date of such editorial activity. The material which we are here treating as belonging to the editorial framework is i 1, 3, 12, 13a, 14, 15, ii 1 , 2 (probably), 10, 20. It may be that, if an argument of Beuken (to be discussed below) is right, we should include ii 4 as coming from the editor, although otherwise disputed material from the oracles will not be discussed. The danger of the circular argument is ever-present. Verse 5 of chapter ii is usually regarded as a gloss. Whether it was from the editor of the rest of the framework can only be decided by a comparison of the contents and outlook of the two, a comparison we shall not attempt here. Of the other verses mentioned, i 15a is usually held to be a misplaced introduction to the oracles of ii 15-19, and v. 15b is taken to introduce the oracle in ii 1-9. No one can treat any aspect of the books of Haggai and Zechariah i-viii without being deeply indebted to Beuken's work, even where he may find himself questioning some of the conclusions. Λ brief survey, by way of reminder, of Beuken's position may therefore be in place at the outset. He believes that the final forms of the books of Haggai and Zechariah i-viii stem from a "Chronistic milieu", for much of the terminology and many of the ideas reflect those to be found in the writings of the Chronicler. Among these are: the same concern for the temple and its ritual, concern for the continuance of the Davidic line, the view of the prophets as "messengers", the concept of God "stirring u p " the spirit of leaders and people, the association of the "spirit" of God with prophecy and the setting of the rebuilding of the temple in a covenant context. It is important to stress Beuken's own phrase, a "Chronistic milieu". He does not make a simple identification with the Chronicler, partly because he recognizes elements in the material that are derived from other sources which express its own peculiarities, and partly because he recognizes that behind what is termed the "Chronicler" the outlook of various groups may be represented (pp. 35 f.). We turn, then, to consider some of the distinguishing features of the editorial framework. We note first the use of the formula bâyāb debar-ybwb beyad baggay hannābP, which occurs three times, in i 1, 3, and ii 1. Perhaps not too much should be made of its use, for twice also we have the alternative formula bāyāb debar-ybwb ‫י־‬el-baggay bant1ābP in ii 10, 20. Beuken stresses that the idea of the word of Yahweh

coming "by the hand o f " a particular prophet is found only twice in older texts, but is characteristic of the Deuteronomic writings and those of the Chronicler (p. 28). He cites four examples of its use in the books of Kings. In fact it occurs there eleven times 4), and only four times in the Chronicler's writings 5). One of these is a parallel to one of the Kings references, while three refer to the prophets generally. This is rather different from its use in Kings where it is always associated with a particular prophet. Of course, many of the references in Kings are to prophetic words spoken to kings of the northern kingdom in passages which have no parallel in Chronicles, but when Beuken says that in this, as in so much else, the Chronicler is influenced by the Deuteronomists, it is necessary to observe that the two use the phrase rather differently. Where the Chronicler does link the phrase "by the hand o f " to a particular individual, it is to Moses, a use which appears four times, always in reference to Moses as lawgiver 6). This usage of the phrase is found only once in Kings 7). However, where the phrase is used much more of Moses is in the Priestly writing, where it occurs thirteen times 8 ) and where it is used not only of Moses as law-giver but as transmitter of the instructions concerning the manufacture of the tabernacle and the order of its ritual. Indeed, it is used in this last connection most frequently. Of course, we cannot speak of "influence" between the Priestly writers and the editorial framework of the Book of Haggai, since we can date neither. At the most we could say that it might indicate a similarity of outlook between those responsible for each, whether they arrive at that outlook independently, from a common source, or whether both works issue from similar circles. If, then, there is any significance in the use of this phrase three times in the framework, it may express either a concern to show that what happened with the rebuilding of the temple was a fulfilment of the prophetic word, showing history viewed as linked cause and effect, the prophetic word of Yahweh and its fulfilment, a concern which characterizes both the Deuteronomists and the Chronicler but is expressed here in a way which accords more with Deuteronomistic 4

) 1 Kings xii 15, XV 29, xvi 12, 17, 34, xvii 16; 2 Kings ix 36, xiv 25, xvii 13, 23, xxi 10. 2 ‫ף‬ Chr. χ 15 ( = 1 Kings xii 15), xxix 25, xxxvi 15; Nch. ix 30 (29). e ) 2 Chr. xxxiii 8, xxxiv 14, xxxv 6; Neh. ix 14. 7 ) 1 Kings viii 53, 56. 8 ) Ex. ix 35, xxxv 29; Ixv. viii 36, χ 11, xxvi 46; Nu. iv 37, 45, ix 23, χ 13, xv 23, xvi 40, xxvii 23, xxxvi 13.

usage, or a concern to draw a parallel between the establishment of the first temple and that of the second, with both resting on an authorizing word of Yah weh spoken through his chosen messenger of the time. Another feature of the framework is its concentration upon the prophetic word spoken to the leaders, Zerubbabel and Joshua. In the oracles themselves it appears to be the community as a whole which is addressed. There is a final oracle in ii 21-23, addressed by Haggai exclusively to Zerubbabel, who is addressed as "governor of Judah". There is also in ii 4 a call to Zerubbabel and Joshua, alongside those who are addressed as "the people of the land". Beuken has argued, however, that ii 4 represents the work of the editor, at least to the point of its being a modification of an oracle originally addressed to the whole community. Usually ii 2-9 is divided into two oracles, ii 2-4 (or 5 according to whether v. 5 is regarded as gloss or not), and ii 6-9. Beuken maintains that vv. 6-9 constitute an answer to the hesitations expressed in v. 3, and that it is thus v. 4 which is intrusive. The editor has adapted the original oracle to an "installation to office" form, on the pattern of those found in the Chronicler's work, as in 1 Chr. xxii 11-16, and xxviii 10-20, David's installation of Solomon to the office of temple builder. Common to these are the injunction ha%aq and the imperative Casū, and the promise of God's presence with the one being installed in office (Beuken, pp. 50 ff.). The parallel may be justified, but it is worth noting that the type of oracle Beuken finds here is also to be found in the Deuteronomistic writings, e.g. Dt. xxxi; Jos. i, χ 25; 2 S. xi, etc., while its occurrence in other prophetic material (e.g. Is. XXXV 4), and its echo of some Psalm passages (e.g. Pss. xxvii 14, xxxi 25 (24)), may suggest a common source to them all in Israel's worship. However, whether we accept Beuken's analysis of ii 3-9 or not, the fact remains that the framework places much greater emphasis on the role of the two leaders than the oracles themselves do. Beuken says that it is a feature of the Chronicler's work that the prophetic word is always addressed to the king whose response becomes determinative for that of the whole community (p. 32). He quotes Westermann to support him : The astonishing thing now is that all of these speeches [i.e. the prophetic speeches in the books of Chronicles], with one exception (ch. 24:20), are actually prophetic speeches directed to the king 9 )! 9 ) C. Wcstermann, Basic Forms of Prophetic Speech (London, 1967), p. 166, E.Tr. of Grundformen prophetischer Rede (Munich, 1960).

This is impressive until we carry out a similar investigation of all those passages, already referred to, in the books of Kings, which contain the formula "by the hand of . . . " . There also, with the exception of Elijah's word concerning the cruise of oil, all are directed at or to the ruling kings. Nevertheless, while it would be false to limit this concern of the framework to any exclusive connection with the Chronicler, the fact of this emphasis on the leadership remains of interest and importance. The pedigree of both is emphasised by the constant repetition of their descent (a factor which may suggest that ii 2 belongs to the same hand), a descent which, according to the Chronicler, would make a Davidide of Zerubbabel (1 Chr. iii 16), and a descendant of the pre-exilic line of Levitical high priests of Joshua (1 Chr. vi 14). The divine purpose for the community is announced to the leaders and effected through their obedience. Both are placed alongside in the framework without comment on their respective roles and this, together with the retention of the oracle concerning the messiahship of Zerubbabel in ii 21-23, might be held to support Eissfeldt's view that the framework is not likely to be so very much later than the events it records. It is otherwise in Zech. i-viii where there is more conscious discussion of their respective roles and some suggestion of growing emphasis on the figure of the high priest. But what is of interest in the framework of the book of Haggai, is that the sole function of Zerubbabel, for all that he is termed "governor", is the building of the temple. Unlike the last oracle (ii 21-23) no political significance is given to his office whatever, and here one is reminded of the role of David in the books of Chronicles. Is there here a similar reinterpretation of the messianic hope to that of the Chronicler, of which P. R. Ackroyd could say, The Davidic hope, taken out of history, is embodied in temple and cultus, ordained by David, and now renewed . . . 10)? But if there is particular interest in the leadership, there is no exclusive concern with them alone. The community as a whole is linked with them by its response to the prophetic word, a response described in i 12-14. They are three times described as köl spirit hâ'âm in i 12, 14, and ii 2. The term še>ērit can mean purely a "residue", but from its use in the prophetic books it had evidently acquired a special theological overtone, for it is used there in contexts of both threat 10

) P. R. Ackroyd, "History and Theology in the Chronicler", Concordia Theological Monthly 38 (1967), pp. 501-7.

of judgement and promise of deliverance. Its use here suggests that the community of returned exiles is seen as those who, having survived the judgement of the exile, have now returned as the nucleus of the new Israel, heirs to the old prophetic promise of salvation. Beuken points out that it is strange that the phrase does not occur in i 1 whereas it does in the corresponding superscription of ii 1 (p. 29). But could this be a deliberate usage? May the editor be expressing the opinion that it was the prophetic word of Yahweh and their response to it which constituted them as the true Israel, the genuine "remnant"? This response is described in terms of their "listening to the voice of the L O R D their God". This is sharply evocative of the Deuteronomic phrase, "If you listen to the voice of the L O R D your God . . .", with its assurance that experience of the covenant blessings depended upon such obedience, a phrase found often in both Deuteronomy, the Deuteronomistic history and the Deuteronomistic sections of the book of Jeremiah. It is closely paralleled in the framework with another characteristic Deuteronomistic phrase, "the people feared before the L O R D " . It is interesting to observe that in the present arrangement of the book of Haggai the oracles warning of judgement in chapter i are followed by oracles promising deliverance and blessing in chapter ii, the two pivoting around the response of the people to the word of Yahweh, a response which is thus seen as critical. Indeed, this response is pictured in some sense as a work of spiritual renewal by the use of the phrase, "And the L O R D stirred up the spirit of . . . " both leaders and people. In spite of Beuken's insistence that this is an entirely Chronistic term (p. 31), we may disregard its use in the books of Chronicles in this context, since it is there used exclusively of Yahweh's stirring up of the spirit of foreign powers to act either against or for his people ‫ ) ״‬. Its appearance in Ezr. i 5 is different, but could well be dependent upon its use in the book of Haggai. This seems, in fact, to be a phrase peculiar to the framework, but one wonders if, with its suggestions of rousing from sleep or inactivity, something of the overtone of the idea of the arousing of the nation in Ezk. xxxvii, or even of the moral and spritual renewal of Ezk. xxxvi or Jer. xxxi 31 ff. may not be implicit. The result of this action of God upon the spirit of the whole community was their undertaking of the work of the reconstruction 11

) 1 Chr. ν 26; 2 Chr. xxi 16, xxxvi 22.

of the temple, which is described in i 14 in the following way: wayyäböT! wayyalaíū melā*kāh bebēt yhwh) The use of the term melā*kāh is of interest, for, while it can be used of work of any kind, it is employed very often in connection with work upon the temple. It is used in the Priestly writing particularly of the work connected with the tabernacle, and again in both Kings and Chronicles for the work of construction of Solomon's temple. Indeed, the terminology answers very closely to that found especially in Ex. xxxv f. where the enthusiastic response of the whole community is stressed: All the men and women, the people of Israel, whose hearts moved them to bring anything for the work (hamm^lâ^kāh) which Yahweh had commanded by Moses (beyad nwšēh) to be done ([/aCasāt), brought it as their freewill offering to Yahweh (Ex. xxxv 29). . . . every one whose heart stirred him up to conic *el-bamtu*1ā1‫־‬kāh la1" sôΊ "δtab (Ex. xxxvi 2) 12). While we have ruled out the legitimacy of any attempt to trace literary dependence between these two sources, we may nevertheless ask whether it may not be that the editorial framework of the book of Haggai views the rebuilding of the temple as a parallel to and in some sense a fulfilment of the building of the first, and to have come from circles which invested the temple with the same kind of theological significance as those from which the Priestly writing came. The stress in ii 4 on the promise of God's "presence" in the midst of his community answers closely to the thought of the Priestly writing of God "tabernacling" among his people in the sanctuary. Of this view, J. P. Hyatt has said that it accords well "with the promise of Ezk. 37:27: My dwelling place shall be with them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people" 13). Nor can it be very far from the outlook of the Chronicler who, while he may have stressed more the divine transcendence, yet, by his emphasis on the temple, its personnel and its cultus, saw it, in the words of Myers, as "the 12

) The point made on p. 415 must again be stressed, that there can be no instance of any literary dependence here, since we cannot be sure of the relative dates of the Priestly Writing and the editorial framework of the book of Haggai. This is particularly the case with Ex. xxxvi-xl, since they present several peculiarities which have led many commentators to suggest that they represent a later strand of the Priestly Writing. Cp. B. S.Childs, Exodus (London, 1974), pp. 529-37. 13 ) J. P. Hyatt, Exodus (London, 1971), p. 262.

eternal trysting place between the Lord and his people . . . " 1 4 ) . It is time to return to the question with which this article began. From all this, is there any discernible exegetical purpose to be found in the framework of the book of Haggai? Must we not say that any thorough-going eschatological prophet raises problems for those who follow him? What happens when the crisis of history which he invested with such significance comes and goes without proving as final as he foretold? One may cast it still farther into the future, like the final stabs of the last two verses of the book of Daniel. Or one may reinterpret it in a way that seeks to relate it to the continuing life of the people of God, to show that each new crisis of history gains in significance and presents sharper challenge in the light of the final crisis which is still awaited. Is it not some such process as this which must explain to some extent the emergence of the two outlooks of post-exilic Judaism of which O. Plöger has written in his book, Theokratie und Eschatologie? ÏS ). We do not know enough of the history following 515 B.C. to say with confidence what happened to the community in Jerusalem under the leadership of Zerubbabel. But it would scarcely be rash to assume that not all that Haggai predicted immediately followed the restoration of the temple. Is the editorial framework of the book a first attempt to relate them to the situation which did emerge? In one sense, we might perhaps describe this attempt at a reinterpretation of the oracles of the prophet along the lines of what might be called "realized eschatology". More accurately, perhaps, we should say that their eschatological hopes here receive a partial "theocratic" interpretation. If not all the signs which the prophet foretold of the new age had yet appeared, nevertheless its day had dawned. The completion of the new temple marked the fulfilment of all the hopes and promise implicit in the first. The returned community had become the "remnant" of prophetic promise, constituted as such by the fulfilment of the divine word given by the prophet and its renewed hope rested securely on the basis of that divine word. Its continuance was assured by the presence of God in the temple in their midst mediated to them by the cultus, and its authenticity was guaranteed by the divinely ordained leadership which characterised the restored community. The significance of that leadership was not 14

) J. M. Myers, I Chronicles (Garden City, New York, 1965), p. lxviii. ) (2nd edn., Neukirchen, 1962), F‫״‬Tr. Theocracy and Escha/o/ogy (Oxford, 1968).

15

in any crude resurgence of the old politico-messianic hopes, but in the emergence of a people of God, restored to a right relationship with him, gladly serving him, renewed by him. Meanwhile, the editor calls on his contemporaries to show by their attitude to the temple and its service, the same spirit of willing obedience to the word of Yahweh as the contemporaries of the prophet Haggai showed, a call underlined by the reminder that Haggai was Yahweh's "messenger" (i 13), a description of the prophetic office to be found indeed in the Chronicler, but also in Second Isaiah (xliv 26) and, above all, in the prophetic collection known to us as the book of Malachi. This present fulfilment of Haggai's preaching did not exclude a greater, future hope. His eschatological promises were preserved still and honoured. But the future outcome could be awaited with confidence and hope because of the fulfilment of them they were already experiencing in the present. Such an understanding of the framework does not necessarily imply a very late date for it. It does not need to have been tied as closely to the "Chronicler" as Beuken suggests. It was open to wider influences, yet it could well represent the viewpoint of a group farther upstream, but in the same waters which nourished the Chronicler. Are there indications that this group, and those among whom the Priestly writing must have been crystallising, had many things in common? The absence of any signs of uncertainty over the dual role of Joshua and Zerubbabel would point to an earlier stage in the development of the tradition than that of the final editing of Zech. i-viii 16). It may be added in conclusion that such an early exegesis of the oracles of Haggai would not be without its interest and value as a guide for the continuing task of the exegesis of earlier prophecies, by which their relevance and importance might be demonstrated and related to the continuing life of the people of God in every age. 16 ) It should be noted, however, that if Hag. ii 2 and 4 both belong to the framework, there is no record in the oracles themselves that Haggai addressed such a person as Joshua the High Priest at all. His appearance alongside Zerubbabel in the framework would then suggest that a process of elevation of the priesthood had begun which was to be carried farther by the time of the final editing of Zech. i-viii.

P O S S E S S I O N IN

T R A N C E

P R E - E X I L I C

A N D

P R O P H E C Y

I S R A E L

by SIMON B. P A R K E R Boston, Massachusetts

The so-called ecstatic prophets of 1 Sam. χ ff., xix 20 ff. are still generally seen as representing a stage in the development of Israelite prophecy 1 ). However, it has often been pointed out that there is no evidence to suggest that they gave oracles of any kind, and some scholars are attempting to understand Israelite prophecy without reference to ecstasy 2). But no alternative account of ecstasy has yet been suggested 3). Beginning with a re-examination of the two Samuel passages the following study seeks to characterize the phenomena reflected there by reference to recent cross-cultural studies of trance states, to suggest a historical context and function for such a behavior, and, finally, to clarify its relationship to other phenomena in ancient Israel, especially prophecy. I Of the many texts which are often cited as referring to "ecstasy" two are by far the most explicit. In the first, 1 Sam. χ 5-7, Samuel, having anointed Saul nāgîd, is telling him what will happen to him on his way home : 1

) See e.g. G. Fohrer, History of Israelite Religion (Nashville and New York, 1972; London, 1973), p. 225 = Geschichte der israelitischen Religion (Berlin, 1969), p. 224; J. Bright, A History of Israel (2nd edn, Philadelphia and London, 1972), p. 182; B. W. Anderson, Understanding the Old Testament (3rd edn, Englewood Cliffs, 1975), pp. 228 ff. 2 ) E.g. R. Rendtorff, "Reflections on the Early History of Prophecy in Israel", Journal for Theology and Church 4 (1967), pp. 14-34 (originally ZThK 59 [1962], pp. 145-67). V. Eppstein, "Was Saul also among the Prophets?", Ζ AW 81 (1969), pp. 287-304 concludes that the history of Israelite prophecy should be reassessed in the recognition that the two Samuel passages are irrelevant. V. W. Rabe, BASOR 221 (Feb., 1976), p. 126, thinks that this is now a general trend. 3 ) Resort to the category "shamanism" in some recent studies has not distinguished prophecy and ecstasy: A. S. Kapelrud, "Shamanistic Features in the Old Testament", in C. M. Edsman (ed.), Studies in Shamanism (Stockholm, 1967), pp. 90-96; K. Goldammer, "Elemente des Schamanismus im alten Testament", Studies in the History of Religion (Leiden, 1972), pp. 266-85.

. . . you will come upon a group of ^bî^îm on their way down from the high place, led by lute and drum and pipe and harp, and they will be mitnabb^im. Then a spirit of Yahweh will overwhelm you, so that (you will) hìtnabbîtā with them, being transformed into a different person. When these significant events happen to you, do whatever comes to hand, for God will be with you. The fulfillment of Samuel's prediction is summarized in verse 10. In the second passage, 1 Sam. xix 20 ff., Saul, having learned of David's whereabouts, sends messengers to take him, but when they arrive they see the nebPtm nibb^im, "and a spirit of God came upon Saul's messengers, so that they too yitnabb^û". The same happens with two subsequent sets of messengers (verse 21). Finally Saul goes in person, "and a spirit of God came upon him too, so that he continued on his way wayyitnabbe' (or emended: wehitnabbē'‫׳‬y until he arrived where David was (verse 23). Then he too stripped off his clothes, and he too yitnabbP in Samuel's presence, and fell down, lying naked all that day and night (verse 24a). What are these nebPim, and what is meant by the verb hitnabbē' (nibbā' in xix 20, apparently not distinguished in meaning)? In the first passage the behavior is accompanied, perhaps fostered, by music. It is interpreted as a radical transformation of the personality, and may confer extraordinary powers on the person so affected. According to the second it may entail stripping off one's clothes, and may issue in a coma. In both its onset is described as an invasion, or at least a visitation, by a divine spirit. It is a group behavior, and is contagious. It seems clear that we have to do with some kind of trance state, or altered state of consciousness. But on the basis of recent field studies and comparative studies it is possible to suggest a more precise definition of the behavior reflected in these passages. Several such studies were carried out under the directorship of Professor Erika Bourguignon of the Department of Anthropology of Ohio State University between 1963 and 1968, and some of the results have been published under her editorship as Religion, Altered States of Consciousness and Social Change (Columbus, 1973). As the title implies, the partieular focus of the work is those altered states which are institutionalized within a religious framework, and the relations of such states to social or cultural change. Both foci will be of value to us in our attempt to understand the experience attributed to Saul in 1 Samuel. Bourguignon distinguishes two types of trance as coming within

the purview of these studies : "possession trance", referring to "states interpreted by the societies in which they occur as due to possession by spirits", and "trance", referring to states not thus interpreted, and most typically involving hallucinations or visions (p. 12). Possession trance is further characterized by L. Greenbaum in the same volume as referring to . . . a condition in which a person is believed to be inhabited by the spirit of another person or a supernatural being. During this "possession" by a spirit other than his own, the person is in an altered state of consciousness, evidenced by one or more of the following : talking and acting like the inhabiting spirit, lapsing into a coma-like state, speaking unintelligibly, exhibiting physical symptoms such as twitching, wild dancing, frothing at the mouth, and so on. Upon regaining his original identity, the person generally retains no conscious memory of the activity of the spirit. Possession trance may be an individual or a group phenomenon. It may be induced by drugs, music, or other methods external to the individual, or it may be a spontaneous manifestation by the person possessed. It may be a phenomenon restricted to a particular status or role (for example, a diviner, medium, priest) or it may occur at random in the society. In all cases however, the phenomenon is accepted within the society as a trance induced by a spirit entering the person possessed, and not as an individual psychological aberration (pp. 42-3). Visionary trance on the other hand is generally a covert, passive experience. It acquires social significance only when the visions are recorded or communicated, which is possible after such a trance, since the visions are generally remembered, especially when given religious significance in the society (Bourguignon, p. 15). The significance of the society's interpretation of either phenomenon is that the interpretation in turn structures the behavior and experience of the trance state 4). According to this typology the Samuel passages clearly refer to possession trance, and that is the term that will be used through the rest of this article 5 ). But Bourguignon makes another important dis4 ) Bourguignon, pp. 13-14. Cf. L. C. May, American Anthropologist 58 (1956), p. 90. δ ) The complaint that "ecstasy is a word which has been sorely overworked" had already been voiced by A. Guillaume, Prophecy and Divination (London, 1938), p. 290 (cf. p. 107). H. W. Robinson preferred the term "possession" in his InspiraHon and Revelation in the Old Testament (Oxford, 1946), p. 180. V. W. Rabe claims "spirit-possession" is the "proper category" — BASOR 221 (Feb., 1976), pp. 125-6.

tinction, which can be exploited immediately. Possession trance may be mediumistic—that is, mediating a message from the spirit world to an audience—or personal and compensatory (p. 336). As noted at the beginning of this paper, there is no suggestion that the "prophecy" of our passages involves any communication between God and man, or between persons. It appears not to be mediumistic. As this point, something must be said about the Hebrew terminology. Jepsen, followed by Guillaume, tabulated the occurrences of the nifal and hitbpael of the root nby to show that for both forms the meaning "rave" in earlier texts gradually gave way to the meaning "prophesy" in later texts 6). Johnson, making the same distinction in meaning, has warned against being "led astray by the use of the verbal form [hitnabbe']", stating that in places it "has no immediate connection with prophecy of any kind", though the only two such places he allows are Jer. xxix 26 and 1 Sam. xviii 10 7). It is generally acknowledged that the verb may sometimes mean "rave": disagreement arises over which occurrence requires which meaning. Johnson's warning has, however, been ignored to the extent that in any given passage, while one meaning may be claimed as primary, the other is often assumed as implied. On the basis of what has been said thus far in this paper, I would argue that in the two Samuel passages cited both the nifal and the hithpael of the verb mean: "to be in, or to fall into, a possession trance", and that they have nothing to do with prophecy or divination. Further, it is the working hypothesis of this article that for every example of these verbal forms the context only requires either one meaning or the other, never both. Such mutually exclusive definitions of the two meanings pose problems for understanding the semantic development of the word, otherwise rather obvious. But if possession trance was first known to Israel from Phoenicia, where its function was mediumistic 8 ), it would be natural for the Israelites to refer to it by the same word with which they referred to mediumistic activity in their own culture, namely nb'—even though its function in Israel was generally unrelated to prophecy. «) A. Jepsen, Nabi (Munich, 1934), pp. 7-8; A. Guillaume, pp. 114-15. ') A. R. Johnson, The Cultic Prophetin Ancient Israel (2nd edn, Cardiff, 1962), pp. 63 and 17. But on Jer. xxix 26 see below. 8 ) The best pre-Hellenistic evidence for this remains the behavior of the servant of the prince of Byblos in the Report of Wen-Amun, dated to the eleventh century. See AN ET (3rd edn), p. 26; and most recently, with commentary, H. Goedicke, The Report of Wenamun (Baltimore, 1975), pp. 53-5.

Be that as it may, it is a corollary of the preceding argument that the noun, nāb?, can also refer to a person in, or subject to, possession trance; and, specifically, that the persons encountered by Saul were not "prophets" (seers, diviners, or mediums of any kind), but simply a group in a possession trance 9 ). II If possession trance in Israel was not mediumistic, what was its function? Bourguignon generalizes that possession trances may provide subjective, expressive compensation for personal or social stresses through the emotional satisfactions provided by the possession trance experience itself; or they may provide objective instrumental compensation through a change in status resulting from the social recognition accorded the phenomenon (p. 328). " T h e cultural meaning supplied for these states and the institutional framework within which they operate vary from society to society, and thus the specific functions they fulfil vary also" (p. 3). The two passages discussed above perform different functions in their present literary contexts. 1 Sam. xix 20-24 shows how on a particular occasion David was protected from Saul by the latter's (and his messengers') succumbing to possession trance. This is an ad hoc use of the trance phenomenon in the larger narrative, and gives no hint of the general function of the trance in the society. In 1 Sam. χ 5-7 Saul's possession trance serves in the larger context as a confirming sign for him that he is the designated ruler of Israel—confirming, because possession trance is here interpreted as possession by a spirit of Yahweh in whose name he has just been anointed. Of course, for those who repeat and hear the story it is a confirming sign for them that Saul was indeed (or had been) Yahweh's appointee. At this point another text can be introduced which appears to refleet a similar phenomenon: Num. xi 16-17 and 24-5. Here Yahweh

9

) The Akkadian terminology is similarly ambiguous. Though some occurrences of mahtt seem to mean "behave wildly" (y. S. D. Walters, JBL 89 [1970], p. 79, n. 5) and an Akkadian text from Ugarit refers to such behavior by mahhū (v. J. J. M. Roberts, " A New Parallel to I Kings 18: 2 8 - 2 9 " , J B L 89 [1970], pp. 76-7), there seem to be no adequate reasons for seeing this connotation in the verb or cognate noun referring to prophecy at Mari: W. L. Moran, Bib. 50 (1969), pp. 27-8; S. D. Walters, JBL 89 (1970), p. 79. A. Malamat had already contrasted the alleged etymology of the word ("raving, frenzied") with the "sober, purposeful statements" of the Mari prophets in VTS 15 (1966), pp. 210-11.

tells Moses to gather seventy men from among Israel's elders 1υ), and to have these men stand with him at the tent of meeting. Yahweh says he will then come down and speak with Moses, and transfer some of Moses's spirit on to the men, so that they can help Moses bear the burden of (governing) the people: he will not have to manage on his own (verses 16-17). Moses does what he has been told to do, Yahweh does his part, taking some of Moses's spirit and setting it on the elders, "and as the spirit alighted on them, ìvajjitnabbeÌû·, but they never did again" (verse 25). Here we have a group being possessed by a spirit—probably not to be understood as the spirit of another person, as described in the ethnographic literature, but "some o f " the spirit which Yahweh had conferred upon Moses. The situation does not suggest or require communication of any kind u ) . The group's response to the transfer of the spirit seems to function as a confirming sign of their appointment to the new central offices 12). The ruler is portrayed as operating entirely on his own up to this point. He needs an administration. The candidates are chosen in the first instance on the basis of their ascribed roles ("elders"), but the final qualification is possession trance, here interpreted as possession by the same spirit with which the ruler is endowed. This is to be contrasted with Ex. xviii 13-27, where a similar administrative problem is treated much more rationally : the qualifications for office are character references, the offices themselves are structurally defined (see especially verses 21-2) 13). Clearly this reflects a later, more sophisticated understanding of government than the Numbers passage, where the "monarch" is portrayed as being still basically dependent on traditional authority ("elders"), although pos-

10 ) Their further designation as sôfrîm ("officers" or "clerks") is an expression of the later recognition that elders once used to perform public duties now handled by administrative officials. See M. Noth, Numbers (London and Philadelphia, 1968), p. 87 = Das vierte Buch Mose : Numeri (Göttingen, 1966), p. 78. 11 ) Noth found this "very strange in the present context", and assumed that the purpose of the present passage must be, not the relief of Moses' burden, which is developed in a "much more pertinent way" in Ex. xviii 13-27, but "the derivation of ecstatic 'prophecy' from the 'spirit' of Moses" (Noth, Numbers, p. 89 = Numeri, pp. 79-80). This necessitates emending the M T at the end of verse 25 to rfíàyāsûpú, leading to the translation: "and they did not cease (prophesying)". 12 ) N. Snaith, ed. Leviticus and Numbers (London, 1967), p. 232; J. Lindblom, Prophecy in Ancient Israel (2nd edn, Oxford and Philadelphia, 1963), p. 101, n. 80. 13 ) For a recent discussion of the tradition history of this passage see B. S. Childs, The Book of Exodus (Philadelphia, 1974) = Exodus. A Commentary (London, 1974), pp. 321 ff.

session trance seems to be an additional prerequisite for participation in the new form of government. It is also significant that in Num. xi the elders experienced the trance on this occasion "for the first and only time" (NEB). Possession trance often serves to designate persons for, and initiate them into, roles which they then normally perform without resort to such abnormal states—thus Nuer prophets 14) and Nguni diviners 15). Moreover, after initiation the latter enjoy greater power and prestige than they had previously, operating as "professionals, engaged . . . in serious and socially significant enterprises" 16). Similarly, in Haitian peasant society where "possession is a prerequisite for becoming an initiate and later a priest", the behavior confers "power in the real world outside the ritual context . . ." 17). I suggest that with the growth of monarchy in Israel there developed a demand for persons with new kinds of qualifications for new kinds of offices. Traditional authority, with its ascribed status based on the lineage system, must often have seemed inadequate, or at least inappropriate. On the other hand, achieved status and rational criteria for selecting persons to office were initially unperceived, or at least undefined. People whose expectations lay entirely within the old, traditional order were disoriented by the new. At this critical, transitional stage possession trance was adopted—perhaps from the more advanced, monarchic culture of Canaan/Phoenicia—and adapted as a means of bridging the gap between what we can see as two discontinuous, incommensurate systems; as a means of guaranteeing in Israelite eyes a person's endowment, and Yahweh's endorsement of him, for the role in question. This is not to claim that possession trance was a sufficient condition for entry into the king's service. In fact, there was probably considerable continuity between those of high traditional status and those who occupied the new positions of power in the developing royal administration—witness the elders of Num. xi, and the patronymics recorded for most of the royal officers in the lists of 2 Sam. viii 16-18, xx 23-6; 1 Ki. iv 1-6 (if these can be taken to be indicative of some traditional status). On the other hand many who experienced possession trance may not have acquired office —there is no suggestion that those encountered by Saul did so. But 14

) Ε. E. Evans-Pritchard, Nuer Religion (Oxford, 1956), p. 44. ) J. Gussler, in Bourguignon, pp. 97 ff. le ) Gussler, p. 114. 17 ) E. Bourguignon, in M. E. Spiro (ed.), Context and Meaning in Cultural Anthropology (New York, 1965), pp. 56-7. 15

for such there was a more subjective benefit. The trance experience enabled them to transcend the disorientation, the confusion, the anxiety generated by the great changes in process, and to come to terms with the new order. For such people the group may have been an important element in the experience. In this respect perhaps the groups encountered by Saul may be compared with those in Ethiopia described by S. D. Messing, which served as "a catch-all for many psychological disturbances ranging from frustrated status ambition to actual mental illness", and in which the possession cult functioned "as a form of group therapy", the devotees forming "a close-knit social group in which they find security and recognition" 18). In any case, the trance in early monarchic Israel provided, in Bourguignon's terms, both objective, instrumental compensation, and subjective, expressive compensation. If the connection (made in both 1 Sam. χ and xix) between possession trance and the proverb: "Is Saul also among the nebPtmi" is sufficiently historical to permit the latter to be interpreted: "Is Saul really one of those who have experienced possession trance?" 19), we can now understand the peculiar force of the proverb. For to question SauPs experience of the trance would be to question his qualifications, and therefore his very legitimacy as king 20). But if his rule was being challenged through a saying which denied that he had been designated by possession trance, it is equally understandable that in response stories should be circulated that portrayed him as having indeed had that experience, both at his initial designation, and, as further confirmation, when persecuting David. At the same time the composers of these accounts turned the very ammunition of the enemy to their own account. For they used Saul's experience of the trance as the occasion when the proverb used against him had been coined, thus reinterpreting it to mean the opposite of what it had originally intended; 18 ) S. D. Messing, " G r o u p Therapy and Social Status in the Zar Cult of Ethiopia", American Anthropologist 60 (1958), pp. 1120-26. 19 ) Originally implying a negative answer, and coined by Saul's enemies, David's supporters, as persuasively argued by J. Sturdy, "The Original Meaning of 'Is Saul also among the Prophets?' 1 Sam χ 11, 12; xix 24", VT 20 (1970), pp. 206-13. Cf. V. Eppstein, "Was Saul also among the Prophets?", ZAW 81 (1969), 287-304, who cautions that the explanation of the proverb must date from a later time (cf. Β. C. Birch, "The Development of the Tradition on the Anointing of Saul in 1 Sam 9:1-10:16", JBL 90 [1971], pp. 55-68). Contrast J. Lindblom, "Saul inter Prophets", AST I 9 (1973), pp. 30-41. 20 ) Cf. H. W. Hertzberg, I and II Samuel (London, 1964), p. 140 = Die Samuelbûcher (Göttingen, 1956), p. 108.

and even explained one of David's lucky escapes by having Saul seized by possession trance. But having identified the phenomenon of possession trance, and assigned it a general function on the basis of the evidence in 1 Sam. χ and Num. xi and in the light of comparative data, we must also now refer to the general theory which supports our connection of the trance with particular social and political developments, and consider the evidence for the history of the phenomenon. Again a general theoretical framework is provided by Bourguignon : Among . . . problems beyond the control of individuals arc the frcquently cataclysmic consequences of change—social, cultural, economic, and political. And when we consider the relationship of religion to change, its double role as a bulwark against change on the one hand and as a mediator or even initiator of change on the other, we often find that key individuals in this process experience altered states of consciousness (p. 4). And again: " T h e form possession trance takes in a given situation is . . . a response to cultural change, the behavior being modified as the belief system and the social structure change" 21). Whatever the origins of possession trance in Israel, it first appears to us as a group behavior, and in their present context the two Samuel references suggest some degree of institutionalization : the first group encountered by Saul are coming down from a bāmā, and Saul is directed toward them by Samuel, who appears to preside over the second group 22). These details suggest that either the traditional leadership or later prophetic circles harnessed, or aspired to harness, the developing phenomenon. In Num. xi 16-17, 24-5 the institutionalization of possession trance is explicit : specified persons have the experience on a specific occasion at a particular time and place only—and there the ruler presides. This is the more marked, when contrasted with the sequel in verses 26-9, a passage which has been appended to the earlier material of verses 24-5 23). In verse 26 it is explained that two of the seventy elders just spoken of as all having received some of Moses's 21 ) Bourguignon, p. 337. Cf. Κ. Goldammer's use of La Barre (The Ghost Dance : The Origins of Religion [New York, 1972]) : K. Goldammer, "Elemente des Schamanismus . . ." (see above, n. 3), pp. 278-9. 22 ) For a prophet presiding over a seance in which others are possessed see the ceremony described by Ε. E. Evans-Pritchard, Nuer Religion (Oxford, 1956), pp. 34-8. 23 ) M. Noth, Numbers, p. 90 = Numeri, p. 80.

spirit were in fact still in the camp. The spirit now alights on them, and they fall into a possession trance there in the camp. When word is brought to Moses, Joshua immediately says: "Stop them!" (verse 28). Moses replies: "Are you jealous for me? I wish that all Yahweh's people were subject to possession trance, that Yahweh would set his spirit on them all" (verse 29). The situation reflected in this pericope is the resistance of spirit possession to attempts to limit it to prescribed institutional settings. This is seen by some (Joshua) as a threat to the established order. It is defended by others (Moses—and the authors of the passage) as universally desirable. The issue is whether possession trance should be limited by social controls, subject, that is, to institutional sponsorship; or whether it should be autonomous. Apparently possession trance was now officially restricted to specific institutional settings, and actually enjoyed, or aspired to, by persons outside those settings. Both situations imply that possession trance no longer served the objective, instrumental purpose suggested for it earlier in this paper. Although there are no further references to possession trance in the literature (but see the discussion of prophecy below), there are other kinds of possession beliefs, well enough known, but worth briefly restating here within Bourguignon's general framework. " A belief in 'possession' may also be linked to the modification of a person's behavior, capacities, or state of health, in the absence of an altered state of consciousness". Such "alterations of capacity" may be referred to simply as possession, and may co-exist with possession trance (and visionary trance) in a society 24). Thus in Israel displays of extraordinary strength are spoken of in terms of a spirit of Yahweh overwhelming a person, as in the case of Samson, when he tore apart a lion with his bare hands (Judg. xiv 6), or threw off his bonds to kill a thousand men with the jawbone of an ass (Judg. xv 14-15). Or again the same terminology is employed when a person is consumed by unusual anger, as was Samson when the Philistines wheedled out of his bride the answer to his riddle (Judg. xiv 19), and Saul, when he heard of the Ammonites' threat to the inhabitants of Jabesh Gilead (1 Sam. xi 6)—the anger is explicitly mentioned in both cases. In 1 Sam. xviii 10 "A bad spirit of God overwhelmed Saul, wayyitnabbē>", and threw his spear at David. Here at least, it would appear, all are agreed that hitnabbP has nothing to do with prophecy. That it 24

) Bourguignon, pp. 15-17. Cf. the table on pp. 359 ff.

does not refer to the same kind of possession trance that we have been discussing is indicated by the consistent reference to a " b a d " spirit (xviii 10, xix 9, xvi 14, 15, 16, 23b—the adjective is omitted in 23a). It might seem that Saul's inordinate jealousy of David is interpreted as possession. But the passages preceding the references to the bad spirit and suggesting that motive were not originally part of the same continuous story. 1 Sam. xvi 14 simply states that the spirit of Yahweh left Saul, and a bad spirit from Yahweh plagued him, and this would originally have followed chapter xv in which Samuel rejected Saul. Thus we are left with an inordinate behavior sufficiently analogous to the better known possession trance to be described by the verb hitnabbP 25), but distinguished as possession by a bad spirit 26). Elsewhere a bad spirit is credited with upsetting good relations, as the one Yahweh sends between Abimelech and the lords of Shechem (Judg. ix 23). Ill In the preceding discussion of possession trance and other possession phenomena, it was not found necessary to refer to prophecy except when clarifying the ambiguous Hebrew terminology. None of the passages referred to involved any kind of mediumistic activity. But I shall also argue the converse, namely, that Yahwistic prophecy in Israel does not involve possession of any kind. In the remainder of the article several passages which have been thought to provide evidence of "ecstatic prophecy" in Israel will be briefly reconsidered. One body of evidence for prophetic possession trance has been seen in such passages as Is. xxi 3-4: At this my limbs writhe in anguish, I am gripped by pangs like a woman in labour. I am distraught past hearing, dazed past seeing, My mind reels, sudden convulsions seize me. (New English Bible) Apart from the fact that a first person account of a possession trance seems to be ruled out by Bourguignon's characterization (the subject does not remember his trance behavior), there is a more specific objection to this interpretation of such passages. D. R. Hillers has shown 2s ) The use of the verb in the present narrative emphasizes the reversal of Saul's rise to power. 26 ) Note further that the response at court to the first onset of the bad spirit was to have David brought in to appease—not foster—it with his music (1 Sam. xvi 16-23).

that they are examples of a much more widespread literary convention that uses such physical, as well as mental, symptoms as a means of portraying "the reaction to bad news"—see Is. xiii 7-8; Hab. iii 16; Jer. vi 22-3, xlix 23, 1 43; Ezek. xxi 11-12; and in a somewhat freer form: Ex. xv 14-16; Jer. iv 9, xxx 5-6. That this has nothing to do with prophecy as such is confirmed by the occurrence of the same literary convention in Ugaritic literature, where gods and kings react to bearers of bad news in a similar way 27). Three times a prophet is spoken of as mešuggāl "mad, wild, beside himself", an obvious reference to ecstatic states according to some scholars. Thus in Jer. xxix 24-7 a message sent by Shemaiah, an Israelite prophet in Babylon, to Zephaniah, priest in the Jerusalem temple, is quoted as holding Zephaniah responsible for locking up k0l-^îš mRšuggāÍ ûmitnabbP, and inquiring why he has not so dealt with Jeremiah. The letter was prompted by Jeremiah's message to the exiles, in which he told them to settle down in Babylon, and live a normal life, since their exile was going to last a long time (verse 28). The context is clearly concerned with prophetic conflict—compare Jeremiah's response in verses 31-2, and also in the larger context verses 8-9, 15-23. One prophet is trying to counter another by using abusive language—"any madman prophesying". Nothing in the context suggests abnormal behavior that could be indicative of actual "madness" or possession trance. In 2 Kings ix a prophet comes to the Israelite army at Ramoth Gilead, takes Jehu apart from his fellow-officers, and anoints him king. When Jehu reappears, the other officers ask him: "What did this meší1ggāl come to you f o r ? " (verse 11). As Jehu stands before them freshly anointed, he says : " Y o u know the man and his business". They protest they do not, and insist he tell them, which he then does. They immediately achnowledge him and proclaim him king (verse 13). Again there is nothing in the prophet's behavior reminiscent of madness or trance of any kind. It seems clear that the officers are sitting around bantering, and the prophet serves as a novel butt for their jokes. The awkward exchange between Jehu and them serves to sober them 28). Only then do they take the prophet seriously. 27 ) D. R. Hillers, " A Convention in Hebrew Literature: The Reaction to Bad News", Ζ AW 77 (1965), pp. 86-90. Cf. further the reaction of king Belshazzar to the writing on the wall: Dan. ν 6. 28 ) Jehu's "embarrassment" is noted by J. A. Montgomery and H. S. Gehman, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Books of Kings (Edinburgh, 1951), p. 401.

The interpretation of Hos. ix 7 is less transparent, but the phrases u>îl hannäbV mesuggäl 7 / hārûah "the prophet is stupid/inane/at a loss, the man of the spirit is mad/wild" seem to be a quotation of the people's response to Hosea 29). Since the same individual is referred to and the two adjectives seem to refer to opposite poles of human behavior, they cannot be simple descriptions. But even if the quotation is taken as a more general reference to different kinds of prophet, it remains essentially opprobrious 30). (NEB interprets the phrases as predictions of part of IsraePs punishment: "Then the prophet shall be made a fool . . .‫ 'י‬In that case, the distinction between actual prophetic behavior and that folly and madness to be suffered in the future is patent). In sum, the word mešuggāl is never used of prophets in contexts where it can be read as a neutral, descriptive term. Rather, it is used as a derogatory term in invective and levity, and as such cannot be cited in support of the view that prophets experienced possession trance or "ecstasy" 31). Guillaume headed his lecture on ecstasy with a quotation of 2 Kings iii ll-16a, remarking that the passage had been referred to "more than once" in that context (p. 290). It has remained a favorite proof-text for ecstatic prophecy. The kings of Israel and Judah approach Elisha in a military crisis, seeking an oracle from Yahweh. Elisha has them fetch a musician for him. When the musician begins to play, the " h a n d " of Yahweh comes upon Elisha, and he pronounces an oracle. The conjunction is unique 32), the text does not explicitly claim that Elisha's inspiration or Yahweh's word was a consequence of the music 33 ), and the terms used to describe Elisha's experience differ from those used in the passages where we have established clear reference to possession trance. Why then does Elisha call for music? Once again comparative evidence can be called upon to elucidate the situation. It has been observed in Haiti, where possession in a >e

29 ) H. W. Wolff, Hosea (Philadelphia, 1974), p. 155, E. Tr. of Dodekapropheton 1. Hosea (2nd edn, Neukirchen, 1965); J. W. Ward, Hosea: A Theological Commentary (New York, 1966) p. 157; J. L. Mays, Hosea (Philadelphia and London, 1969), p. 129. 30 ) Wolff: a "vehement insult" (Hosea, p. 152). Cf. Mays, Hosea, pp. 124, 130. 31 ) Note that the opponents of the prophet Muhammed maligned him by referring to him as " m a d " and possessed by spirits: W. M. Watt, Muhammad at Mecca (Oxford, 1953), p. 127. (On the word majnutt, cf. A. Guillaume, Prophecy and Divination, p. 205, where he compares mešuggāC.) 32 ) Y. Kaufmann, The Religion of Israel (Chicago, 1960; London, 1961), p. 96. 33 ) So recently H. Schweizer, Elischa in den Kriegen (Munich, 1974), pp. 147-8, and n. 90, where he cites numerous scholars who have assumed such a connection.

ritual context is expected to involve trance, that "degrees of dissociation vary from profound states of unconsciousness to dizziness to theatrical involvement to outright faking" 34). More generally, G. K. Park has written that "the drama of'possession' . . . may merely serve, like a mechanical device, to establish the apparent presence of otherwise invisible beings" 35). Given the recurring elements of irony and humor in the accounts of Elisha's dealings with the Omride kings, it would not be out of keeping for him to be portrayed as putting on a "performance" of certain features of possession trance for the benefit of the king with his assumed Phoenician leanings. Thus while it has to be admitted that the passage seems to attest to knowledge of the use of possession trance in prophecy, I would claim that it is specifically as a feature of Phoenician culture that it is introduced into this story (and perhaps indeed into the prophecy of the Omride court). Another passage which has been prominent in discussions of "ecstatic prophecy" in Israel is that which describes the behavior of the Baal prophets in the trial of gods on Mount Carmel in 1 Kings xviii. These "prophets" appeal to Baal all morning in vain, are goaded on by Elijah, and then cry louder, gash themselves till their blood flows, and "prophesy" (xviii 26-29). But there is no question of their prophesying in our sense of the term, for they are not speaking/or the god 36), but appealing to him. But does the word "prophesy" refer to their utterances at all? It seems more likely that it refers simply to their behavior 37), that is, to possession trance. However, the context makes it clear that they are not actually possessed by their god, for they can get no response of any kind from him. Rather, they are attempting to induce a response, and are doing so by going through the motions or forms of possession trance, which in this case are not the symptoms of a divine presence, but are intended as a kind of sympathetic magic, to induce the divine presence 38). Thus, while here too we have testimony to the knowledge of possession trance, no 34

) E. Bourguignon in M. E. Spiro, Context and Meaning in Cultural Anthropology (New York, 1965), p. 56. 35 ) G. K. Park, The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 93 (1963), p. 202. For the histrionic aspects of divination in general, Park's article as a whole is illuminating. Full reference: "Divination and its Social Contexts", JRAnthI 93 (1963), pp. 195-209, reprinted in W. A. Lessa and E. Z. Vogt (ed.), Reader in Comparative Religion (2nd edn, New York, 1965), pp. 382-92. 36 ) Any more than the "prophets" of the post-exilic text 1 Chr. xxv 3, who "thank and praise Yahweh". 37 ) So already Guillaume, p. 144. 38 ) J. Gray, I and II Kings (2nd edn, London, 1970), p. 399.

connection is made with prophecy 39). The behavior is histrionic, not oracular. At the same time, it must be noted that this text too is dealing with the Omride period, and reflects the authors' concern about the acceptance of Phoenician institutions—especially religious institutions—in Israel. Thus, although it is not explicitly stated here, it may well be that mediumistic possession trance was known in Israel during this period. It would have entered Israel, along with other elements of Phoenician culture, through the pro-Phoenician court, and lasted roughly as long as the Omrides. IV In the first part of this article I argued for a systematic separation of the categories "possession trance" and "prophecy" in discussions of Israelite institutions. The second part of the article attempted to elucidate the possible functions and settings of possession trance, as well as briefly reconsidering other forms of possession referred to in the Old Testament. In the third part was a review of those expressions and passages most frequently cited as evidence of "ecstatic prophecy" in ancient Israel. I conclude that possession trance is not an element of Israelite prophecy, and figures in a history of Israelite prophecy only marginally in discussions of i) the possible impact of Phoenician prophecy on Israelite institutions, especially in the Omride court, and ii) the calumny and mockery to which prophets could be subjected. 39

) So Jepscn, Nabi, p. 7—but. cf. p. 145.

P O E T I C

S T R U C T U R E R H E T O R I C

A N D I N

P R O P H E T I C

H O S E A

by JACK R. L U N D B O M Berkeley

In his Prolegomenon to George Buchanan Gray's newly reissued The Forms of Hebrew Poetrj (New York, 1972), Professor David Noel Freedman proposes that a unit of poetry in Hos. viii 9-13 be isolated on the basis of an inclusio (pp. xxxvi-xxxvii). According to Freedman, the single colon in v. 9 : For behold they have gone up to Assyria 1)

kî-hēmmâ ^ālû ‫ר‬as sûr

balances the single colon in v. 13: Behold they will return to Egypt

hēmmâ misrayim yāšûbû

Together the two constitute a normal bicolon which the poet has broken up in order to give this unit of poetry a frame. When the two cola are juxtaposed key terms balance each other nicely: hēmmâ is repeated, the perfect lālû and imperfect yāsûbû correspond to each other, while "Assyria" and " E g y p t " constitute what may very well be a fixed pair 2 ). Hosea elsewhere uses "Assyria" and " E g y p t " in parallel constructions (vii 11, ix 3, xi 5, 11, xii 2). We note too that 1 ālû ‫י‬aššûr and misrayim yāšûbû form a chiasmus. Freedman says "the two cola complement each other impressively", and so they do. The recognition that these cola could fit together in parallelism is not new. Duhm, for example, transposed the single colon of 13 .‫ע‬ so that it immediately followed the single colon of v. 9 3). Freedman's suggestion has the advantage, however, in that it explains the text as it stands. And, if correct, it provides us with important new insights into Hebrew poetry and Hebrew rhetoric. 1

) Freedman translates c<7lû as a future: "they will go up". I take this verb however to be a simple past which is how it would normally be translated. 2 ) For fixed pairs in Hebrew and Ugaritic poetry, see S. Gevirtz, Patterns in the Early Poetry of Israel (Chicago, 1963), and M. Dahood, Psalms III (Garden City, 1970), pp. 445-56. 3 ) Bernhard Duhm, Die Zwölf Propheten (Tübingen, 1910), p. 34.

The inclusio is a structural device by which one returns at the end to the point at which he began. It is widely used in both oral and written discourse of today—including poetry 4 )—and we find it in ancient discourse as well 5 ). In the Old Testament it appears frequently in Deuteronomic sermons, prophetic speeches, and in psalms 8 ). Structures in Deut. i-xxviii are of particular interest to us since they reflect the same general period as Hosea, i.e., ca. 750-700 B.C. 7 ). We see, for example, the preacher of ch. xii framing his sermon with an injunction to obedience: These are the statues and ordinances which you shall be careful to do in the land... (xiii) Every word that I command you, you shall be careful to do; you shall not add to it or take from it. (xiii 1) In his sermon on clean and unclean foods (xiv 1-21) he provides a frame by listing miscellaneous regulations at the extremities in the midst of which occur these words : For you are a people holy to Yahweh your God (v. 2) For you are a people holy to Yahweh your God (v. 21) The inclusio can also be used to frame a sub-unit of discourse that is much longer. The superscription to the book of Deuteronomy contains such an inclusio which is of the inverted type: These are the words that Moses spoke to all Israel beyond the Jordan... (il) *) Although she does not call it by this name, Barbara H. Smith recognizes this phenomenon in modern poetry; see her book Poetic Closure (Chicago, 1968), pp. 27, 53-54, 66-7. 5 ) H. Lausberg, Elemente der literarischen Rhetorik (Munich, 1963), p. 86. For structures larger than the clause or sentence classicists use the term "ring composition" ; see J. A. Notopoulos, "Continuity and Interconnexion in Homeric Oral Composition", Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 82 (1951), pp. 81-101. 6 ) M. Dahood, Psalms I (Garden City, 1966), pp. 5 et passim; James Muilenburg, Isaiah (IB), pp. 385, 392; idem, "Form Criticism and Beyond", JBL 88 (1969), pp. 9-10. ') Deut. i-xxviii I date in the reign of Hezekiah; see my article, "The Lawbook of the Josianic Reform", CBQ 38 (1976), pp. 293-302.

Beyond the Jordan, in the land of Moab, Moses undertook to explain this law. .. (15) Some years after both Hosea and the Deuteronomic preacher, in 622 B.C., the prophetess Huldah delivered an oracle to Josiah and the people of Judah in which she employed the inclusio. It too is of the inverted type: Behold I will bring / evil / upon this place. . . (2 Kings xxii 16) . . .all the evil / which I will bring / upon this place. (xxii 20) The tradition is maintained by Jeremiah as I have sought to demonstrate in my Jeremiah·. A Study in Ancient Hebrew Rhetoric (Missoula, 1975), pp. 36-60. But to return to Hosea, the inclusio in viii 9-13 is different. First of all, it is created by the break-up of a standard bicolon of poetry. I have seen only one other instance of this, viz., Jer. li 20-23 where wenippasti bekâ gôyitn we(hishatti beka)mamlâkôt (20b) balances wenippasti bekâ pahôt ûsegānim (23c)8). Otherwise such a phenomenon is rare. Freedman says the structure "is novel to say the least". This inclusion is also different in that the end does not simply repeat the beginning. Freedman speaks of complementation by which he means that both cola combine to give a more full picture than either of them gives singly. In his view the journey to Assyria lies in the future and will be a parallel experience to the future journey to Egypt, i.e., exile will be to both places 9 ). But in my view the journey to Assyria lies in the past, and the future journey to Egypt will come about as a result of the former journey. It is because messengers have gone to Assyria (instead of to Yahweh) that they will be brought back into slavery (Egypt = slavery). Hosea says virtually the same thing in ν 13-14 and vii 11-12. This is one of many variations of a common prophetic argument. Elijah told the sick Ahaziah that because he sent to Baalzebub instead of to Yahweh he would die (2 Kings i). Isaiah and Jeremiah likewise advised against foreign alliances when a rejection of Yahweh was implied (Isa. xxx 1-7, xxxi 1-5; Jer. ii 18-19). Such ventures can only bring shame (Jer. ii 8

) Jeremiah·. A Study in Ancient Hebrew Rhetoric, pp. 91-2. ) Professor Freedman has expressed his views more fully to me in subsequent private correspondence. 9

36-37). Thus in my opinion the cola do more than complement each other; the final colon advances the thought. The two taken together create a prophetic argument: Because you have gone to Assyria you will therefore return to Egypt. Jeremiah puts the inclusio to this same use later on. Freedman expressed the hope that his lone example might be "a harbinger of others not yet detected". We should like then to draw attention to another structure of precisely the same type. It is found in Hos. iv 11-14, where the single colon of vv. 11-12: New wine takes away the mind of my people

tîrâšyiqqah-lēb cammî

has its counterpart in the single colon of v. 14: A people without sense will be thrust down

1

am 10 •yābînyillābēt

Editorial expansion at the end of 10 and beginning of 11 obscures the upper limit of the opening colon. Our reconstruction follows Eiliger in BHS and Wolff 10 ) who omit 5*nût weyaytn we from the beginning of 11 and include cammî from 12 (lxx: καρδία λαου μου). Most translators and commentators take ,‫־‬ammî to be the subject of 12a. But with our reconstruction the colon becomes 7 syllables which is the same number of syllables in 14c if the initial waw is omitted. The syllable count in viii 9-13 is also 7 and 7 (Freedman, p. xxxvii). Here too we note that earlier commentators with a feeling for poetry became uneasy at the sight of a single colon. D u h m took 11 and placed it before 14c11). W. R. Harper, who made the text of Hosea into strophes, accomodated 11 by omitting part of 12 and placed 14c way back with v. 412). At least D u h m recognized that 11 and 14c go together, but as we can see there is again no need to rearrange the text. This is simply another instance of a bicolon being broken up in order to frame an intervening unit. When juxtaposed these cola are likewise seen to have balancing terms: lām is repeated and yiqqah-lēb corresponds roughly to lā^-yābîn. (In Prov. χ 13 leb is balanced with the N-stem participle nābân, while in xi 12 and xv 21 it is balanced with tebûnôtjtebûnâ.) Hosea describes in both instances a people whose mind has been dulled. We have another chiasmus too : 10

) H. W. Wolff, Hosea (BKAT, (Neukirchen, 1961), p. 89 [E. Tr. (Hermeneia), p. 72]. ‫״‬ ) Die Zwölf Propheten, p. 27. 12 ) The Structure of the Text of the Book of Hosea (Chicago, 1905), pp. 14, 16; cf. Harper, Amos and Hosea (ICC, Edinburgh, 1910), pp. 253, 260.

"takes away the mind/of my people" and "a people/without sense". The statements at the beginning and end of the unit may be independent wisdom sayings as some commentators suggest 13 ), but in this context they combine to form another prophetic argument: New wine makes a people drunk, and a drunken people can easily be felled. In both iv 11-14 and viii 9-13 the identification of the inclusio aids in delimiting the poetic unit. In ch. iv most commentators begin a unit at 11; only Cheyne and Mays, however, end at 1414). Edwin M. Good concludes his unit at 14 but before the final colon 15 ). Wolff extends his unit to 15. In ch. viii none of the modern commentators begins at v. 9 while v. 14 is thought to be either the conclusion of the unit or else a later addition 16 ). Are iv 11-14 and viii 9-13 whole poems or are they sub-units within poems that are larger? It is hard to know. I am inclined to take both as separate and originally independent poems, though I readily concede that the delimitation of poems in Hosea is something about which we still know relatively little. Having found two poems now with the same rhetorical structure at beginning and end, we will proceed to a closer and more complete comparison. This can be done when the poems are laid out in full : Hosea iv 11-14 11 New wine takes away the mind of my people. 12 They inquire of their thing of wood, and their staff gives them oracles. For a spirit of whoredom has led them astray, and they have gone a-whoring out from under their God. 13 On the tops of the mountains they sacrifice, and on the hills they burn offerings, Under oak, poplar and terebinth because their shade is good! Therefore your daughters play the whore, and your sons' brides commit adultery. 13

) Harper (ICC, p. 260) cites the earlier opinion of P. Ruben, although Ruben took both 11 and 14c as marginal glosses; see also J. L. Mays, Hosea (OTL,Philadelphia and London, 1969), p. 72. 14 ) T. K. Cheyne, The Book of Hosea (Cambridge Bible, 1884), ad loc.\ Mays, OTL, ad loc. 15 ) "The Composition of Hosea", SEA 31 (1966), p. 35. le ) Wolff, Β ΚAT, pp. 174-5, 188 [Hermeneia, pp. 136, 146]; Mays, OTL, pp. 123-4.

14 I will not punish your daughters when they play the whore, nor you sons' brides when they commit adultery; For those men over there go aside with whores, and sacrifice with sacred prostitutes. A people without sense will be thrust down! Hosea viii 9-13 9

10

11 12 13

For behold they have gone up to Assyria A wild ass off by himself, Ephraim has hired lovers. Even though they hire among the nations, now I will gather them up. So that they soon writhe under the burden of the officials' king.17) Indeed Ephraim has multiplied altars ; he uses them for sinning, altars for sinning. Though I write for him multitudes of my laws, they are regarded as something strange. Sacrifices they love, so they sacrifice 18) flesh and they eat. Yahweh takes no delight in them. Now he will remember their inquity, and punish their sins. Behold they will return to Egypt!

It is now possible to see that similarity in structure extends beyond the broken bicolon which opens and closes each poem. The inner bodies of each poem are the same length: 7 bicolic or tricolic lines. If the broken bicolon is counted as one complete line then each poem is 8 lines. Of the two iv 11-14 is the more regular. All its lines are bicolic, and with the exception of 13b, all are in good parallelism. In viii 9-13, vv. 11 and 13a are tricola. Earlier scholars deleted mi%behôt lahäto* (11) and yhwh /0' rāsām (13a), but now most prefer to leave both in the text, which I believe is correct. The parallelism of this poem is not what it is in iv 11-14, but the body still seems to be made up of bicolic and tricolic lines. The centers of each poem are perhaps worthy of special comment. V. 13b is the center of iv 11-14, and it is the only bicolon in the poem 17 ) The M T here is incomprehensible; translation follows Wolff, Hermeneia, p. 133. " ) M T again difficult; see Wolff (ibid.).

to lack parallelism. Instead Hosea embellishes his preceding remark with asyndeton: "oak, poplar and terebinth 5 '. This emphasizes how many and varied are the places where Israel goes aside to engage in illicit cultic rites. Nils W. Lund in his Chiasmus in the New Testament (Chapel Hill, 1942) showed how large chiastic structures often contained triplets in the center (pp. 57, 199, 201, 274). Here too we have a triplet. There is no triplet in the center line of viii 9-13, which is v. 11, but one does find embellishment of another sort. The phrase mit(behôt lahâtô‫—י‬which as we have said should not be deleted— picks up both lahäto1 in the second colon and mi%behöt in the first. This might not be significant except for the fact that the poem does not otherwise build on repetition 19 ). There would seem to be at least some indication, then, that Hosea uses the centers of his poems for embellishment. I offer this only as a provisional conclusion which further research can perhaps corroborate. Many of the Jeremianic poems have an identifiable center in which balancing techniques are seen to be operative 20 ). That Hosea should compose two poems so much alike certainly deserves our attention. Again, to use Jeremiah for purposes of comparison, I have found the same to be true with some of his poems once the units are properly delimited and the structures are made plain. Poems have the same number of lines, the same rhetorical structure, and sometimes the same words or even the same sounds in identical collocations 21 ). We know of course that modern poets and songwriters repeat structures from one composition to another, and so it should occasion no surprise in us to find the ancients doing precisely the same thing. A syllable count of both poems indicates that the overall rhythms, however, are different. The average number of syllables per colon in iv 11-14 is between 9 and 10, while in viii 9-13 it is between 7 and 9. Some cola in the latter have as few as 4 and 5 syllables. Only the opening and closing cola of both poems correspond with a syllable count of 7. A final word now about prophetic rhetoric. In both poems Hosea has but one objective. He must confront the people with their apostasy and bring to them Yahweh's word of judgement. The indict19

) The repetition in %ibhê habhābayyi%behû (13a)—whatever that means—is of a different sort and does not provide the type of embellishment we have here in 11. 20 ) They are poems with chiastic structures however; ci. Jeremiah: A Study in Ancient Hebrew Rhetoric, pp. 70-96. 21 ) Ibid., pp. 68, 78-82.

ment in iv 11-14 is for foreign worship—Assyrian perhaps, maybe Canaanite, or a combination of both. Wooden idols and cultic prostitution, regardless of whose influence it comes under, are abominations in the sight of Yahweh. The indictment continues through v. 13. In 14ab, which concludes the body of the poem, Yahweh states whom it is he will not judge, viz., the young women. Judgement comes at the end: " A people without sense will be thrust down!" But even here Hosea speaks only in general terms. He says "a people". Yet when linked up with "my people" above, the conviction becomes quite specific. In viii 9-13 apostasy consists of a political alliance with Assyria together with the cultic practices which this alliance has forced upon the people. The indictment continues through 13a, although we must leave open the interpretation of v. 10 which is corrupt. The important point is that judgement is again saved for the end, coming in 13b where it is stated first in general terms: " N o w he will remember their iniquity, and punish their sins", and then made specific in the final colon: "Behold they will return to Egypt!" Yet to the end Hosea speaks in partially veiled terms. " E g y p t " most likely refers here to Assyria, which, after all, is where the exile will be. Assyria, he says, will be another "Egypt". The inclusio, with its tying together of beginning and end, gives a more precise statement of judgement, i.e., that the messengers who have gone to Assyria with their tribute money, paying to her the wages of a whore as it were, will later be forced to travel this same road again when Israel is taken into captivity. The end will be like the beginning: The journey into slavery will repeat the journey with the tribute. Both arguments contain their subtleties and not everyone in Hosea's audience is likely to grasp them. Nevertheless, I think we can still presuppose a measure of sophistication on the part of some. These people, after all, were conditioned to poetic parallelism, which is to say they expected cola to come in twos and threes. If Hosea begins his poem then with a single colon, another will be anticipated. To postpone completion is of course to create expectation. Only when that final colon comes will the attentive listener be satisfied. And if the listener is accustomed to a rhetoric which ties the end in with the beginning, a rhetoric exemplified in passages like those from Deuteronomy which we saw earlier, he might reasonably be expected to put the two parts of Hosea's argument together. From Hosea's point of view, breaking up cola in this manner

is not done merely for the sake of novelty, although I suppose we cannot rule out this motive entirely. Like the other prophets Hosea had a difficult message to deliver. The reason he postpones his main point is so that he will not lose his audience. The Deuteronomic preacher, we must remember, had only to admonish and to warn. For him then the inclusio was intended mainly to restore focus and to emphasize key points. But for Hosea the inclusio functioned as an argumentative device, used to convey to the people Yahweh's terrible message of divine judgement.

T H E T H E

P R O P H E C I E S

F A L L

O F

O F

I S A I A H

J E R U S A L E M

I N

A N D 587

B.C.

by R. E. C L E M E N T S Cambridge

On first reflection it might appear strange to consider the question of the prophecies of Isaiah and the fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonians in 587 B.C., with the subsequent destruction of the temple there. Yet there are a number of factors which suggest that there is an important connection, even though the latest prophecies delivered by Isaiah cannot be dated much after 701 B.C., and the interval of time between these and the fall of Jerusalem would therefore have been more than a century. We know that prophecy was regarded as a living word from God, and it is evident from the way in which the Deuteronomic Historian interprets prophecy that he regarded it as nothing strange that a prophetic threat should have been fulfilled with quite remarkable exactness almost three centuries after it had been delivered (cf. 1 Kings xiii 2 with 2 Kings xxiii 16) 1 ). Furthermore, it is clear from the complex way in which the prophetic books have been compiled over a very long period of time that they were the subject of further reflection and adaptation long after the original prophet had died. Nowhere is this more evident than in the case of the book of the prophet Isaiah. We may adduce a number of important considerations which point to the acceptance of the view that the present shape and structure of the book of Isaiah owes a considerable debt to the belief that a connection was to be seen between certain of Isaiah's prophecies and the fall of Jerusalem in 587 2). The first of these is to be found, not in the book of Isaiah itself, but rather in that of his contemporary, Micah of Moresheth, and in a quotation from Micah set in the book of Jeremiah. Micah had declared in simple and unequivocal terms: 1

) Cf. G. von Rad, Deuteronomium-Studien (Göttingen, 1947), pp. 55 ff. = E.tr. Studies in Deuteronomy (London, 1953), pp. 78 ff. 2 ) The significance of this point for understanding the book of Isaiah is especially pointed out by P. R. Ackroyd, " T h e Vitality of the Word of God in the Old Testament", Annual of the Swedish Theological Institute 1 (1962), p. 19.

Therefore on your account Zion shall become a ploughed field; Jerusalem will be reduced to rubble 3 ), and the temple hill will become tree-covered hillocks 4) (Mic. iii 12).

According to Jer. xxvi 16-19 the tradition of this threat given by Micah was cited by the elders of Judah at the time when Jeremiah was accused by "the priests and the prophets" of Judah of having spoken treasonably against Jerusalem by foretelling the destruction of the temple. The present form of the narrative contained in chapter xxvi of the book of Jeremiah is indicative of its having been composed at a time after 587, when the temple had already been destroyed by the occupying Babylonian forces 5). The very fact of its citation, attributed to the elders of the city, shows that Micah's prophecy from more than a century before was thought to be relevant to what had taken place in 587 B.C; otherwise there could have been no point in citing it as an example of true prophecy 6). By the time it had come to be quoted in Jer. xxvi it was evidently felt to have been fulfilled, even though the mention of Hezekiah's repentance at the time when Micah had first uttered it (Jer. xxvi 19) had occasioned a delay in its implementation. A comparable postponement of a threat uttered by a prophet is said to have been brought about much earlier by Ahab's repentance (1 Kings xxi 27-29). When we turn to the prophecies of Isaiah there are certainly clear instances of his having preached sharp and incisive threats against the city and inhabitants of Jerusalem, although not specifically ineluding a threat of the destruction of the temple (cf. Isa. i 21-26, iii 6-15, iii 16-iv 1, ν 8-23, etc.). Most probably these threats are to be placed in the earliest period of the prophet's activity and belong to the time of Ahaz's reign, after this king had sent his fateful appeal to the king of Assyria for help in resisting the Syro-Ephraimite alfiance (2 Kings xvi 8 f.). However, it is not only the fact that individual prophecies of Isaiah 3

) Reading ^iyyîm with Jer. xxvi 18. ) Retaining the plural bâmôt-, cf. Mic. i 5. 5 ) For the importance of the Jeremiah narrative in witnessing to the history of interpretation of Micah's prophecy cf. H. W. Wolff, Mit Micha Reden. Prophétie einst und heute (Munich, 1978), p. 95. See also J. L. Mays, Micah (London, 1976), p. 92. Mays relates the original prophecy to the time of the Assyrian threat in 701 B.C. e ) Cf. further G. Wanke, Untersuchungen %ur sogenannten Baruchschrift, BZ A W 122 (Berlin, 1971), pp. 77 ff., 156, 4

threatened the destruction of Jerusalem which prompts some consideration of whether they came to be viewed in the sixth century B.C. as a foretelling of the destruction wrought by the army of Nebuchadnezzar. A very clear and explicit link between Isaiah's preaching and the event of the fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonians is made in the narrative of the sending of emissaries from Merodach-baladan to Hezekiah, in which Isaiah plays a role (2 Kings xx 12-19) 7). I have already elsewhere examined the presuppositions and purpose of this distinctive narrative, and have argued that it must be regarded as having been composed after the fall of Jerusalem in 598 B.C. 8 ). It has been composed as a sequel to the story of Jerusalem's deliverance from Sennacherib (2 Kings xviii 17—xix 37 = Isa. xxxvi 1— xxxvii 38) in order to show that Isaiah's prophecies were thought to be related in some way to what had happened to Jerusalem under the hand of Nebuchadnezzar. A sixth-century writer, working with inherited material about Isaiah, had clearly wanted to show that the tragic events of his own days could be understood more fully with the help of the prophecies of Isaiah. Yet another factor also points in the direction of our acceptance of the conclusion that ancient Israelite scribes saw some sort of connection between certain prophecies given by Isaiah and the destruction that came upon Jerusalem in 587 B.C. This is to be found in the presence of a number of interpretative comments in chapters i—xxxv of the book of Isaiah which can best be regarded as glosses added to the tradition of Isaiah's prophecies in order to show that they had received their fulfilment at the time when the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem reached their lowest ebb. The secondary nature of these additions has not been recognized by every commentator, as we can hardly expect to be the case, but in many of them this must be held to be reasonably clear. In most instances considerations of form and content indicate their secondary nature. What remains less clear is the conclusion that they were added to the book as part of a fairly homogeneous redaction in the wake of the events of 587. Yet their emphasis upon the horror of the events that have overtaken Judah, and their sense that these had been brought on by the resort to idolatry and a failure to trust in Yahweh, and that such a catastrophe had been foretold by Isaiah, strongly suggest that this was the time of 7

) Cf. P. R. Ackroyd, "An Interpretation of the Babylonian Exile. A Study of 2 Kings 20, Isaiah 38-39", SJT 27 (1974), pp. 329-52. 8 ) Cf. my study Isaiah and the Deliverance ofJerusalem (Sheffield, 1980).

their origin. N o other event brought such misery as did this, in the centuries that followed Isaiah's preaching. Even on very general grounds, therefore, it may be argued that the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 B.C. is likely to have provided the historical backcloth to comments which clearly presuppose that some dire calamity has overtaken Judah. In general, what we are concerned to examine here is not whether we can show to be secondary passages that have hitherto been regarded as authentic to Isaiah. More simply it is to ask whether we can discern traces of a connected and relatively systematic process of redaction in passages which have already, for the most part, been seen to be secondary for formal and stylistic reasons. Already, in fact, we may note that the efforts to trace the redactional history of the book of Isaiah by H. Barth 9) and J. Vermeylen 10) have been led to recognize such a connection between Isaiah's preaching and the destruction of Jerusalem in 587. We may also point out two very prominent characteristics of the present shape of the book of Isaiah which may be illuminated, if not fully explained, by a recognition of this connection with the destruction brought upon Judah by Nebuchadnezzar and his forces. The first of these is the obvious one that, in its canonical shape, the book of Isaiah includes a substantial "Babylonian" section in chapters xl—lxvi which does not, at first appraisal, appear to have much to do with the "Assyrian" chapters of the book which precede it. The second point is to be found in the peculiar fact that a series of sharply pointed threats against Jerusalem, intimating its military defeat, is to be found in ii 6—iv 1. As it now stands this has obviously been surrounded by a noticeably secondary preface and postscript of a reassuring nature in ii 1-5 and iv 2-6. The older threatening prophecies have evidently been brought together and given a position of prominence in advance of the major collection of prophetic sayings from Isaiah which so clearly begins in ν 1 ff. Every indication therefore points in the direction that at some stage in its redactional history the book of Isaiah was given a dramatic introduction which contained the most explicit threats of the military defeat and downfall of Judah and Jerusalem. The most likely expianation of this would appear to be that it was precisely these prophe9 ) Die Jesaja-worte in der Josiane! t. Israel und Assur als Thema einer produktiven Neuinterpretation der Jesajaüberlieferung (Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1977), pp. 285 ff. 10 ) Du prophète Isaie à l'apocalyptique. Isaie, I-XXXV, miroir d'un demi-millénaire d'expérience religieuse en Israël 1-2 (Paris, 1977-8), especially pp. 693 ff., for Vermeyen's summary of exilic (Deuteronomic) additions,

des which were felt to have acquired a special meaning in view of what had happened to Jerusalem. In this case the event of 587 stands out as the obvious presupposition for such a distinctive editorial action. We may proceed therefore to consider in detail the most prominent of those short comments and additions in Isa. i—xxxv which can most plausibly be ascribed to the post-587 redaction of the collection. Even though we may admit that some doubt and uncertainty must remain over some verses, nevertheless, it may be argued that the resultant picture is surprisingly coherent. The first of such passages is to be found in Isa. i 9 : I f Yahweh of hosts had not left us a few survivors, we should have been like Sodom, and become like Gomorrah (Isa. i 9) u ) .

The purpose of the comment is clearly to offer some element of alleviation of the preceding threat {yv. 5-8), and to suggest the idea of a remnant through whom the future would be secured, even though the precise term "remnant" (Heb. š^ār) is not used 12). In some respects, although the secondary character of this brief addition may be recognized in view of the way in which it softens the sense of dire calamity portrayed in the preceding verses, it differs from the further verses which we are to consider on account of this hopeful character. Either we must place it late in the exilic period, when the message of hope had had time to become re-established, or earlier still in Josiah's reign. The most striking feature of most of the glosses with which we are concerned is their emphasis upon the immensity of the sufferings which have come upon Judah—Jerusalem, and the faithlessness and idolatry which had occasioned them. This latter characteristic is certainly to be found very much in evidence in Isa. ii 18-19, the next passage with which we are concerned. The whole question of the structure and composition of Isa. ii 6—22 is a complex one, since the unit appears to possess an Isaianic nucleus, which has subsequently been worked over relatively extensively. ‫״‬

) The secondary nature of this verse is indicated by the fact that the reference to Sodom and Gomorrah appears to have been suggested by the mention of these cities in the following verse. 12 ) This verse is cited by the apostle Paul in Romans ix 29 as a basic prophetic affirmation of the promise of a saving remnant.

Very possibly this working over was undertaken in the wake of the events of 587 B.C.: And the idols shall utterly pass away. And men shall enter the caves of the rocks and the holes of the ground, from before the terror of Yahweh, and from the glory of his majesty, when he rises to terrify the earth (Isa. ii 18 f.).

The two verses which immediately follow are clearly a yet further addition, which simply reiterates the basic theme of the awefulness of the punishment which Yahweh will inflict upon his people and of the shame and bitterness which men will feel on account of their resort to idolatry : In that day men will cast forth their idols of silver and their idols of gold, which they made for themselves to worship, to the moles and to the bats, to enter the caverns of the rocks and the clefts in the crags, from before the terror of Yahweh, and from the glory of his majesty, when he rises to terrify the earth (Isa. ii 20 f.).

Considerable agreement has come to be felt in recent years over the recognition that the two verses Isa. vi 12-13 form an addition to the original call-narrative of the prophet. In particular their sense that, even after a period of fearful devastation, "the land" will thereafter be compelled to suffer a further period of destruction would appear to indicate the impact of Babylonian imperialism after that of Assyria: And Yahweh will remove men far away, and there will be great desolation in the land. And, even though a tenth part should remain in it, it will be burned again, like a terebinth or an oak, which is cast out like the standing pole of a high place 13) (Isa. vi 12-13).

The final clause of v. 13c " T h e holy seed is its stump", is undoubedly a still later, hopeful, addition. 13 ) For the secondary nature of these two verses cf. H. WÌ1dberger, ]esaja 1-12 (Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1972), pp. 241, 257 f.; H. Barth, pp. 195 f. See also O. H. Steck, "Bemerkungen zu Jesaja 6", BZ, NF 16 (1972), p. 191, note. My translation follows 1QIs a 's reading mslkt msbt bmh.

A further post-587 addition is to be found in Isa. viii 19-22, but must be understood to consist of no less than three separate comments. It is the longest of these units, in vv. 21-22, which particularly concerns us here: And one will pass through it 14), hard pressed and hungry; and because he is hungry, he will become angry, and will curse his king and his God. Then, whether he turns his face upwards, or looks down to the earth, everywhere he will see trouble and darkness—distressing blackness, and intense gloom, without a ray of light 15) (Isa. viii 21-22).

The preceding verses, 19-20, can also with strong probability be related to the post-587 situation on account of their special emphasis upon the false avenues of religious knowledge to which the people had turned, with a corresponding neglect of the teaching (Heb. tôrâh) and testimony (Heb. teÍûdâtì) given to the people by Yahweh through his prophet. However, it is verses 21-22 which have a special interest, since their reference to the cursing of the " k i n g " shows that this addition cannot have been made very long after 587, after which time there could have been no king whom the distressed population could curse. The identity of the location that is referred to simply by the suffix to the preposition " t h r o u g h " is not clear. Either the city of Jerusalem itself is intended, or otherwise we should need to think of the "land", as referred to in vi 11. What is striking is the idea that the judgement upon the land and the city, which had been threatened in the preceding two chapters, is sensed to have been implemented, and a deep concern is felt to show the reader how dire and fearful this had been. To this extent the comment both intensifies the content of the picture that the original prophecy had sketched, and at the same time shows that this had been realized in events that had occurred. Further emphasis upon the idolatrous conduct of the people of Judah is to be found in xvii 7-9. Here too we find two separate comments of a similar character, and we need concern ourselves only with the first of them. 14 ) The reference of the suffix to the preposition bāh is not explicit, since there is no immediate antecedent. Very probably the reference is to "the land", the desolation of which is foretold in vi 11. Otherwise we should refer it to the city of Jerusalem. 15 ) Reading minnôgah instead of menuddāh.

In that day men will look to their Creator, and their eyes will have regard to the Holy One of Israel; they will no longer pay attention to the altars which their own hands have made, nor will they have regard to what their own fingers have fashioned, whether Asherim or altars of incense (Isa. xvii 7-8).

The emphasis here upon the worship of images and the resort to illicit forms of cultus, especially the burning of incense, appears to be a marked characteristic of this post-587 redactional material. Its aim clearly seems to be to provide some kind of theodicy which would show why such massive destruction had to be inflicted upon Judah. A more general comment upon the nature of the destruction brought by the Babylonians follows in v. 9. comparing the fate of Judah with that which the land had suffered under its pre-Israelite inhabitants: In that day your 16) fortified cities will become like the deserted ruins of the Hivites 17) and the Amorites, which they abandoned from before the Israelites; and there will be desolation (Isa. xvii 9).

It would be quite wrong to attempt to interpret these brief comments and additions as though they constituted new and independent prophecies, whether we ascribe them to the original prophet, or, as must surely be the case, to later editors. Rather they are to be seen as fuller amplifications and interpretations of the prophecies to which they have been appended. In this case it is the central importance of the original prophecy in Isa. xvii 1-6, directed against the alliance of Israel and Damascus in the years 735—733 B.C., which has called forth these later comments. What they achieve is the inclusion of a stronger element of explanation and motivation for the threat of judgement contained in the original prophecy. In view of the central importance of the period of Babylonian domination of Judah in the years from 605 to 538 B.C., with the two crushing defeats inflicted on Judah in the years 598 and 587, it is not surprising that attempts have been made to interpret Isaiah's prophecies against the background of such events. In the case of the oracles against foreign nations and cities, there are strong indications that the original Isaianic nucleus of such prophecies has been much expanded in order to take account of the impact of the Babylonian conquests. In one instance, that of Isa. xxiii 13, this is quite explicit. The antecedent prophecy against Tyre and Sidon in xxiii 1—12 must cer1e 17

) Reading with LXX mä'-uzzßk instead of ) Reading hahiwwt on the basis of the L X X ; cf. Β HS.

tainly belong to the neo-Assyrian period. The comment that has then been added in v. 13 simply refers the original prophecy to the Babylonian era, on the assumption that it still remained valid for this later age : Behold the land of the Chaldeans! This is the people; it was not Assyria. They gave Tyre over to the wild beasts. They set up their siege-towers and razed her towers to the ground. They made her a ruin 18) (Isa. xxiii 13).

In spite of the obscurity of the text the overall purpose of the redactor is clear in showing that the prophecy had been fulfilled, but at the hands of the Babylonians, not the Assyrians. If this is the case here, in a clear example, then it further suggests that it has been a similar redactional interest that has occasioned the extensive elaboration of prophecies concerning Babylon in chapters xiii and xiv. From an original eighth century prophecy in xxii 2-3, which could well have originated with Isaiah, a whole sequence of prophecies outlining the history of Babylon's impact upon Judah then follows in xiii 4 ff. These continue the story down to the time of the Deutero-Isaianic prophecies of chapters xl—lv in xiii 17—22, and conclude with the magnificent dirge over the final collapse of Babylonian imperial power in xiv 4-21. We need not at this point enter into the discussion whether similar efforts at incorporating features relating to the Babylonian conquests have been made in the oracles concerning Moab in chapters xv-xvi, and Arabia in chapter xxi. In many respects the most striking and impressive of all the redactional additions that were made to the book of Isaiah in the wake of the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 B.C. are to be found in chapter xxii. Here we are faced with two original Isaianic prophecies delivered in the immediate aftermath of the surrender of the city to Sennacherib in 701 B.C. (2 Kings xviii 13-16). When the population of the city in Hezekiah's time had congratulated themselves upon their escape from the ravages of battle, Isaiah had condemned them in two sharply worded warnings (Isa. xxii 1-4, 12-14). Both of these prophecies affirm that the citizens had deeply offended Yahweh by their actions, and strongly intimate that they must therefore expect further 18

) The text is obscure at several points (cf. BHS), but the general sense seems assured.

judgement from him. The concluding threat in v. 14 is unmistakably clear: Yahweh of hosts has revealed (his word) in my ears : "Surely this w r o n g will n o t be forgiven you till you die", says the Lord Yahweh of hosts (Isa. xxii 14).

It is this plain message of coming judgement, given by Isaiah after the events of 701 B.C., which has made these two prophecies of very special importance to the editors of the book. In the aftermath of the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in 587 B.C. a striking contrast appeared to have presented itself. Jerusalem had been spared in Hezekiah's time from the armies of Sennacherib, and this event had come to be viewed in a very positive, and almost euphoric, light (so the narrative of 2 Kings xviii 17-xix 37) 19). Yet, when faced with the threat from Babylon, no such deliverance had been afforded by Yahweh to his city. Why had God appeared to act differently in the face of the comparable threats? Already we have noted that the narrative of 2 Kings xx 12-19 ( = Isa. xxxix) had been composed in order to show that some occasion of misguided conduct on Hezekiah's part had contributed to the defeat of 598 B.C. N o w Isaiah's two prophecies emanating from the aftermath of the events of 701 appeared to offer further confirmation that some sin on the part of the citizens of Jerusalem had evoked from Yahweh the need for further and fuller judgement in the years that had followed. There can be no doubt therefore, that in Isa. xxii 5-8a and vv. 8b-ll we have two additions designed to relate Isaiah's threat to the situation of Jerusalem's fall in 587 B.C. This is made all the more probable by the fact that in Isa. xxii 6 we have an explicit reference to the armies of Elam and Kir, which can much more readily be referred to the armies of Nebuchadnezzar than to those of Sennacherib: F o r the Lord Y a h w e h of hosts has a day of tumult and trampling and confusion in the valley of vision; a breaking d o w n of walls, and a shouting to the mountains. A n d Elam bore the quiver with chariots and horsemen, and Kir displayed the shield. 19

) The origin and purpose of this narrative is discussed in my study referred to in note 8 above. Cf. also B. S. Childs, Isaiah and the Assyrian Crisis (London, 1967), pp. 69 ff.

Y o u r choicest valleys were full of chariots, and h o r s e m e n assembled at the gates ; F o r he ( G o d ) has taken away the c o v e r i n g of J u d a h (Isa. xxii 5-8a).

The reference to the "breaking down of walls" indicates that an event in which Jerusalem had been violently attacked is referred to, which can only have been the Babylonian attack in 587. Furthermore, the belief that this event represented the long foretold "day of Yahw e h " reflects the interpretation found in Ezek. vii 7, which is even more fully related to the tragedy of 587 B.C. in Isa. ii 12-22, an original Isaianic utterance which has been substantially expanded. The concluding comment in Isa. xxii 8a is particularly illuminating: "For he (God) has taken away the covering of Judah". The meaning is clearly that Yahweh had refused to protect Jerusalem from Nebuchadnezzar, as earlier he was believed to have done against the threat from Sennacherib. The second of the post-587 additions to Isa. xxii is equally interesting for the way in which it draws upon a particular theme of Isaiah's own invective against Jerusalem—the trust in military strength, rather than in Yahweh (cf. Isa. vii 3, xxxi 1)—in order to show why Jerusalem fell: I n that day you looked to the weapons of the H o u s e of the Forest, and you saw that the breaches of the city of D a v i d w e r e many, and you collected the waters of the lower pool, and y o u c o u n t e d the houses of Jerusalem, and you b r o k e d o w n the houses to fortify the wall. Y o u made a reservoir between the t w o walls f o r the water of the old p o o l . But you did n o t look to him w h o did it, n o r have regard f o r him w h o planned it long ago (Isa. xxii 8 b - l l ) .

Particular interest attaches to the circumstantial detail concerning the fate of the walls and houses of Jerusalem under siege, and the general accusation, derived from Isaiah's prophecies, that the population had shown a complete lack of trust in Yahweh. The notion that God had "planned" (cf. Isa. xxx 1) the city's destruction long ago then relates very effectively to the initial prophecy in Isa. xxii 1-4. Overall therefore we can see here a striking attempt on the part of the post-587 redactors to find an explanation for the tragic events of that year with the help of Isaiah's prophecies. The last of the post-587 additions that have been made to Isa. xxii is interesting for the remarkable way in which it represents the final stage of a process of redactional interpretation applied to a specific prophecy. The original, and certainly authentic, Isaianic saying is to

be found in Isa. xxii 15-18. It was addressed to an unnamed steward who has, secondarily, been identified with Shebna the secretary, who appears prominenently in the narrative account of Jerusalem's deliverance from Sennacherib (Isa. xxxvi 3,11, etc.). Very probably this identification took place along with the expansion of the original prophecy in vv. 19-23. This expansion has evidently been made with the intention of magnifying the steward's office in association with the royal house of David (Isa. xxii 22), and may best be ascribed, along with other such additions, to Josiah's reign. The purpose is not entirely clear, but it appears to have been a desire to show that a direct connection existed between the divine support for the Davidic dynasty and the general welfare of Jerusalem and Israel. What must be regarded as a quite circumstantial prophecy has thereby been elaborated into a more general promise concerning the person of Eliakim and the future role of the Davidic dynasty. Our immediate concern is with the fact that a yet further addition has been made in v. 24, affirming symbolically the precarious nature of this dependence of Israel upon an individual of the royal house. To this has then been added a threat that this dependence will prove too great and that all the trust that has been placed in this individual will prove vain and illusory: I n that day, says Y a h w e h of hosts, the p e g that was fastened in a sure place will give w a y ; and it will be cut d o w n and fall, and the b u r d e n that was u p o n it will b e cut off, f o r Y a h w e h has s p o k e n (Isa. xxii 25).

We can scarcely doubt that what began as a prophecy regarding an unknown individual has subsequently been interpreted as a foretelling of the fate of the royal house of Judah. The time of its fall was in 587 when, with Zedekiah's removal from his throne in Jerusalem, the end of the centuries long reign of the Davidic family over Judah was brought to an end. This event had clearly happened by the time that this redactional comment was added at the end of Isa. xxii. Overall therefore the chapter manages very remarkably to find in Isaiah's prophecies a basis for understanding and interpreting the tragedy of Jerusalem's destruction in 587 B.C., and the ending of the reign of the house of David over Israel in that same year. Prophecy has been used to provide a theodicy, explaining the necessity for events which otherwise appeared to contravene the established expectations concerning the purposes of divine providence.

It is in no way a new suggestion that there are to be found in a substantial number of redactional additions made in Isa. i-xxxv interpretations which have been intended to associate authentic Isaianic sayings with the events that took place in Judah in 587 B.C. Most critical commentators working in this century have reckoned on the presence of a number of such additions. What we have been especially concerned to undertake is to find out if we can discern in such additions a relatively coherent and consistent pattern in this redactional work. The passages that have been dealt with above have all, for one reason or another, been noted by several commentators as secondary in their present contexts. In many cases the use of the familiar connective formula "in that day" further strengthens such a contention. N o r should it be felt in any way surprising that a literary collection of the size and scope represented by the book of Isaiah should have undergone such a process of redactional addition. It was simply one facet of the conviction that prophecy represented a living word from God, which could be used to interpret a whole range of historical situations. It may be argued that this conviction has contributed greatly to the later use of prophetic sayings and themes in Jewish apocalyptic 20). Our more immediate concern has been to establish some understanding of the present shape presented by the book of Isaiah. A number of features pertaining to its redactional history may be regarded as reasonably well established. Among them is the evident fact that chapter i has been composed in order to provide a broad general introduction to the book, with its general theme established by an appeal for repentance. Furthermore, the remarkable "Isaiah Memoir" which extends, apart from a few later additions, from vi 1 to viii 18 can also be readily identified. Barth has additionally argued very persuasively (pp. 113 ff.) that an important original redactional unit, which has now undergone some substantial expansion, is to be found extending from ν 1 to xiv 27. This is thematically concerned with the fate of Israel and Judah at the hands of the Assyrians. It is certainly a very plausible inference, if the case for a substantial revision made in the wake of the events of 587 B.C. is granted, that the threats concerning "Judah and Jerusalem" contained in ii 6-iv 1 were 20

) So especially in the thesis of L. Hartman, Prophecy Interpreted. The Formation of some Jewish Apocalyptic Texts and of the Eschatological Discourse. Mark 13 Par (Uppsala, 1966), esp. pp. 137 ff. See also P. D. Hanson, The Dawn of Apocalyptic (Philadelphia, 1975), pp. 9 ff.

located in their present prominent position at this time. Their intention is to show that a central part of the message of Isaiah was concerned with a divine warning of the coming military overthrow of Judah and Jerusalem. Later, post-exilic, redactors have then inserted the words of hope, couched in traditional imagery, in ii 1-4(5) and iv 2-6. If this case is conceded, then we may argue, in modification of Barth's proposals, that the original Josianic edition of Isaiah's prophecies began with chapter v, and not with chapter ii 21). A subsequent (post-587) re-ordering of the material now set in chapters ii-iv has taken place. In many respects even more far reaching in its consequences than this question of the placing of the contents of chapters ii-iv of the book of Isaiah is the issue concerning the inclusion of chapters xl-lxvi as the sequel to i-xxxix. In effect, the book of Isaiah comes to us in two parts—an Assyrian part and a Babylonian part. Several commentators have assumed, if they have not explicitly argued, that these two parts are only peripherally related to each other. In the actual exegesis of prophecy it has frequently been taken for granted that these two parts of the book of Isaiah can be treated as though they were in reality two separate books. The fact that they are linked together has been dealt with as though it were simply a consequence of the needs of literary convenience. Yet this must be regarded as highly improbable, and a more intrinsic connection between the two parts of the book should be recognized. At least one aspect of this is the probability that certain of the prophecies of the earlier part of the book may have offered a theological and thematic background for a number of the prophecies contained in chapters xl-lv 22). If our contention set out above is accepted, that Isaiah's prophecies were thought to shed a great deal of light upon the situation which befell Judah, Jerusalem and the Davidic dynasty in 587 B.C., then we have a further reason for understanding why the "Babylonian" prophecies of chapters xl ff. were thought to be related to those which Isaiah had earlier given. Already we have noted that Isaiah's prophecies were thought to be relevant to the defeat of Judah in 598 B.C., as is shown by the story of the visit of Merodach-baladan's emissaries to Hezekiah (2 Kings xx 12-19 = Isa. xxxix). Can we not conclude 21

) Cf. Barth, pp. 311 ff., who sees the "Assyrian Redaction" of the book of Isaiah as having begun with Isa. ii 7 ff. 22 ) Cf. J. F. A. Sawyer, From Moses to Patmos. New Perspectives in Old Testament Study (London, 1977), pp. 113 ff.

then that it was precisely because Isaiah's prophecies were felt to have an important bearing upon the fate of Jerusalem and the Davidic dynasty that chapters xl ff. have become linked with the earlier collection of Isaiah's prophecies? Just as Micah's threat of the destruction of the Jerusalem temple was seen to have acquired a new meaning with the events of 587 B.C. (Mic. iii 9-12), so also were Isaiah's prophecies set under a new light at that time. Furthermore, we may pursue the analogy of the redactional structure of the two books further, by noting that in Mic. iv 1-5 precisely the same message of the renewal of hope for Zion-Jerusalem has been added that we find in Isa. ii 1-4. The fulfilment of Yahweh's acts of judgement upon Jerusalem has necessitated in turn a fuller elaboration of the new (post-exilic) message of hope. So long as the primary concern of the interpreters of Old Testament prophecy has been to interpret the life, times and personalities of the great prophets as religious individuals, then the question of the interconnectedness of the different parts of the book of Isaiah has necessarily appeared as an embarrassment, and even a mystery. Yet once we turn our attention away from the questions of authenticity, useful as they are in their own sphere, we find that there are many important lines of connection in the book relating both to specific themes, and to the history of a number of the major institutions of Israel's religious and political life. A whole wealth of developing themes and imagery reflects the continuing history of Judah, Israel and Jerusalem from the beginning of the neo-Assyrian age down into that of the Persian conquerors of the fifth century B.C. However, the major part of the book evidently reflects most strongly the Assyrian and Babylonian periods of imperial domination of Judah. If we take "inauthentic" to be a category exclusively concerned with matters of authorship, then we quickly run into serious difficulties when we try to understand why the book has been given the shape that it now possesses. Critical examination has shown beyond question that there is much material in the book of Isaiah which cannot possibly have originated with the figure of Isaiah in the eighth century B.C. Yet authenticity, in the minds of the editors and redactors of the prophetic literature of the Old Testament, was concerned with the message of the prophet, and with the general content of what he had proclaimed. In this sense there is surely nothing "inauthentic" in the book of Isaiah, in that all sixty-six chapters have an intrinsic connectedness through the message of the prophet and its felt relevance to

the fate of Judah, Jerusalem and the Davidic monarchy in the following two centuries. For how long a period this process of growth, elaboration and re-interpretation continued we cannot for certain know. Yet the indications are that most of it was completed by the end of the fifth century B.C., and there appears to be little necessity, even in respect of the late chapters xxiv-xxvii, to assign material to a time later than this 23). It is our main contention that it was in this process of prophetic re-interpretation and development that the events which befell Jerusalem in 587 B.C. provided a pivotal point. Even though the amount of material that was added to the book at this time may not initially have been all that extensive, yet it exercised a formative role in giving to the book its present structure. N o t least was it this factor in its interpretation which led to the linking of the "Babylonian" chapters (xl-lxvi) with that part of the book (i-xxxix) which we can still recognize to have been primarily concerned with the conflict between Israel and Assyria. This link is then not the result of a chance similarity of style, nor yet a vague connectedness deriving from the supposed centuries-long existence of a group of "Isaiah's disciples" 24) ; nor yet is it simply a consequence of matters of literary convenience. To posit the existence of such a community of disciples of the prophet simply extends the meaning of "disciples" to a degree that can no longer be regarded as reasonable or probable. Rather should we see it as the result of a very important thematic and historical connection, or series of connections, which binds the various features of the message of the book to each other. The originating figure of this message was the unrivalled prophetic master, Isaiah of Jerusalem, the son of Amoz. Yet what he had said needed to be applied and interpreted to the situations which developed, not only during his lifetime, but beyond this into the following two centuries and more. Thereby we have incorporated into the book a remarkable series of attempts by ancient scribes and scholars to understand their world, and their situation, in the light of the words which the prophet was believed to have brought from God himself. 23

) For a fifth century B.C. date for the "apocalyptic" chapters xxiv-xxvii of Isaiah see now H. Wildberger, Jesaja 13-27 (Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1978), p. 911. 24 ) As argued by S. Mowinckel, Jesaja-Disiplene. Profetien fra Jesaja til Jeremia (Oslo, 1926).

T H E

M A I N

C O N C E R N

O F

S E C O N D

I S A I A H

by A R V I D S. K A P E L R U D Oslo

1. Introduction The prophet Second Isaiah, who preached at the end of the Exile, had a special task to perform in a difficult situation. Like most of the Old Testament prophets he did not speak to people living in the distant future, but first and primarily to his own fellow-countrymen, in a hard time, under foreign rule. His words—the words of Israel's God YHWH—were directed to them, and were intended to have a distinctive meaning for them. They needed words from Y H W H . Since the fatal year of 587 B.C.E. the tempel had been lying in ruins, and a great part of the people was living in Babylon as a deported and defeated group. There were few or no signs that their situation would change. There had been a faint gleam of light when the imprisoned King Jehoiachin was set free, but he was not allowed to return to Jerusalem. H o w much that meant to the deported groups and to those still living in Judah, is not known. Their condition, especially that of those living in Babylon, may have improved a little. But those who lived in Babylon longed for home, and, together with those living in Judah, they wanted to get rid of foreign rulers and to see the temple of Y H W H restored on Zion. They were tired and had lost courage. They were praying and crying to their God, but no help could be seen. They felt lost, pressed by other peoples, foreign religion and culture, and they wondered what Y H W H could do about all this. Was he able to do anything, he, who had not been able to save them from catastrophe ? Were the mighty gods of Babylon the only gods who could act? T o the different pessimistic groups Second Isaiah was called to convey the words of God. They had to be words that went straight to the heart of their situation, or they would not be heard at all, only disregarded. That does not mean that the people and their situation

decided what kind of words should be spoken to them, but it meant that the words of the prophet had to meet them and say something of importance to them in the situation in which they were living. It is necessary to see the preaching of the prophet from this point of view if it is to be possible to understand what was the main concern of Second Isaiah. He did not speak into a blue sky. He had an important message from God to a desperate people, who were on the verge of giving up their hope. They clung to the traditions they had preserved, but at the same time the stress of the surroundings and the lack of a real change in their situation were facts that meant a constant pressure. This is the background for the preaching of Second Isaiah. It is the situation with which he was confronted and which he had to meet. When he heard rumours of the victories of King Cyrus, and experienced his victory over the Babylonians, the time had come to proclaim the message from Y H W H . It is one of the ironies of history that this message to a depressed and broken people, intended to help and console them, became one of the strongest roots of later apocalyptic. Surely, Second Isaiah spoke about the furute, both near and distant, but his words were directed towards his own anxious people. To reach them with the words of God, the only real God, was his primary concern. From this standpoint his preaching must be judged. It will make it possible for us to see what features in his message were the chief ideas. We' cannot detach his preaching from the state of the community to which he spoke. It had a definite aim: the anxious and pessimistic people. 2. Main Ideas 2.1 Consolation Second Isaiah is often called "the prophet of consolation", and this designation has been used so much that it is felt as a final characterization of the prophet. The introductory words of the preaching of the prophet have created this impression: "Comfort, comfort my people, says your G o d " (xl 1). This theme may be observed in the two first sections, xl 1-8 and 9-11, where the aspect of consolation is present, but where more particular ideas also appear. A new exodus for the people of G o d is foretold, and the glory of the Lord will be revealed (xl 3-5). A voice

demands that the prophet should cry out that the people is like withering grass, "but the word of our God will stand for ever" (xl 6-8). Then follows the heralding of good tidings for Zion, Jerusalem and the cities of Judah: "Behold your God!" The Lord God comes with might, and he will gather his lambs in his harms (xl 9 - 1 0 ) . It is easily seen that this kind of consolation comprises features which need a closer analysis, and which cannot be registered as consolation only. Tones of consolation appear several times in the preaching of Second Isaiah: "Fear not, for I have redeemed you; I have called you by name, you are mine" (xliii 1). "Fear not, for I am with y o u " (xliii 5). But as the preaching of the prophet goes on his voice changes. The softer notes become harder and harsher, and the intended consolation (if it was intended) disappears into discussions of a rather heated character. He even ends with a warning: "Seek the L O R D while he may be found, call upon him while he is near . . . For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, says the L O R D " (IV 6, 8). Such words do not sound like consolation. They are more like the conclusion of a discussion, or of a warning. We may possibly indicate what happened in the following way: Second Isaiah stood forth to comfort his people, but during his preaching his inspiration (the word of God) took him another way, and made him emphasize other features which it was necessary to place in the foreground. The usual designation "prophet of consolation" may thus contain some truth, but not the whole and probably not the most important truth. 2.2 Salvation and Redemption In a brief article it is impossible to discuss all the important features in the preaching of Second Isaiah. It is necessary to pick out features which seem to dominate and which may have been his main concern. Salvation and redemption are features that occur again and again in the preaching of the prophet, clearly emphasized. He underlined strongly that Y H W H was the God of salvation, the only one who could save his people from the unhappy situation in which they were living. It was said as intensely as possible, as a direct word from Y H W H himself: "I, I am Y H W H , and besides me there is no saviour" (xliii 1 1 ) . "Thus says the L O R D , your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel : 'For your sake I will send to Babylon and break

down all the bars, and the shouting of the Chaldeans will be turned to lamentations. I am the L O R D , your Holy One, the Creator of Israel,your K i n g ' " (xliii 14-15). There is no doubt about the kind of salvation here: it is the deliverance of the people from their oppressors in Babylon. That was a message of hope, if it could really be trusted. The prophet was aware of the problem in this respect, and that made him repeat the message again and again, with a strong emphasis on the might and power of Y H W H : "For I am the L O R D your God, the Holy One of Israel, your Saviour" (xliii 3). It was the deliverance from their captivity in Babylon which was the dominating feature in the thoughts of the Jews living in the great foreign centre. They longed to go back to Judah, with a few exceptions : people who had made their fortune in trade in the new circumstances. They had been longing for years, but no gleams of hope had been seen. Nevertheless, they hoped and prayed for, but did not expect, a new exodus, like the one their forefathers made from Egypt. The prophet knew their way of thinking: " T h u s says the L O R D , who makes a way in the sea, a path in the mighty waters, who brings forth chariot and horse, army and warrior; they lie down, they cannot rise, they are extinguished, quenched like a wick : Remember not the former things, nor consider the things of old. Behold, I am doing a new thing; now it springs forth, do you not perceive it? I will make a Way in the wilderness and rivers in the desert" (xliii 16-20). In that case, said the prophet, it was not necessary to ponder over the past, a new exodus was approaching. Y H W H was going to save the people. But the people was not a meek and humble congregation, it needed a strong reprimand: "Hearken to me, you stubborn of heart, you who are far from deliverance : I bring near my deliverance, it is not far off, and my salvation will not tarry; I will put salvation in Zion, for Israel my glory" (xlvi 12-13). Again, there is no doubt that the deliverance and the salvation meant release from the captivity in Babylon. Help from Y H W H was coming to a people with stubborn hearts. The emphasis on salvation in Zion is interesting. It may be an indication that the prophet to a certain extent also spoke to his fellow-countrymen in Jerusalem. The main point in the words of the prophet is that the actual approaching salvation is part of the coming lasting salvation as manifested on Zion.

Because salvation first and foremost means release from captivity, it is not surprising that salvation and redemption seem to be one and the same thing in the preaching of the prophet. That may be seen also in the designations used of Y H W H : "I am the L O R D your God, the Holy One of Israel, your Saviour" (xliii 3), "I am the L O R D , your Holy One, the Creator of Israel, your King" (xliii 15), "Thus says the L O R D , your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel" (xliii 14). The same or parallel expressions are found in several places, e.g. xliv 6, 24, xlviii 17, xlix 7, liv 5. The idea of redemption is found again and again. Salvation is seen as a redemption of the deported people, who would now be released from their chains and re-established in their ancient rights. As is well known, the idea of redemption is an old one in Israel. The verb gā*āl and the noun gô'ël were used in ancient family law. A gö*el was the relative who had the duty to redeem people who had fallen into debt to others and who might even be sold as slaves (Lev. xxv). This was, however, only one of the duties laid on the gô'ël, whose task it was to help relatives in need or in danger. When Y H W H is so often called go*el by Second Isaiah it is obvious that this emphasizes his very close connection with the people deported from Judah. It was important for the prophet to underline this. The people needed a relative to release them from their captivity, and Y H W H was such a "relative" for them. He would not let his people suffer any longer; they had suffered enough (xiii 22-25, xliii

1 ff). Y H W H would release his people: "Sing, Ο heavens, for the L O R D has done it; shout, Ο depths of the earth; break forth into singing, Ο mountains, Ο forest, and every tree in it! For the L O R D has redeemed Jacob, and will be glorified in Israel" (xliv 23). For a long time the people had been waiting for their redemption, and at long last it was coming: "Truly, thou art a God who hidest thyself, Ο God of Israel, the Saviour. All of them are put to shame and confounded, the makers of idols go in confusion together. But Israel is saved by the L O R D with everlasting salvation. You shall not be put to shame or confounded to all eternity" (xiv 15-17). Here, and in xliv 23, redemption and salvation have cosmic dimensions. The whole world would take part in it, as is said expressly in xiv 22: " T u r n to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no o t h e r . . . To me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear" (xiv 22 and 23b).

This all-embracing salvation is important. The words indicate that the prophet had an aim that went beyond the preaching of immediate salvation for the deported people. That is pointed out in several of his words: " G o forth from Babylon, flee from Chaldea, declare this with a shout of joy, proclaim it, send it forth to the end of the earth; say, 'The L O R D has redeemed his servant J a c o b ! ' " (xlviii 2 0 ) . Salvation and redemption are seen as something actual here, set forth as a declaration to the deported people, but at the same time the view reaches to the end of the earth. "All flesh shall know that I am the L O R D your Saviour, and your Redeemer, the Mighty One of Jacob" (xlix 26). There is a dialectic tension here that may be seen again and again. The wide perspective and the particular aspect lie so close to each other that they sometimes merge completely with each other: "Listen to me, my people, and give ear to me, my nation, for a law will go forth from me, and my justice for a light to the peoples. My deliverance draws near speedily, my salvation has gone forth, and my arms will rule the peoples; the coastlands wait for me, and for my arm they hope" (li 4 f.). Here the salvation is actualized, but at the same time it goes into a greater totality as something lasting: law, right, righteousness, sides of the community with God in which Israel was supposed to live, as may be seen from the following verse: " m y salvation will be for ever, and my deliverance will never be ended" (li 6). Salvation and redemption are characterized by God's infinite love and mercy, and when his wrath had come upon his own covenant people it was no lasting state : " I n overflowing wrath for a moment I hid my face from you, but with everlasting love I will have compassion on you, says the L O R D , your Redeemer" (liv 8). The words of Y H W H were plain: "For this is like the days of N o a h to me: as I swore that the waters of Noah should no more g o over the earth, so I have sworn that I will not be angry with you and will not rebuke you. For the mountains may depart and the hills be removed, but my steadfast love shall not depart from you, and my covenant of peace shall not be removed, says the L O R D , who has compassion on you" (liv 9 f.). Salvation and redemption are central notions in the world of Second Isaiah. They have acquired a deeper meaning than they used to have in previous times. Since ancient times they were formed out of situations in daily life. This side was in the foreground also in

Second Isaiah, but at the same time salvation and redemption characterize the actions of God, with everything they contained: blessing, peace, happiness, harmony, light on the road and hope for the future. 2.3 YHWH

did not fail {theodicy)

Second Isaiah wanted to comfort his people and to assure them of Y H W H ' s salvation and redemption. But there was something else he wanted, probably even more. That may be read out of his emotional preaching, and it stands out so clearly, that it is astonishing that it has not been emphasized more strongly by commentators and others who have discussed the preaching of Second Isaiah. The prophet wanted to show his people definitely that Y H W H , their God, had not failed, but that he was the only real God, and not a powerless creation of their imagination. This was absolutely necessary, as his preaching reveals that the people had not only lost their courage, but also their faith in their God. The prophet had to restore this, and he had to give convincing arguments. The first necessity was to assure his people that Y H W H was by no means powerless : "And the glory of Y H W H shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together" (xl 5), and "Behold, the Lord Y H W H comes with might, and his arms rules for him; behold, his reward is with him, and his recompense before him" (xl 10). In the following text Y H W H is described in the same way as in the revelation to Job xxxviii. This way of describing Y H W H is characteristic when doubt and criticism have been dominating, as may be clearly seen from Job. Many words in the mouth of Second Isaiah show that doubt and criticism were expressed clearly: "Why do you say, Ο Jacob, and speak, Ο Israel: My way is hidden from Y H W H , and my right is disregarded by my G o d ? " (xl 27). Such words indicate that the doubt went deep. The people felt that they had been forsaken by their God, and that nothing was done to give them their rights. "This is a people robbed and plundered they are all of them trapped in holes and hidden in prisons ; they have become a prey with none to rescue, a spoil with none to say, 'Restore!' " (xiii 22). What was the explanation of this? The prophet gave the same answer that is found also in Lamentations : "Who gave up Jacob to the spoiler, and Israel to the robbers? Was it not Y H W H , against whom we have sinned, in whose ways they would not walk, and

whose law they would not obey? So he poured upon him the heat of his anger and the might of battle" (xiii 24 f.). This was the theological interpretation, and if it had been sufficient for the prophet's audience his book would not have needed its last thirteen chapters. It was necessary for the prophet to take up several problems that worried the people, and to which they had found no solution. Were the people forsaken by their God? The answer from Y H W H had to come clearly and expressly: "Feat not, for I have redeemed you; I have called you by name, you are mine" (xliii 1). Y H W H would again do great deeds, as he had done when he led his people out of Egypt (xliii 3, 18 ff., xiv 14). It was necessary to preach in this way, for the people had lost confidence in their G o d : "Yet you did not call upon me, Ο Jacob; but you have been weary of me, Ο Israel! You have not brought me your sheep for burnt offerings, or honoured me with your sacrifices" (xliii 22 f.). The people went even further. They not only turned their back upon Y H W H ; they also rebuked him : "Woe to him who strives with his Maker, an earthen vessel with the potter!" (xiv 9). The answer of Y H W H was distinct: "I made the earth, and created man upon it; it was my hands that stretched out the heavens, and I commanded all their host" (xiv 12). Even more explicit are the words of Y H W H , that take up the relations between him and his people: "Only in Y H W H , it shall be said of me, are righteousness and strength; to him shall come and be ashamed, all who were incensed against him. In Y H W H all the offspring of Israel shall triumph and glory" (xiv 24 f.). It is emphasized that in Y H W H was sëdâqôt, which does not necessarily mean "righteousness", but which makes it clear that Y H W H will act according to his will, as he did when he led his people out of Egypt. Those of the people who are mentioned here, did not only strive against their maker (xiv 9); they were incensed against him. That was far more dangerous. They were deeply disappointed, so much that they hated their God. It was therefore imperative for the prophet to show that Y H W H was a real God, who had acted for his people since ancient times and still did. For a short while Y H W H had forsaken his people and hidden his face, when his wrath at the sins of his people overflowed, but now he would gather his people with mercy and compassion, and he would no more be angry with them (liv 7-10).

The people who strove against their maker are also given a lecture through the Songs of the Suffering Servant. He was of another mould, a contrast to the hard doubters. He was not rebellious, he gave his back to the smiters, he did not hide his face from shame and spitting (1 5 f.). The Servant was set forth as an example for his people: " W h o amon^‫ ׳‬you who fears Y H W H and obeys the voice of his servant, who walks in darkness and has no light, yet trusts in the name of Y H W H and relies upon his G o d ? " (1 10). The way in which the Suffering Servant is depicted, whether it was done by Second Isaiah or somebody else, shows that the behaviour of the people, and the relation between Y H W H and his rebellious people, were seen as important issues in the preaching of the prophet. It was necessary for the prophet to convince his people, more necessary than to comfort them. The comfort would have had no meaning and would have been useless, if he had not been able to convince them that Y H W H had power and was out to help them. Y H W H had been active since he created the world, and he had also foretold what would happen, and now he had come to rescue his chosen people. Here is a chief concern in the preaching of the prophet which must be emphasized. It places him in a historical, social and theological position that makes his preaching better understandable and more meaningful. It was relevant in the time and the situation in which he lived. Mány of the problems in the preaching of the prophet which have been considered as enigmatic may be understood better if due weight is given to these facts.

R E F L E C T I O N S

O N

T H E

P R O P H E T I C

S T U D Y

O F

T H E

D I S C O U R S E

The Question of Isaiah I 2-20* by YEHOSHUA GITAY Chapel Hill, North Carolina

A. The Problem A major problem in the analysis of any speech is the need to understand it in its proper context. Speeches which are not supplied with circumstantial evidence, either external or internal, are not easily understood. Such speeches can sound vague, unorganized and perplexing to the uninformed reader. In fact, the audience's understanding depends on the type of the discourse. We can distinguish between two types of speeches: direct and oral, narrative and written. The narrative discourse is designed normally for a variety of audiences, and is composed, consequently, in a way which secures its meaning in some future time. By contrast, the direct discourse faces a specific audience in an actual situation, and includes^ therefore, nonlinguistic clues to the speaker's intention; clues which may not be familiar any more to the later listener or reader. 1 Within the direct discourses in the prophetic literature, there are many speeches which are illuminated by specific introductions or particular historical references which define their contextual situation. Unfortunately, many other prophetic utterances are not illuminated by such clear circumstantial evidence other than the * Various earlier versions of this article were presented at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Religion/The National Association of Professors of Hebrew (November 1980), the Southeastern meeting of the American Society of Biblical Literature (March 1981) and the International Society for the History of Rhetoric (April 1981). Professor John H. Hayes has kindly read the manuscript. I wish to thank him for his useful comments. Professor Jack M. Sasson also aided me in this endeavor. 1 See for the problem, E. D. Hirsch, The Philosophy of Composition (Chicago, 1977), pp. 21-3.

general historical-geographical superscriptions of the books, 2 a situation which may cause the "universal audience" 3 to wonder about their meaning. Tracing the contextual situation of the prophetic texts is a major task for modern prophetic criticism. Involved in the contextual situation is the code of communication. A certain conventional code bridges the gap between the speaker and audience. B. Bernstein explains: Sapir, Malinowski...have all pointed out...that the closer the identifications of speakers the greater the range of shared interests and the more probable that the speech will take a specific form. The range of syntactic alternatives is likely to be reduced and the lexis to be drawn from a narrow range. 4 An analysis of the prophetic style indicates that the range of its variety is reduced. It appears, at first reading, to be a stereotyped style in which convention dominates the expression producing an impersonal style. 5 To understand communication in such a style, in the way it was understood by its first audience, is the major problem for the modern critic whose own communicative code differs from the conventional code of the specific ancient literature, the object of his study. Another objective difficulty is the organization. The organization of the prophetic material seems, on first reading, to be a jungle. Since the prophetic books are not planned compositions but a series of speeches (even though they may be united thematically), the question of the determination of the original utterance is the question of determining its meaning as well. B. Formgeschichte: The Solution? These series of difficulties (the contextual situation, the communicative code, and the determination of the speech) were 2

For the superscriptions see the recent studies of H. M. I. Gevaryahu, "Biblical Colophons: A Source for the 'Biography' of Authors, Texts, and Books", SVT28( 1975), pp. 42-59, and G. M. Tucker, "Prophetic Superscriptions and the Growth of a C a n o n " , in G. W. Coats and B. O. Long (ed.), Canon and Authority (Philadelphia, 1977), pp. 56-69. 3 For the distinction between a single interlocutor and the universal audience, see Ch. Perelman, Rhétorique et Philosophie (Paris, 1952), pp. 20-2. 4 "Social Class, Language, and Socialization", in P. P. Giglioli (ed.), Language and Social Context (Harmondsworth, 1972) p. 165. 5 Cf. H. Gunkel, What Remains of the Old Testament and Other Essays (London, 1927), p. 59 = Deutsche Literaturzeitung 27 (1906), col. 1798.

challenged by H e r m a n n Gunkel's Formgeschichte. Gunkel stressed the conventional impersonal nature of the biblical text, and introduced a philological-historical approach, Formgeschichte. T h e literary genres, the original prophetic speeches, argued Gunkel, are definable according to certain characteristics. The genres' Sitz im Leben can be traced on the basis of their fixed literary form, which mirrors their social-religious function, and, consequently, their meaning. A. Alt's statement is characteristic: It depends on the observation that in each individual literary form, as long as it remains in use in its own context, the ideas it contains are always connected with certain fixed forms of expression. This characteristic connection is not imposed arbitrarily on the material by the literary redactors... The inseparable connection between form and content goes back behind the written records to the period of popular oral composition and tradition, where each form of expression was appropriate to some particular circumstance amongst the regularly recurring events and necessities of life.6

Thus, the study of the genres is intended to enable the modern reader to communicate with the original text. Here, through the study of the fixed literary forms, we are not confronted with the individual authors; thus we may close the gap between production and reception, between the intention of the usually anonymous authors and the expectation of their audience. 7 Gunkel's rules concerning the determination of literary genres—short oracles in his view 8 —are still the dominant rules for many critics. The various genres, wrote Gunkel, are definable on the basis of a common store of thoughts and moods, a traditional linguistic form—to which Gunkel attached special value—and the Sitz im Leben.9 6 Essays on Old Testament History and Religion (Oxford, 1966), p. 87, (Garden City, N.Y., 1967), p. I l l = Die Ursprünge des israelitischen Rechts (Leipzig, 1934), p. 11 = Kleine Schriften 1 (Munich, 1953), p. 284. 7 See Gunkel, Die israelitische Literatur (Leipzig, 1925; reprinted in Darmstadt, 1963); idem, Remains, pp. 57-68 = DLZ 27 (1906), cols. 1797-1800, 1861-6; also K. Koch, Was ist Formgeschichte? (Neukirchen-Vluyn, 19743). 8 Gunkel, " T h e Israelite Prophecy from the Time of Amos", in J . Pelikan (ed.), Twentieth Century Theology in the Making 1 (London and New York, 1969), pp. 64-5 = RGG1 4 (1913), col.' 1878, RGG2 4 (1930), cols. 1547-8. See also T. H. Robinson, "Higher Criticism and the Prophetic Literature", Exp. Times 50 (1938-9), pp. 198-202. 9 Gunkel, "Jesaia 33, eine prophetische Liturgie", ZAW M (1924), pp. 182-3,

In this context, I should mention another cornerstone of prophetic criticism which corresponds with Gunkel's rules: unity of style. The assumption is that a change in style, from direct speech to indirect speech, and changes in meter indicate changes in authorship, and provide, as well, stylistic tools for the separation between the original speech and later editorial additions and glosses. 10 This definable philological method, Formgeschichte, is not, however, free of problems. Two basic issues raise severe criticism: (1) the relationship of a formulaic phrase, the literal meaning, to its speech situation, and (2) genre and speech: the question of the determination of the prophetic discourse. The first issue revolves around the meaning of a word or a phrase in a discourse. Is the semantic meaning always the same or it is changeable and dependent on the context? Studies in the act of speech warn against the lexicographic meaning, and call for a distinction between literal and literary m e a n i n g . " The implications of what is called speech-act theory can be illustrated by the language of Isa. i 2-3. T h e address to heaven and earth as witnesses followed by the accusation is defined as a form of covenant lawsuit. 12 This definition of the literary type, on the ground of a certain literary expression, also determines the prophetic unit, 1 3 and, not less important, the prophetic office and function: covenant mediators. 1 4 The appeal to heaven and earth, " a s cited i n j . Ή . Hayes, " T h e History of Form Critical Study of Prophecy", in G. W. MacRae (ed.), The Society of Biblical Literature: 1973 Seminar Papers (Cambridge, Mass., 1973), pp. 61-2. 10 This stylistic criterion of distinction was introduced to prophetic criticism by B. Duhm's influential study, Das Buch Jesaja (Göttingen, 19685). 11 See J . R. Searle " T h e Background of Meaning", i n j . R. Searle et al. (ed.), Speech Act Theory and Pragmatics (Dordrecht, 1980), pp. 227-8; also idem, Speech Acts: an Essay in the Philosophy of Language (Cambridge, 1969), and J . L. Austin, How to do Things with Words (Oxford, 1962). 12 See H. B. Huffmon, " T h e Covenant Lawsuit in the Prophets", JBL 78 (1959), pp. 285-95. See also G. E. Wright, " T h e Lawsuit of God: A Form Critical Study of Deuteronomy 32", in B. W. Anderson and W. Harrelson (ed.), Israel's Prophetic Heritage (New York and London, 1962), pp. 26-67, and J . Harvey, " L e 'Rîb-Pattern‫י‬, réquisitoire prophétique sur la rupture de l'alliance", Biblica 43 (1962), pp. 172-96; idem, Le Plaidoyer prophétique contre Israël après la Rupture de l'Alliance (Paris/Montreal, 1967). 13 Huffmon (p. 286) suggested a large unit: i 2-20, while Ο. Kaiser (Der Prophet Jesaja. Kap. 1-12 [Göttingen, 1963], pp. 5-6, E. tr., Isaiah 1-12 [London and Philadelphia, 1972], p. 7), arguing for the cultic linguistic usage, referred to vss. 2-9 as a single unit. 14 See Wright, pp. 65-6.

required by ancient cult u s a g e " , suggests also the place in which the prophet delivered his speech: the temple. 1 5 A close analysis of the language of Isa. i 2 indicates that the expression šimCû šāmayim + ha^zînî ^eres, as G o d ' s witnesses, appears rarely in the prophetic literature, and the other two occurrences referred to by scholars (Mic. vi 2 and J e r . ii 12) are not identical. It would be too hasty, therefore, to draw conclusion about a prophetic formulaic usage of lawsuit based on a specific linguistic expression. The fact is that the discussed combination is used quite flexibly (cf. Isa. i 10); thus, it is impossible to speak about a prophetic formulaic usage of heaven and earth addressed as God's witnesses. It would be more accurate to speak here about a literary motif of court speech. Then one might argue that such a motif, because of its flexibility, is not dependent on a particular literary form but is used freely in various contexts, which are no longer confined to a specific Sitz im Leben.6‫י‬ In short, the discovery of a certain formula may provide the literal meaning but not the literary function, which is a significant distinction. 17 The application is that a linguistic study of the prophetic speech disconnected from its literary context may be misleading concerning the prophet's intention and his audience's perception. 1 8 Another presupposition concerning the determination of the units on the basis of Gattung is, as mentioned above, the unity of style. Studies in speech performance indicate that speakers are not tied to a certain stylistic pattern but dominate their style, changing it according to the circumstances. 1 9 A discourse cannot be 15

See, for instance, Kaiser, p. 5 (E. tr., p. 7). For a critique of the lawsuit covenant form, see also the recent discussion of R. E. Clements, Prophecy and Tradition (Oxford and Atlanta, 1978), pp. 8-23. 17 For further discussion and critique of the traditional understanding of Sitz im Leben, see R. Knierim, "Old Testament Form Criticism Reconsidered", Int. 27 (1973), pp. 435-68; D. A. Knight, " T h e Understanding of Sitz im Leben in Form Criticism", in G. W. MacRae (ed.), The Society of Biblical Literature: 1974 Seminar Papers (Cambridge, Mass., 1974), pp. 105-25, and M. J . Buss, " T h e Idea of Sitz im Leben—History and Critique", ZAW 90 (1978) pp. 157-70. 18 Cf. G. Fohrer, "Remarks on Modern Interpretation of the Prophets", JBL 80 (1961) pp. 309-19. 19 B. A. Rosenberg, " T h e Formulaic Quality of Spontaneous Sermons", Journal of American Folklore 83 (1970), p. 5, tells us: Rev Ratcliff begins his sermon in normal, though stately and carefully measured, prose. As he gets into his subject, he gradually raises the intensity of his delivery. About one third of the way into his sermon the prose has verged into a very 16

understood on the basis of formalistic criteria. Studies in discourse structure indicate that there are other factors which unite the various parts into one integral discourse, factors which are the flow of thought and the global theme. 2 0 Such a situation is described, for instance, by H . Frankfort in his analysis of the structure of the "dialogue of a man weary of life with his soul". The entire poem is separated into a number of shorter poems each of which can stand independently, but they are all tied together by a global theme. 2 1 Accordingly, the proposal of form critics to divide Isa. i into a number of independent oracles, on the basis of stylistic formalistic changes 2 2 (and not, this time, as we saw above, on the basis of the assumed Sitz im Leben) must be questioned. By contrast, these assumed independent units may be explained from the standpoint of speech analysis and reader-response criticism 23 as intentional components of a larger whole. C. The Text as a Communicative Discourse If indeed the prophets were using a narrow formulistic language, then the result was a chain of conventional formulae, which corresponds in each case to a similar stylistic-linguistic form. Such uniform language would rule out any sound historical interpretation; the modern critic would not be able to reconstruct the various circumstances and, in this manner, the responses which distinguish each situation and gave birth to each speech. Furthermore, the prophetic discourse is by its nature a speech of protest. 24 This goal could not be effective if the prophets were tied rhythmical delivery After this climax he breaks off dramatically into normal prose, then builds back again, and finally tapers off into a subdued normal delivery. See also Y. Gitay, " A Study of Amos's Art of Speech: A Rhetorical Analysis of Amos 3:1-15‫״‬, CBQ 42 (1980), pp. 304-5. 20 See M. Dascal and T . Katriel, "Digressions: A Study in Conversational Coherence", PTL: A Journal for Descriptive Poetics and Theory of Literature 4 (1979), pp. 202-32, and the literature cited there. 21 Ancient Egyptian Religion (New York, 1948) pp. 143-4. 22 See G. Fohrer, "Jesaja 1 als Zusammenhang der Verkündigung Jesajas", ZA W 74 (1962), pp. 251-68, and H. Wildberger, Jesaja 1-12 (Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1972). Cf. also P. R. Ackroyd's ("Isaiah i-xii: presentation of a prophet", SVT 29 [1977], pp. 31-2) recent suggestion that Isa. i is a collection of various small units paralleled structurally to other units within chapters i-xii. 23 For a useful collection of reader-response criticism, see J . P. Tompkins (ed.), Reader Response Criticism (Baltimore/London, 1980). 24 Cf. R. Smend, "Das Nein des Amos", Ευ. Th. 23 (1963) pp. 404-23. See also

to a stereotyped language associated with an official-traditional institution. 2 5 Further, a stereotyped language is, in the end, a language of cliche. Such repeated expressions relate to each situation as a formula but not as a case in itself. T h e immediate danger of the cliche is the audience's passive response: a routine. 2 6 Indeed, close stylistic analyses of the oral-mentality literature, 2 7 a style which we hesitate to define as individual creativity, show that talented authors knew how to break the formula and to mark their personal impression on their writing or speeches. 2 8 T h a t is, indeed, what H o m e r meant when he spoke about the poet's creativity: " F o r men praise that song the most which comes the newest to their e a r s " (a 351-2). Isa. i is an example of a vivid text, rich in vocabulary with a dietion conveying an illusion of emotional depth. T h e description of the disaster, vss. 5-7, is not a conventional description, and the vocabulary is rare. T h u s , the combination: kol-ro^s loh° It wek0l-lēbāb dawwāy is u n c o m m o n : the pair rā^š-lēbāb is irregular. Similarly, the combination makkāh friyyāh is unique but the relation between pesac w'habburah is found elsewhere (Prov. xx 30). T h e r e is, therefore, a tendency to avoid the narrow use of a traditional formula. Stylistically, the prophetic text is a mixture of two elements: the traditional element presents Isaiah as a child of his literary tradition while the innovative element portrays his deliberate attempt to break the literary tradition. This literary relationship between the old and ·the new requires clarification. First, even in the modern K. Koch, "Die Entstehung der sozialen Kritik bei den Profeten, in H. W. Wolff (ed.), Probleme biblischer Theologie. Gerhard von Rad zum 70. Geburtstag (Munich, 1971), pp. 236-57. 25 For studies treating the relationship between " o l d " and " n e w " in the prophetic message, see M. L. Henry, Prophet und Tradition, BZA W 116 (Berlin, 1969), Clements (see n. 16), pp. 24-40, and W. Zimmerli, "Prophetic Proclamation and Reinterpretation", in D. A. Knight (ed.), Tradition and Theology in the Old Testament (Philadelphia, 1977), pp. 69-100. 26 For the negative impact of the cliché, see Ch. Perelman and L. OlbrechtsTyteca, The New Rhetoric (Notre Dame and London, 1969), p. 165. 27 For this issue concerning the biblical literature, see Y. Gitay, "DeuteroIsaiah: Oral or Written?", JBL 99 (1980), pp. 185-97. 28 This curious relationship between tradition and creativity is discussed by C. S. Lewis, The Discarded Image: An Introduction to Medieval and Renaissance Literature (Cambridge, 1964), p. 209; M. Parry, " T h e Homeric Language as the Language of an Oral Poetry", Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 44 (1933), pp. 12-17; and A. L. Oppenheim, " T h e City of Assur in 714 B . C . " , JNES \9 (1960), pp. 133-47. Similar conclusions are reached by all these studies, each of which is dedicated to a different period and culture, but all of which are confined to the pre-printed period.

period, which is distinguished by its literary individual creativity, it is impossible to create entirely new ways of expression; 2 9 to do so can ruin in advance any channel of communication with the audience. Second, an effective appeal to the audience can be achieved only when the author or speaker somehow breaks the tradition at certain points. T h e n his message is understood; he is not entirely disconnected from the code of communication, but, on the other hand, his style does not follow the routine; he requires concentrated attention from his audience. 3 0 Isaiah, by using the traditional code rô 3 / h°li and lēbāb dawwāy, on the one hand, but the pair rā^š-lēbāb, on the other, as well as the conventional code makkāh + pesac w'habburāh together with the uncommon combination makkāh ?riyyāh, still follows a certain communicative code but avoids the cliché. It is obvious that Isa. i is a dynamic text which reflects a deliberate attempt to communicate effectively with the audience. This is done through a careful selection of vocabulary as well as the devices of repetition, synonyms; and in vs. 8, for instance, the deliberate attempt to communicate with the audience is revealed through the device of " d w e l l i n g " on the subject reflected by the series of three metaphors, two of which are just repetition. In short, the prophetic text cannot be taken as a brief communication constructed in fixed formalistic style. T h e prophetic speech is a vivid text, which must be studied on the basis of its dynamic nature. It is obvious that Isaiah's intention in vss. 5-8 is to " d w e l l " on the subject in order to achieve a certain pragmatic goal. Vss. 5-8 are not separated from vss. 4 + 9. Structural discourse analysis indicates that the subject of vss. 5-8 is referred to in vs. 4 while the particle lûlê in vs. 9 connects the verse with the previous ones as a condition (GK § 106.1). Since vs. 9 indicates that the people no longer live under immediate military threat, we must conclude that the detailed description of the " a l m o s t " catastrophe is actually a tool used by Isaiah in order to illustrate a point: the people are sinners (vs. 4) and God saves them (vs. 9). What is the relationship between the sin, the catastrophe, and G o d ' s saving act? T h e text of 29 See R. Jakobson, Fundamentals of Language (The Hague, 1956), p. 58. See also T. S. Eliot, "Tradition and the Individual Talent", in J . Scully (ed.), Modem Poetics (New York, 1965), pp. 61-8. For a recent statement of the problem see, J . Schleusener, "Convention and the Context of Reading", Critical Inquiry 6 (1980), pp. 669-80. 30 For the importance of breaking the stereotyped style as a means of effective communication, see H. Gombrich, Art and Illusion (Princeton, 1972), p. 374.

vss. 4-9 does not provide a clear answer to this question. And, above all, there is a tension between the detailed description of the disaster and the indication of the sin with no specific detail. The question what the sin is leads us to another: if the description of the catastrophe is not an end in itself, and the goal is obscure, then are not vss. 4-9 just a part of a more complete discourse? To approach this problem I shall introduce an alternative: Muilenburg's rhetorical criticism. J . Muilenburg suggested a focus on the text itself, to discover its literary components, and to define, accordingly, its structure. 3 1 This is a productive approach but only to a certain degree. The major problem is that Muilenburg also proposed certain stylistic formulae (not external ones such as form criticism uses) as formal rhetorical devices, which will enable the critic to determine " q u i c k l y " the literary unit. Such an approach can be helpful only when applied to small poems. T h e search for formal rhetorical devices for determining the prophetic unit can be misleading since the structure of the prophetic speech can be flexible, even in speeches delivered by the same prophet. 3 2 Isa. i is a dynamic text, designed to communicate with its audience. Such a text is not delivered in a vacuum; it is a response to a certain situation. A major task of the critic is, therefore, to reconstruct the point of departure of the address, called by rhetoricians the rhetorical situation. 33 It is clear that Isaiah makes an effort to stress a particular point. Methodologically, however, to try to discover- the rhetorical situation on the ground of a fragment of speech can be misleading. The literary text, like any verbal text, is received by the reader through a process of "concentration". Its verbal elements appear one after another, and its semantic complexes build up "cumulatively", through adjustments and readjustments. That a literary text cannot yield its information all at once is not just an unfortunate consequence of the linear character of language. Literary texts may effectively utilize the fact that their material is grasped successively; this is at 31

"Form Criticism and Beyond", JBL 88 (1969), pp. 1-18. See Y. Gitay, Prophecy and Persuasion: A Study of Isaiah 40-48 (Bonn, 1981). 33 For the question of the cause of the speech, see Quintilian Institutio Oratoria, III, VI, 3-21. For a modern treatment of the subject see L. F. Bitzer, " T h e Rhetorical Situation", Philosophy and Rhetoric 1 (1968), pp. 1-14, idem, "Functional Communication: A Situational Perspective", in E. E. White (ed.), Rhetoric in Transition (University Park and London, 1980), pp. 21-38, and Ch. Perelman and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca, New Rhetoric, p. 491. 32

times a central factor in determining their meanings. The ordering and distribution of the elements in a text may excercise considerable influence on the nature, not only of the reading process, but of the resultant whole as well.3‫יי‬ Rhetorically, Isa. i 2-20 consitutes one address. The subject of vs. 4 (inseparable from vss. 5-9) is the people's misbehavior, which is exactly the topic of vss. 2-3. This is, indeed, the topic of vss. 10-20 as well. The stress of vs. 4 on the people as sinners indicates that we do not face here a triumphant address celebrating the enemy's withdrawal. The issue is a domestic religious one. This notion is strengthened in vs. 9b: the mention of Sodom and Gomorrah which, by comparison to vs. 11, hints that the reference in vs. 9 is not just a metaphor for describing a destruction (cf. Amos iv 11; J e r . xxiii 14; Lam. iv 6; Zeph. ii 9). Yet what is the sin? The general statement of vss. 2-3 + 4 does not correspond with the rich description of vss. 5-7. In fact, a detailed description of the sins is presented in vss. 11-17. Again, the reference to Sodom and Gomorrah at the end of vs. 9 is repeated at vs. 10, which is tied to vss. 11-17 on the basis of syntax: the pronominal suffix. Vss. 18-20, which are rejected by some scholars as a gloss on the basis of vocabulary and meter, 3 5 are in fact an epilogue, which structurally corresponds with the frame of vss. 2-9. 36 Vs. 9 and vss. 18-20 are both conditional sentences stressing G o d ' s interference. In vs. 21, we face a new speech dealing as much as the preceding one with-a domestic issue, but referring more specifically to those addressed. Thus, the general audience of vss. 2-20 (note how the reference qesinê(-îm) in vs. 10a is modified by " p e o p l e " in vs. 10b) are replaced now by the officials in vss. 23, 25. 37 If Isa. i 2-20 is one speech, then the focus is on the people's sins. But in order to understand the speech in its proper context, we must nevertheless trace the contextual situation. We have certain clues, which help us to understand the situation. The broad title of vs. 1, followed by the description of the near defeat, indicates that 34

M. Perry, "Literary Dynamics", Poetics Today 1 (1979), p. 35. Cf. Ε. Robertson, "Isaiah Chapter I " , ZAW52 (1934), pp. 231-6, and more recently W. L. Holladay, Isaiah: Scroll of a Prophetic Heritage (Grand Rapids, 1978), p. 7. 36 Cf. Kaiser (p. 12; E. tr., pp. 12-13) and the discussion below. 37 It is important to notice, as I show in my Prophecy and Persuasion, that this sort of relationship, general followed by more concrete, also characterizes DeuteroIsaiah's speeches. 35

the present speech occurred after one of the serious wars which took place at the time: either the Syro-Ephraimite war or the invasion of Sennacherib. 3 8 To determine which of these is the war described in vss. 5-8 is not crucial for our present discussion; 39 it is sufficient to recognize that J u d a h was saved miraculously, and that the memory of the almost total defeat is still fresh. The problem is, therefore, to determine the rhetorical situation. Focusing on vss. 10-17, one may conclude that Isaiah protested here against the self-satisfaction due to Hezekiah's reform, 4 0 arguing that the changes are actually a matter of frame, which do not constitute the essence: ethical behavior. However, taking into consideration the catastrophic description within vss. 5-9 as well, I must point to another rhetorical situation. The focus on the people's ritual behaviour (vss. 11-15) portrays them as devoted to the worship of God. This stress on the ideal cultic situation, on the one hand, and the catastrophe, on the other, suggests a connection: a tension between cultic devotion and political disaster. This tension suggests that the rhetorical situation is a complaint by the peopie against God for his late—almost too late—intervention which caused his people to suffer so heavily in spite of their devotion to him. Rhetorically, Isaiah faces here an extremely difficult persuasive task. H e has to explain that a traditional religious conception, which is supposed to ensure the people's security, 41 is actually wrong and mistaken. A rhetorical analysis of the structure of the present speech reveals that the prophet was aware of his persuasive task; he therefore organized his speech according to the difficulties. Each part of the address has its own function leading gradually to the programatic goal. The discourse can be divided into the following parts: 1. Introduction - vss. 2-3. 38

For the title see Wildberger (see n. 22), pp. 1-7. For the historical background, see recently, H. Donner, " T h e Separate States of Israel and J u d a h " , and B. Oded, "Judah and the Exile", i n j . H. Hayes and J . M. Miller (ed.), Israelite and Judaean History (London and Philadelphia, 1977), pp. 421-51. 39 The description of Hezekiah's situation portrayed in Sennacherib's annals, "himself I made a prisoner in Jerusalem.. .like a bird in a cage" ( A N E T , p. 288), is not necessarily the literary source of Isa. i 8. 40 For the religious-cultic meaning of Hezekiah's reform, see now M. Haran, Temples and Temple Service in Ancient Israel (Oxford, 1978), pp. 140-6. 41 See E. Dürkheim, The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life (New York, 1965), pp. 414-33.

2. Statement of facts - vss. 4-9. 3. Confirmation - vss. 10-17. 4. Epilogue 42 - vss. 18-20. In the introduction, Isaiah uses comparisons, which speak for themselves. By comparison one lets the object compared to speak for itself; it allows the speaker to make his point clearly with no further explanations. Isaiah describes here a paradoxical situation: animals know how to behave; Israel does not know. This kind of introduction, called paradoxical introduction, has been described by R . Whately: When the point to be proven or explained is one which may be strange, and different from what might be expected; in which case it will often have a good effect in rousing the attention, to set forth as strongly as possible this paradoxical character, and dwell on the seeming improbability ofthat which must, after all, be admitted. 43 Classical rhetoricians suggest that the second part of an argumentative speech should be the statement of facts, narratio: what happened (see Ad Herennium 1.4). In the light of the people's lament, one asks why Isaiah recites the past events so dramatically. The answer depends on the goal of the discourse. The introduction of J u d a h ' s behavior as a paradox is repeated by the stress on J u d a h ' s paradoxical stubbornness in vs. 5. 44 Thus, the speaker portrays his audience's suffering not as an act of sympathy but in order to indicate the cause. He does this, however, in a two fold way. O n the one hand, Isaiah establishes a connection between suffering and punsihment, but, on the other, he depicts the past events in a lively way, thus creating an emotional impact. The function of emotion in an argumentative discourse is important since it influences in a way which cannot be achieved by purely reasonable argument. In our case, Isaiah creates the feeling of fear and, at the same time, its opposite: confidence. 45 That is to say, the prophet revives the emotions of the fear of an invasion, but points further to God the saviour, thus establishing the people's notion of dependence on God; a notion which could be released as a consequence of the peo42

For my use of the classical terminology, see Y. Gitay, Prophecy and Persuasion. Elements of Rhetoric (1846; ed. D. Ehninger, Carbondale, 1963), p. 170. 44 For sārāh as an expression of disobedience and even revolt, cp. Deut. xiii 6. 45 For the relationship between fear and confidence, see Aristotle, Rhetoric, 1382a-1383a. 43

pie's complaint. Note that Isaiah closes his speech (vss. 18-20) by reminding his audience of the potential future, the repeated disaster coloured in the statement of facts. After the depiction of the past events, the cause of the people's complaint, from the prophet's perspective, Isaiah presents in detail the case, to which till this point of the speech he only referred, but which he did not prove. This is the confirmation: vss. 10-17. 46 In vss. 11-12 Isaiah presents a series of arguments portraying the people's worship as nonsense. 47 His arguments are not philosophical; he does not discuss the meaning of cult. In order to understand Isaiah's arguments against the cult, we must keep in mind its role and function in ancient society: cult is an essential factor in the life of that society. 48 Any reasonable, philosophical argument in this case will be opposed drastically. T h u s the strategy of the absurd, of ridicule, is the most effective in such circumstances. Ridicule is a powerful weapon at the disposal of a speaker against those who might undermine his argument by refusing, without cause, to accept some premise of his discourse. This is the weapon that must be used against those who take it into their heads to hold and persist in holding two incompatible points of view without trying to remove the incompatibility... Ridicule is often achieved through clever deductions drawn from what one is attempting to criticize. In geometry, reductio ad absurdum begins with the assumption that the proposition A is false, in order to show that the consequences are incompatible with what was already known, and thereby infers the truth of A.49 Isaiah applies a similar tactic: the premise that sacrifice for God is false. sbc (vs. l i b ) does not just connote " s a t i s f y " , but also indicates that one "can take no m o r e " (cf. Ps. lxxxviii 4); a feeling strengthened by the relationship between šābaCtî and /0 ‫ י‬hāpastî, which in chiastic order stresses the feeling of rejection repeated again in vs. 14. 46 E. P. J . Corbett, Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student (New York, 19712), p. 321, writes: "Confirmation may be regarded as the core, the central part, the main body, of our discourse—the part in which we do what we set out to do, whether that will be to explain or to persuade". 47 For the background of Isaiah's criticism of the cult see Wildberger, pp. 37-49, and the literature cited therein. 48 See M. Eliade, The Sacred and the Profane (New York, 1959). 49 Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca (see n. 27), pp. 206-7.

The epilogue, vss. 18-20, has two important functions: it sums up the argument, stressing again the major point, and apeals to the audience to think and consider the implications of the address. Aristotle's treatment of the "possible" and "impossible" concerning past and future events as a topic of argument in a rhetorical discourse is helpful for our understanding of vss. 18-20. Aristotle wrote: It may plausibly be argued: that if it is possible for one of a pair of contraries to be or happen, then it is possible for the other.. .questions of past fact may be looked at in the following ways: First, that if the less likely of two things has occurred, the more likely must have occurred also (Rhetoric 1392a). This is the argumentative principle applied here by Isaiah. T h e past is known—a near defeat; thus, there is a possibility of a complete defeat. O n the other hand, God's control of the situation can lead to a good future. The possible - positive or negative - depends on the people's behavior; this is indeed the conclusion of Isaiah's argument. 5 0 D. Conclusion The major task for modern critics is still to determine the prophetic discourse. The prophetic address, a polemical text, must be defined on the basis of its rhetorical situation and its global theme. The rhetorical situation is the cause of the speech, the situation which gave birth to the prophetic response. The global theme unites the various parts of the discourse as one body, a rhetorical discourse. The global theme and the rhetorical situation can be recognized by asking functional questions concerning the role and meaning of each part of the discourse and its contribution for reaching the rhetorical goal: appealing, influencing, or explaining a certain point. The process of the argument, the points of stress, enables the critic to reveal the rhetorical situation, the audience's condition. Discourse-structural analysis assists us in our attempt to

50

Such a conclusion corresponds with the recommendation of classical rhetoricians about the function of the epilogue (derived from έπιλέγειν, "to say in addition"). Thus wrote the author of Ad Herennium: "(The epilogue) is a brief argument which deduced from the preceding facts and sayings the necessary conclusion" (IV. 41).

determine the unit. The structure of the prophetic speech as an argumentative discourse depends, therefore, on the audience's condition, which determines the prophet's rhetorical strategy. Most speeches are divided, however, into several definable parts each of which has a particular rhetorical function. We can recognize introductions, statements of fact, confirmations, even refutations, and epilogues. The language of the prophet reflects the style of oral mentality: on its surface it has a tendency to be stereotyped, a situation which assists the modern critic to understand the background of the language. However, we must be aware that the prophetic texts is a dynamic text. Its goal is either to appeal or to protest against old social-religious conceptions. These goals require a style which cannot be just an imitation of the conventional; it leaves a personal impression. T h e prophetic language is a reflection of both the rhetorical situation and the prophet's goal, and has to be studied accordingly. Rhetorically, Isa. i 2-20 is one speech. The speech was delivered while the wounds of a near military defeat still hurt. The rhetorical situation was a conflict between devotion to cultic practice and a catastrophe. Isaiah's major point is that there is a connection between the people's suffering, the catastrophe, and God; the connection has to be understood in terms of sin and punishment. A rhetorical analysis of the text enables us to understand Isaiah's argument and the ways he addressed his audience.

Z E C H A R I A H ' S

V I S I O N S :

A

T H E O L O G I C A L

P E R S P E C T I V E

by D A V I D L. P E T E R S E N Denver, Colorado

Zechariah's visions remain some of the most enigmatic literature in the Hebrew Bible. Whether trance in the night, dream, or even nightmare, these eight reports of ocular and auditory experience continue to puzzle the reader. These visions do not puzzle because scholars have ignored them. Recent work on this literature has, in fact, revealed great richness, both in its form and in its symbolism." However, despite the best efforts of scholars, what Zechariah heard and saw is not easy to explain. A thorough Forschungsbericht of work on these visions would obviously be inappropriate in a study of this sort. Nevertheless, it is important to observe that scholars have promulgated important and yet quite different theses about Zechariah's visions. For the sake of convenience, I mention briefly two such theories. (1) Klaus Seybold, in 1974, argued that Zechariah's vision cycle is to be construed as " A u f r u f und Vorschau zum Wiederaufbau des Jerusalemer Tempels, als Denk- und Programmschrift zur Restauration des Kultzentrums auf dem Z i o n " . H e continued, the visions are "eine Art Heiligtumslegende, eine Gründungs- und Legitimationsschrift für den zweiten Tempel, ein Hieros-LogosDokument, vergleichbar den Perikope vom Jakobstraum (Gen. 28, 10-22..." 2 For Seybold, Zechariah's visions focus almost exclusively on the significance of the reconstruction of the Jerusalem temple. (2) Not dissimilarly, Baruch Halpern, in a recent article, has contended that these visions may be thought of as an integrated 1

See conveniently, W. A. M. Beuken, Haggai-Sacharja 1-8. Studien zur Überlieferungsgeschichte derfrühnachexilischen Prophetie (Assen, 1967); C. Jeremias, Die Nachtgesichte des Sacharja. Untersuchungen zu ihrer Stellung im Zusammenhang der Visionsberichte im Alten Testament und zu ihrem Bildmaterial (Göttingen, 1977). 2 Bilder zum Tempelbau: Die Visionen des Propheten Sacharja (Stuttgart, 1974), pp. 107 and 100.

"temple s o n g " . For Halpern, Zechariah's night vision—which he thinks also includes the oracular material in the book—"rehearses in a m u n d a n e framework the ritual of temple reconstruction and, in a cosmic or visionary framework, extends and elaborates upon this r e h e a r s a l . . . " 3 Halpern adds, "Representing a reverie at the foundation of the Second Temple, it bears a close relationship to the liturgy of temple renovation as reflected in Mesopotamian texts." As for Seybold, so for Halpern, temple reconstruction provides the idée fixe around which the symbolic notes of these visions are ordered. 4 Others have, of course, maintained that the visions are much more general in their import. So L. Rignell wrote that they entail events of the time of salvation. 5 And W . Rudolph, in his recent commentary, stated, " D i e Visionen schildern durchweg ein T u n Jahwes: Er räumt alle Hindernisse beiseite, die den Arbruch der Heilszeit hintanhalten k ö n n t e n . " 6 The assertions of Rignell and Rudolph are, however, so general that they do not accomplish much by way of explicating the specific details of the visions. Hence, of these two basic interpretive options, the explanations of Halpern and Seybold are the more compelling. Halpern's is, in many ways, the most forcefully argued position. H e maintains that the visions focus on temple reconstruction for three basic reasons: a) the explicit mention of the temple in Zech. i-viii; b) the prominence of temple and cultic imagery in the visions; and c) the presence of a pattern in which the divine warrior saves his people, a pattern which entails cultic imagery and action. Four responses seem appropriate to such claims: 1) Most of the direct references to the reconstruction of the tempie in Zech. i-viii occur in the oracular material not in the visions themselves (i 16, ii 17, iii 7, iv 9, vi 12-14). So for example, the claim " m y house shall be built in i t " , occurs in oracular material following the first vision, and not in the first vision itself. No explicit mention of the Jerusalem temple is ever made in the vision reports.

3

" T h e Ritual Background of Zechariah's Temple Song", CBQ 40 (1978), p.

189. 4 See not dissimilarly, P. R. Ackroyd, Exile and Restoration. A Study of Hebrew Thought in the Sixth Century B.C. (London and Philadelphia, 1968), p. 182. 5 Die Nachtgesichte des Sacharja (Lund, 1950), p. 245. 6 Haggai-Sacharja 1-8—Sacharja 9-14—Maleachi (Gütersloh, 1976), p. 63.

This distinction is critical since, as many scholars maintain, the visions comprise a quite distinct body of material from the oracles. 7 2) Not all the visions contain temple or cultic imagery. So, for example, the fifth vision presents an image of a flying scroll. This flying scroll, which is identified by the maPâk as a curse, is designed to provide recompense to those who have stolen and to those who have sworn falsely and yet who remain unpunished. 8 No detail of this vision warrants the notion that temple or cultic practice is involved. 9 Rather the imagery of a reified covenant curse which, when loosed, provides for the right ordering of, among others, the newly renascent J u d a h i t e community. 3) Not all so-called cultic imagery actually present in the visions is necessarily to be related to temple reconstruction. O n e of the clearest examples of cultic imagery in the visions is the four horns in the second vision, Zech. ii 1-4. Though to be sure the four horns could be those of two bulls, it is in my judgement more likely that they refer to the four horns of the altar, the more so since there is immediate reference to four artisans, individuals who could fashion such an altar. 1 0 However, there is no reason to think that this altar has a direct connection with the restored temple. In fact, the interpretation of the vision leads in a different direction. These horns come to symbolize the totality of world powers which have destroyed Israel and which are soon to be torn down by those who made them. The most one may say concerning the cultic background of this vision is that a disembodied altar—its four horns—provides the occasion for a visionary experience of international retribution. Halpern contends that a stock ancient Near Eastern mythic pattern pervades these visions, a divine warrior combat myth or mythic pattern which entails certain ritual activity. Now a number of things may be said about the putative existence of pervasive mythic patterns in ancient Near Eastern, including biblical, 7

On the distinction between the oracles and the visions, see Beuken, HaggaiSachaija 1-8, and A. Petitjean, Les Oracles du Proto-Zacharie. Un programme de restauration pour la communauté juive après l'exile (Lou vain, 1969). 8 For this translation of Zech. ν 4, see the J P S translation of The Prophets (Philadelphia, 1978), and my forthcoming commentary. 9 Cf. Halpern, pp. 178-9. 10 For a careful argument in favor of the horned animal interpretation, see R. M. Good, "Zechariah's Second Night Vision (Zech 2, 1-4)‫״‬, Bib 63 (1982), pp. 56-9.

literature. However, in this particular case, perhaps the most telling objection is this. In the instances of divine warrior texts which Halpern cites, e.g., the E n u m a Elish and Exod. xv, the divine warrior is directly present in the action and is involved directly in the martial activity. Such is not the case in Zechariah's visions. Yahweh is rarely present; and there is precious little martial activity. And when there is apparent conflict, artisans rather than warriors are involved. Zechariah's visions may, in fact, cohere, but not around the theme of Yahweh as divine warrior. In sum, I contend that the case for the cultic character of these visions is weak. These visions focus even less on cultic matters than does J e r e m i a h ' s vision of the almond rod focus on ancient Near Eastern horticulture (Jer. i 11-12). I If Zechariah's visions do not comprise a vision of temple renewal, what is their import? I suggest the following beginning of an answer. Zechariah's visions stand somewhere between purely mundane concerns and an Utopian vision of renewal. Zechariah's visions are not concrete in the way in which Haggai concentrates on agricultural yield (Hag. ii 14-19) and on the preservation of capital (Hag. i 6); and they are not concrete in the way in which Ezek. xlxlviii provides detailed measurements for the restored temple compound. Nor are Zechariah's visions Utopian as are the expectations for wealth in Hag. ii 6-7 or as the Ezekiel's vision of a society without religious error (Ezek. xliii 7). Zechariah's visions stand somewhere between Utopian social vision and concrete physical and social detail. T h e notion of "somewhere in b e t w e e n " is apt not only as a description of where these visions sit vis-à-vis other early post-exilic literatures. This notion of "inbetweenness" also serves as an accurate indicator for the content of Zechariah's visions. In the first vision, we are conveyed to a geography which is not really of this world, and which is not directly that of the divine dwelling. We are near the cosmic deep, overseeing the divine corral." But we see 1 ' The term mêsullāh is regularly used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to the oceanic depths. The use of the term " d e e p " here probably refers to one of the singular places at which the cosmic deep bubbles up at the surface of the earth, a notion attested in both the biblical and Ugaritic material.

neither the deity nor any obvious location in this world. We are between worlds. In the second vision, Zechariah looks up and sees the four horns, and then four artisans approaching them. These are this-worldly objects and yet somehow removed from this world— hovering above Zechariah in the night. O n moving to the fourth vision, we are presented with a scene in which Joshua is cleansed in the divine council. And yet the council lacks the one element which is regularly present, the deity himself. It is not the divine council which we have come to expect on the basis of 1 Kings xxii or Isa. vi. 12 In the fifth vision, the most static vision of the cycle, Zechariah sees an object which we normally associate with the temple compound. And yet the temple lampstand has no obvious cultic context, and it is surrounded with strange olive-tree people. Finally, in the sixth and seventh visions, the prophet perceives objects, a flying scroll and an approaching ephah. Both are in mid-air. T h e soaring ephah is, as the writer succinctly puts it, "between the earth and the h e a v e n s " . A second feature present in the visions is motion. Things are on the move. T o be sure, not all the visions are filled with movement. But even the so-called static visions function to enable movement in the visions which follow. The first vision, one which provokes a lament by the maPāk, garners a divine response to move beyond the lamentable status quo. Movement must, and does, follow. Artisans are on their way to destroy the nations responsible for J u d a h ' s demise. An individual, probably angelic, moves out to do survey work on Jerusalem, only to be intercepted and corrected. The high priest is reclothed and, thereby, cleansed. Action follows hard on the heels of the inceptive, static vision. And then, in the second static vision, Zechariah sees a symbol of divine presence, one flanked by two anointed figures, figures probably representing the diarchic polity of the newly restored J u d a h i t e community. This vision suggests, among other things, that a new cultic and social order is in place. As a function of this newly constituted order, further action could take place. Flying scroll, soaring ephah, and surging steeds—each with its own function—complete the visionary sequence. These complex symbols represent the working out of this new order as it affects J u d a h as well as the entire 12

See for a similar assessment, E. Theodore Mullen, The Divine Council in Canaanite and Early Hebrew Literature (Chico, 1980), p. 275.

world. Though strange in their imagery, things are happening in these visions. Things are up in the air; and things are on the move. A third feature shared by these visions is the Leitmotif represented by the phrase kol-hPäres. In six of the eight visions, the notion of activity encompassing all the earth is stated explicitly. In both beginning and concluding visions, horses have gone out or are going out to patrol "all the e a r t h " . In the second vision, one hears of horns of the nations which have destroyed J u d a h , a description which surely refers to more than the Neo-Assyrians and Neo-Babylonians. T h e number four here, as elsewhere, symbolizes the totality of world pow.ers. T h e next two visions focus on the restored J u d a h i t e community, and do not, therefore, include explicit mention of worldwide scope. But in the fifth, sixth, and seventh visions, the phrase "all the e a r t h " appears again. In the fifth, Yahweh is ^ādân of whole earth. In the sixth, the flying curse is understood as proceeding out "over the face of the entire e a r t h " . And in the seventh, we hear of an ephah which represents "their s i n " in all the earth. 1 3 In these visions, then, Zechariah experiences visions which focus neither on the territory of J u d a h nor on a localized version of Yahweh's activity. The scope of the activity is cosmic, international, as befits a world sovereign deity. These visions, therefore, share three essential elements: things occur in an intermediate realm, things are on the move, and the notion of "all the e a r t h " is a Leitmotif of the deity's action. How are these features to be explained? Are these elements simply a function of the dream or trance experience which Zechariah reports? O r are they a function of a presumed Jerusalem temple rededication ceremony? In both cases, the answer is no. Rather, another explanation is more likely, or better, two related explanations are like1y· First, Zechariah's visions comprise the doing of theology. In them, he is explaining why it is and how it is that Yahweh will right earlier iniquity; how it is that Yahweh will be present in Jerusalem; how it is that the community's leadership will be organized; how it is that the problem of h u m a n error will be addressed; and how it is that the contamination of earlier sin and unclean existence will be expunged. T h e visions comprise Zechariah's experientially-based

13

Reading cäwönäm with L X X , Syr. instead of M T Cênām.

responses to these problems of a community attempting to reorganize itself. By way of answering the question how Yahweh will be present in Jerusalem, Zechariah reports that Yahweh will no longer be localized in his temple. Instead, Yahweh will be a wall of fire around the city. And as for the city itself, Jerusalem will be a different sort of urban entity from what it had been earlier. It will exist without walls. Here Zechariah may be reflecting on the Persian ritual capital Pasargadae, another city without walls and with fire altars on its perimeter. 1 4 In any case, Zechariah was also being hardheadedly realistic. T h e city walls of Jerusalem were not to be rebuilt for another century. O r another case, purity and holiness were constitutive categories for monarchic Yahwism. In 520 B . C . E . , how could the high priest and, in turn, the people be purified? T h e temple lay in disarray. T h e older cleansing practices were, therefore, impossible to carry out. Zechariah does, however, provide a solution. J o s h u a was to be cleansed in the ritual setting of the divine council, though not by the deity himself. Once this agent of communal purification had himself been cleansed, then the polity of the new community could begin to function. These are important conceptual problems. Rather than rushing in where angels fear to tread, rather than proposing, as had Haggai, that the temple needed to be rebuilt, or that Zerubbabel was to be anointed as king, Zechariah experienced Yahweh's angelic agents and discerned how it was that the new religious and social order was to be initiated. What Zechariah reports in these visions is initial restoration within the cosmic order. Once Yahweh had decided to act beneficently toward what was now J u d a h , there were certain processes which must begin, certain issues which must be resolved, certain decisions about community organization which must be broached; and all this before humans could do the m u n d a n e work 14 Pasargadae was under construction during the period 545-530 B.C.E. and would, as the unwalled ritual capital built by Cyrus to celebrate his universal dominion, have been well known in the ancient world. It was a city which broke significantly with earlier Mesopotamian and Persian architectural styles. Whether or not Zechariah ever lived in Mesopotamia, he would most likely have heard reports about this magnificent new city. See David Stronach, Pasargadae. A Report on the Excavations conducted by the British Institute of Persian Studies from 1961-1963 (Oxford, 1978).

of restoration. What we see in the visions is the beginning of restoration on a cosmic plane. Things are being carried out over "all the e a r t h " , not just in J u d a h as Ezek. xl-xlviii would have it. Yahweh's steeds and angelic host are busy with the work of creating a new social and religious structure which will affect the entire world, not just J u d a h . My first answer to explain the peculiar elements of these visions—that things are up in the air, on the move, and cosmic in scale—is that Zechariah is experiencing and reporting restoration within the cosmic order. In so doing, he is providing the theological rationale which will enable concrete forms of restoration. H e is not, in these visions, directly proposing or engaging in the m u n d a n e work of restoration. II Why was it necessary for Zechariah to bother with such an effort when the immediate conditions of the community made m u n d a n e work so necessary? The answer to this question provides the second, and perhaps more important, reason for the peculiar configuration which these visions have. Zechariah seems to be presenting an alternative vision of restoration. It revises significantly a vision included in another prophetic book, a vision which details the m a n n e r in which J u d a h , and more particularly the temple is to be restored. I refer, of course, to the so-called Verfassungsentwurf of Ezekiel. 15 In order to make this point as clearly as possible, we must consider eight major points of contrast between the visions of Zechariah and " t h e visions of G o d " preserved in Ezek. xl-xlviii. 16 In order to accomplish this task concisely, I propose to raise eight questions and then provide answers drawn from each of these two corpora. (1) What is the scope of Yahweh's restorative activity? Ezekiel's answer is clear. " T h e hand of Yahweh was upon me, and brought 15

On this block of material, see especially H. Gese, Der Verfassungsentwurf des Ezechiel traditionsgeschichtlich untersucht (Tübingen, 1957); W. Zimmerli, Ezechiel (Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1969), pp. 977-1249;J. D. Levenson, Theology of the Program of Restoration of Ezekiel 40-48 (Missoula, 1976). 16 For an assessment of the relation between Zechariah and Ezek. xl-xlviii, though without the benefit of higher critical perspectives, see C. Mackay, "Zechariah in Relation to Ezek 40-48", Evangelical Quarterly 40 (1968), pp. 197-210. Mackay's basic argument is that "Zechariah is our first expositor of Ezek 40-48."

me in the visions of God into the land of Israel" (Ezek. xl lb-2). Everything happens in the land of Israel. Even the paradisal river, which was world-wide in the primeval history of Genesis, is here limited to the land of Israel, so Ezek. xlvii. For Zechariah, however, Yahweh's activity is cosmic in scope, as the Leitmotif kol-hPäres clearly indicates. (2) What will initiate the new order? Ezekiel is not explicit here. But we may infer that a newly completed temple is a requisite. Only with the temple rebuilt do the visions of Ezekiel made sense. T h e actual building of the temple was necessary to enable the new order. Not so for Zechariah. T h e new order required a decision by the deity and activity on the part of his agents in order to set up the basic cosmic and social structure for the new order. H u m a n beings must wait for the deity and his agents to act. (3) What will the new Jerusalem be like? Ezekiel is, here definitively clear. In Ezek. xlviii 30-35, we hear of a square city four thousand five hundred cubits on a side. Each side will have three gates. And since we hear of gates, we may presume that sides were those of a walled city (see Levenson, pp. 119-25). Zechariah's notion is quite different. For him, to talk about measurements of breadth and width is wholly inappropriate. Further, to speak of a walled city is also improper. T h e new Jerusalem will not have walls because it will be a different, and more heavily populated, sort of urban entity. Zechariah could not differ more from Ezekiel's notion of the restored Jerusalem. (4) How will Yahweh be present in the restored city? Ezekiel is at this point characteristically straightforward. In chapter xliii, we hear of the return of Yahweh's kâbôd. T h e deity addresses Ezekiel, " S o n of M a n , this is the place of my throne and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the people of Israel forever." This place is, of course, none other than the tempie. T h e glory of Yahweh entered the temple. That was to be the locus for Yahweh's presence. Zechariah's perspective is quite different. There is no reason to think that Yahweh will be limited to the temple compound. In the third vision, a divine oracle emphasizes Yahweh's presence in a way quite distinct from the temple: " F o r I will be to her a wall of fire round about, says Yahweh, and I will be the glory within h e r " (Zech. ii 9). Nothing in Zechariah's visions leads one to think that Yahweh is thought of as bound by the temple precinct in quite the same way as that notion is expressed in Ezekiel's vision.

(5) How is the priesthood to be restored and renewed? Ezekiel, or a tradent of Ezekiel, contends that the Zadokites are to provide the core of priestly leadership (Ezek. xliv 9ff). They are to undertake special offerings to cleanse and to rededicate the newly constructed temple (xliv 18-27, xiv 18-20). T o put it another way, there are priests who survived the destruction and exilic experience without becoming ritually suspect. Zechariah, however, argues that the restoration of the priesthood is to begin with a specific high priest, J o s h u a . He is to be cleansed, not in some standard purification ceremony, but in a rite performed in the divine council. There is, in Zechariah, no mention of Zadokite versus non-Zadokite, Levite versus non-Levite. Further, there is no warrant, in the visions of Zechariah to think that any priestly groups were degraded as is clearly the case in Ezek. xlxlviii. (6) How is the priesthood to be ordered? The picture in Ezekiel is one of collégial activity. No particular hierarchy is present. And rather surprisingly, the role label " c h i e f " or "high priest" is wanting. Zechariah, on the other hand, makes it clear that, despite the fact that there is a group of priests—so Zech. iii 8—there is a high priest who has significant prerogatives, one whose ritual purity enables the priestly system as a whole to function properly. 1 7 (7) How will the new community be ruled? With Ezekiel, we are forced to consider the enigmatic nāšP. Levenson's comments are apt: " t h e School of Ezekiel hoped not for a diarchy of Davidid and Zadokite such as was to emerge just after the return from Exile (Ze. 3), but for a community so fundamentally liturgical and sacral in nature that the Davidid, politics having vanished, could only be a liturgical figurehead ... Ezek. 40-48 hoped not for a restoration of the monarchy, but for a restoration of the monarch, who is now redefined according to his deepest and truest function as the servant of God, one devoted to the divine service, to liturgy" (p. 143). Clearly, leadership in the restored community focuses on this utopian priest-monarch amalgam, the nāšP. Zechariah operates with a different ideal. In his fifth vision, he sees two olive trees, trees interpreted as being " t h e two anointed who stand by Yahweh of the whole e a r t h " . Commentators uniformly view these anointed figures as signifying the diarchic 17

Admittedly this material is from the oracles.

polity recoverable in the oracular material, e.g., Zech. vi 9-15. 1 8 Zechariah apparently thinks in terms of joint civil-religious leadership, though the character of the civil side of the equation remains notably unclear in the visions themselves. T h e visions do, however, make clear that the high priest is to have an important leadership role, a n d this in contrast to Ezek. xl-xlviii. (8) H o w will the post-exilic c o m m u n i t y deal with disorder? For Ezekiel, one has the suspicion that the new community is to be without disorder. H e writes: " T h e house of Israel shall no more defile my holy n a m e " (Ezek. xliii 7). Similar is his statement about the priests in the new order: " T h e y shall not defile themselves by going near to a dead p e r s o n . . . " (Ezek. xliv 25). O n e senses that this is a Utopian setting, one in which J e r e m i a h ' s expectations of a new covenant are to be realized. Zechariah, by way of contrast, appears more pragmatic. His vision of the new order includes mention of those who have violated covenant norms and yet who go u n p u n i s h e d . This situation is addressed in the sixth vision (Zech. ν 1-4), a vision which is designed to solve that problem by having a flying curse punish those for whom punishment is appropriate. T h e admonitory material elsewhere in Zech. i-viii, though outside the bounds of the visionary texts, buttresses this notion of a not-so-perfect society. T h e s e eight questions and the presumed answers of Ezekiel and Zechariah surely suggest that Zechariah has presented an alternative to or a revision of the notions of restoration present in Ezek. xl-xlviii. Ill In s u m m a r y , one m a y contend that Zechariah was, in and through the vision reports, speaking from within the context of normative Israelite religious traditions, and explaining how Yahweh was again to interact with his chosen people. T h a t was, for Zechariah, no easy task. T h e covenant curses had been called in, the people a n d the land were now unclean. Yahweh had left his holy place; the community had been disbanded. Further, there was an alternative proposal available, that of Ezek. xl-xlviii. Moreover, the visions of Zechariah are not, as some have contended either general expressions of salvation to the newly agglomerated post-exilic com18

See the standard commentaries and Jeremias, pp. 176-88.

munity, nor are they, as others have maintained, directly linked to a cleansing or rebuilding ritual. Haggai may have been fired to propose immediate action in response to the poetry of Deutero-Isaiah or to the program of Ezekiel. Not so Zechariah. H e provided the theological prolegomenon to restoration, a theological warrant for the more m u n d a n e work of restoration to follow. Zechariah provided a theological perspective relevant to a new situation, that of a Yahwism without independent territorial state.

P R O P H E T I C

L E G I T I M A T I O N

I N

J E R E M I A H

1

by J . L. B E R Q U I S T Nashville, Tennessee

A problem which Jeremiah shared with all the prophets was that of attracting the audience's attention. Perhaps for Jeremiah this problem was more severe; at least, in J e r e m i a h ' s book we have more record of conflicts with the crowds and even of plots to kill the prophet. How did Jeremiah convince the audience to listen? At its roots, the issue is one of authority: not the source or nature of J e r e m i a h ' s authority to speak, but J e r e m i a h ' s techniques for persuading the audience of that authority. How did Jeremiah communicate the legitimacy of his prophetic authority, so that the audience willingly (to some degree) accepted his speaking? 2 How was this legitimation accomplished, and in what texts might this function and intention be located? T h e question of a text's function or intention calls into considération form-critical analysis. T h e concern lies chiefly with the intention of the unit. Why did the prophet utter this? What is its purpose? What response was expected from the audience? Though many texts have a variety of intentions, the chief purpose of some units seems to be to present the credentials of the prophet or to argue, perhaps indirectly, for the audience's attention. Such speeches intend to make the audience listen to the prophet, and such speech can be called legitimation. O n one level, much speaking is legitimation. Everything that is said must do something to claim the audience's attention. In common speech, this is accomplished through a variety of means, both verbal and non-verbal. Speakers use a wide range of rhetorical and 1 This is a revision of a paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature in Boston, Massachusetts, on 6 December 1987. 2 B. O. Long, "Prophetic Authority as Social Reality", in G. W. Coats and B. O. Long (ed.), Canon and Authority (Philadelphia, 1977), p. 5.

oratorical devices in order to keep the attention of their audiences. The motivation to listen must be constantly presented and represented. Though this need for legitimation pervades much speech, the present concern is more limited. In the book of J e r e m i a h , attempts to win the approval of the audience are visible. At several points, Jeremiah gives unusual speeches to gain the audience's approval and support. T h e book contains a presentation of J e r e m i a h ' s credentials in the call narrative. Jeremiah argues the validity of those credentials with Yahweh in the confessions. T h e authority to prophesy is argued between Jeremiah and other prophets. Jeremiah is given peculiar tasks which support his claims to authority. In these specific ways, Jeremiah struggles for the sympathetic listening of his audience. Five examples of legitimating texts will be examined below: i 4-19, xiv 10-16, xvi 1-9, xx 7-13, and xxiii 9-40.

I. Jer. i 4-19 O n e of the chief functions of a prophet's call narrative is to announce the prophet's credentials. T h e form itself may have originated in the setting of ambassadors presenting their credentials before their audience, telling how the ambassador was commissioned to present this particular message. 3 T h e form was later used by prophets to publicly announce that they had been vested with legitimate authority and sent to proclaim a legitimate message. This public proclamation of the qualifications for prophecy is a process of legitimation. The prophet relating the call narrative is claiming legitimate authority to engage in the prophetic act, and the form of proclamation is intended to claim the authority in such a way that the claim is accepted by the audience. T h e call narrative provides legitimation in two specific ways. First, the narrative claims that God is responsible for the prophesying. God called the prophet (i 5), and it is God who is responsible for the speaker and for the message (i 9-10). T h e prophet is shown to be exercising legitimate authority, received from God, to proclaim the specific message. Both the speaker and the speech are pronounced legitimate because of divine authority. 3 N. Habel, " T h e Form and Significance of the Call Narratives", ZAW 77 (1965), p. 322.

Secondly, the call narrative emphasizes that the prophet objected to the call (i 6). T h e prophet is depicted as having no say in the matter. God is responsible for the speaker and the message; the prophet did not want to proclaim the message. T h e denial both of personal desire and of responsibility for the message affirms that the prophet had no personal benefit from the message. The motive is purely the service of Yahweh, rather than any personal gain. This denial of desire is an essential element of the call narrative and of the legitimation which the call narrative intends. 4 These legitimating elements are present in Jeremiah's call narrative (i 4-19). The narrative tells of a confrontation between Jeremiah and Yahweh. The initiative for this meeting is Yahweh's; this is a self-revelation by the deity (Habel, p. 307), rather than J e r e m i a h ' s search for a message. Jeremiah claims that the source of his prophecy is not himself, but Yahweh. This validates the message by grounding its origins in the divine realm, and it removes Jeremiah from criticism by denying his responsibility for the content of his messages. T h e introductory word is that Yahweh prepared Jeremiah for this mission from before birth (i 5). The birth imagery emphasizes that J e r e m i a h ' s call came when he was unable to protest. He is helpless before Yahweh, and thus ultimate responsibility belongs to Yahweh. Jeremiah is denied any chance to desire to prophesy, since the decision was made before his birth. T h e commission leads to J e r e m i a h ' s objection (i 6). Jeremiah claims disqualification because of age, 5 and attempts to avoid the commission. He not only denies the desire to prophesy, but he is bold enough to reject Yahweh's commission temporarily and to insist that he is not able to prophesy. Yahweh repudiates this objection (i 7). In doing so, Yahweh is also telling the audience not to use such words in objection to Yahweh's prophet. T h e narrative works to remove the objection from the mouths of the audience, not only to reassure Jeremiah of his call. T h e words of comfort (i 8) talk of J e r e m i a h ' s ultimate victory over his opponents. Yahweh is allied 4 Long, p. 6, develops two similar but not identical categories: divine commission and disclaimer of ultimate responsibility. 5 R. P. Carroll, Jeremiah (London and Philadelphia, 1986), p. 98, argues that this is a stereotypical objection, rather than a specific statement about the prophet's age. However, Carroll also emphasizes the legitimating nature of the objection.

with Jeremiah against any detractors or objections. These words aim to denounce J e r e m i a h ' s opponents. The call itself culminates in a sign to confirm the prior discussion (i 9). This sign is brief: Yahweh touches J e r e m i a h ' s mouth and places words in him. T h e n , Yahweh explains this sign (i 10). Yahweh has granted authority to Jeremiah to proclaim a certain message. T h e message, however, is seen in broad terms and expressed only by its effects. Yahweh grants Jeremiah permission and authority to preach a message with international consequences. The message will be disfavorable to the audience, but because Yahweh's words are placed in J e r e m i a h ' s mouth, his words should be heard and heeded. In this section, Yahweh is shown to be the sole one responsible for J e r e m i a h ' s prophecy, and Jeremiah is shown to have no control over the content of the message, and thus no personal desire for the message. Jeremiah cannot be blamed either for speaking or for the negative character of what he says. The rest of the chapter continues and expands the call narrative. 6 The visions are part of the call, as the calls of Isaiah and Ezekiel included relevant visions. T h e visions confirm J e r e m i a h ' s qualifications, which he himself had previously questioned. 7 T h e visions are proof that Jeremiah is an adequate prophet: he can see visions, and Yahweh affirms the identifications of objects which Jeremiah offers. T h e oracle in i 17-19 also partakes of legitimation: Jeremiah is told that he will confront and overcome opposition. 8 Such elements of legitimation require a setting of possible or potential conflict, which covers a large portion of such a controversial prophet's preaching. T h e intention of the unit as a whole is to work against any possible objections to Jeremiah and his message by claiming for the prophet the legitimate authority of Yahweh's commissioning. Though the whole passage (i 4-19) was organized in a desire to provide prophetic legitimation, these connections do not mean that the first chapter was first composed as a unit. Indeed, i 4-10 is a 6 J . R. Lundbom, Jeremiah: A Study in Ancient Hebrew Rhetoric (Missoula, 1975), pp. 96-9, argues for a unified understanding of i 4-19. 7 A. Malamat, " A Forerunner of Biblical Prophecy: The Mari Documents", in P. D. Miller, P. D. Hanson, and S. D. McBride (ed.), Ancient Israelite Religion (Philadelphia, 1987), p. 46. 8 W. L. Holladay, Jeremiah 1 (Philadelphia, 1986), p. 31.

kernel to which the other materials were added in stages. However, the purpose of the expanding call material remained the same. New material of various genres but with identical intention was added in order to produce a larger, unifed complex which still was legitimating in function. T h e impact of this passage, in its earlier forms as well as in its completed version, would have been to validate J e r e m i a h ' s prophecy and his specific message. J e r e m i a h ' s call was used to combat skepticism in his audiences. This demands an oral, public use of this call-complex by Jeremiah. 9

II. Jer. xiv 10-16 Within its larger unit (xiv 1-xv 9), this sub-unit denounces false prophets. Yahweh prohibits Jeremiah from interceding, and denies that any cultic attempts to counter the present problems and to avert the coming destruction can be effective. Yahweh rejects any connection with the false prophets who pronounce words of peace, 10 and declares that they and those who believe them will both be destroyed. Jeremiah is prohibited from interceding (xiv 11). Intercession was one of a prophet's chief functions. Since the people expected a prophet to intercede, 11 Jeremiah would have been criticized harshly for failing this important task. Perhaps some people believed that this doomsayer who refused prophetic intercession could not be a true prophet. Such an objection is answered with legitimation: it was Yahweh who stopped the intercessory function, and thus Jeremiah should not be blamed. This legitimation provides the opportunity to denounce those prophets who do intercede. Jeremiah introduces the problem (xiv 13): why should people listen to him, and not to the other prophets who not only perform as expected but who also proclaim a much more pleasant message? Yahweh responds with denunciation: the

9 Long, p. 13, states that calls such as this were part of the later tradition and were not used by the prophets themselves. In Jeremiah's case, the stress on age supports a use of this passage by the prophet. Age would be a less important issue for those who later received the words than for those who heard the prophet speak. 10 J . L. Crenshaw, Prophetic Conflict: Its Effect upon Israelite Religion (Berlin, 1971), p. 15, notes that these opponents were cultic officials. 11 A. B. Rhodes, "Israel's Prophets as Intercessors", in A. L. Merrill and T. W. Overholt (ed.), Scripture in History and Theology (Pittsburgh, 1977), pp. 107-28.

other prophets are liars who bring destruction upon themselves and upon those who listen to them. T h e contrast between Jeremiah and the other prophets is sharp. T h e prophets, according to J e r e m i a h ' s quotation of them (xiv 13), negate Yahweh's "sword and f a m i n e " message (xiv 12). Légitimation stresses the difference between the message of Jeremiah and the other prophets, and then denounces the others. T h e opposition prophets are too optimistic. The dangers of sword, famine, and pestilence were real, but they insisted that these dangers were only illusory (Holladay, p. 444). Jeremiah correctly sees the dangers; the other deceive themselves (xiv 14). In order to legitimate Jeremiah against the other prophets, the passage proceeds to the next step. The audience is said to be at the same risk as the condemned prophets. Not only should the false prophets be destroyed, but those who listen to them will also be killed and left without burial (xiv 16). T h e goal of the passage is to turn the minds of the audience from the optimistic prophets to Jeremiah. Strictly speaking, the passage's intent is not to denounce the false prophets, but to convince the audience that Jeremiah is the true prophet. Thus, the horrific imagery of the end of this sub-unit is rhetorically appropriate. This sub-unit justifies J e r e m i a h ' s message and style, including his lack of intercession. It condemns his opponents in order to warn the audience that they risk destruction when they listen to J e r e m i a h ' s detractors. T h e people are thus encouraged to listen instead to Jeremiah. J e r e m i a h ' s message and ministry are validated to the audience once more.

III. Jer. xvi 1-9 This stark section shows J e r e m i a h ' s commitment to the message. Yahweh instructs Jeremiah to remain celibate. Furthermore, Jeremiah should not even attend funerals or weddings, signifying that all will die and that there will be no happiness in Israel. J e r e m i a h ' s celibacy is a symbolic act. 12 In remaining celibate and thus separating himself from the normal progression of past to 12

Against Carroll, pp. 337-42, who argues that this unit has been edited too much to be a reflection of a single person's life, and that therefore we cannot consider the passage as a symbolic act.

future, Jeremiah illustrates Yahweh's statement that the future will not be a continuation of the past. His life functions as a symbol of the desolation of the people and of the coming end (Holladay, p. 469). T h u s , the injunction against marriage, procreation, and celebration strengthens a proclamation made by Jeremiah, and supports that proclamation through a severe personal sacrifice. The injunctions against normal social life make Jeremiah a social deviant, and this social deviance can function as legitimation. T h e confirmation of a message through severe signs within one's own life underscores the consistency and urgency of the message. By demonstrating the depth of commitment of the one proclaming the message, the message becomes more believable to others. A person may offer a message in order to receive some personal gain, but when the message is given at great cost, motives seem less questionable. When that message overwhelms one's life, involving some unusual pain, commitment becomes obvious. T h e message may be seen as more valid, and it may reach new ears. Such personal sacrifice is an extreme form of legitimation, but it is not uncommon among the prophets (Isa. viii 1-4; J e r . xxxiii; Ezek. iv-v; Hos. i-iii).

IV. Jer. XX 7-13 J e r e m i a h ' s confessions are laments, but whether they were intended for private or public use has been a major question. Though it has been thought that the confessions reflected J e r e m i a h ' s private life, more recent analyses argue that the confessions were used publicly. 13 T h e confessions can be understood as reactions to the apparent failure of the ministry as outlined in the call, a failure which was caused by the opposition of other prophets (Holladay, p. 360). T h e confessions reassure Jeremiah of his own validity 14 and attempt to convince others of that legitimacy. T h e confessions are grouped in J e r . xi-xx and account for approximately a quarter of this material. T h e limits and density of this distinctive material have attracted much attention. T h e confessions may well have been the controlling factor for the construction of the entire complex (Holladay, pp. 6-9, 361). If so, then the com13

E. D. Lewin, "Arguing for Authority: A Rhetorical Study of Jeremiah 1.419 and 20.7-18", JSOT32 (1985), pp. 105-19; D. J . A. Clines and D. M. Gunn, "Form, Occasion and Redaction in Jeremiah 20", Z4H^88 (1970), pp. 390-409. ‫ יי‬J . M. Berridge, Prophet, People, and the Word of Yahweh (Zürich, 1970), p. 33.

plex xi-xx should be understood as legitimating, as has been demonstrated above for two non-confessional segments of the complex (xiv 10-16 and xvi 1-9). 15 T h e confessions discuss struggle between Yahweh and the prophet, 1 6 and this functions as a legitimating theme. For those who accuse Jeremiah of enjoying his harsh message, the struggle motif allows Jeremiah to state that he does not want to prophesy doom. Instead, Jeremiah struggles with the one who demands this message. This motif shifts responsibility for depressing prophetic words from Jeremiah to Yahweh. The struggle between them becomes an image for the struggle between Jeremiah and the peopie (Lewin, p. 117), and its telling thus may decrease the people's animosity toward Jeremiah. In this sense, the people identify themselves with the prophet's suffering at Yahweh's hands. 1 7 Perhaps the best example of a legitimating confession is J e r . xx 7-13. Jeremiah accuses Yahweh of coercion. People mock Jeremiah because of the negative word which Yahweh gave him. Jeremiah has no choice in the matter: when he tries to remain silent, he cannot do so. Even J e r e m i a h ' s friends denounce him, preparing to take vengeance upon him for his message of terror. But Jeremiah affirms Yahweh's presence and coming protection. Jeremiah asks Yahweh to wreak vengeance against these persecutors, and then ends the lament in praise. Because of the content of the message which Jeremiah is forced to carry, he has become the object of scorn throughout the community (xx 7). 18 Jeremiah had tried resisting Yahweh in order to deal with this scorn, but he could not resist Yahweh's desire that he preach the message (xx 9). This strengthens the inherent legitimation by stressing Yahweh's domination of Jeremiah, 1 9 thus denying any personal initiative on J e r e m i a h ' s part.

15 Lundbom, p. 30, asserts that the larger pattern of i‫־‬xx communicates authority. 16 Carroll, p. 400, states that the lament is not about Jeremiah's experience. 17 Of course, the later understandings of a prophet healing the people through vicarious suffering were not present at the beginning. 18 Some argue that the scorn is based upon the forcing, especially if this is rape (J. L. Crenshaw, A Whirlpool of Torment [Philadelphia, 1984], p. 39), but the text (xx 8) emphasizes that the derision is caused by the message's content. 19 D. J . A. Clines and D. M. Gunn, " 'You tried to persuade me' and 'Violence! Outrage!' in Jeremiah xx 7-8", VT 28 (1978), p. 26.

Jeremiah is denounced by those around him (xx 10). They, like Yahweh, search for a chance to deceive and overpower him, to take vengeance upon Jeremiah for the things he has said. T h e conflict is made explicit here: others desire to discredit J e r e m i a h ' s person and message, and Jeremiah expectantly seeks deliverance from these enemies (Clines and G u n n [n. 13], p. 402). These people are the reason for the legitimation. Yahweh's presence and coming retribution (xx 11-12) are the goals toward which Jeremiah had been striving throughout the confessions. By asserting such confidence in Yahweh's approval, Yahweh is aligned with the prophet. T h e conclusion of the lament in praise (xx 13) is a positive ending to J e r e m i a h ' s appeal. T h e proclamation that Yahweh will support J e r e m i a h ' s message and rescue him from his enemies is intended to convince the audience of the truth of Yahweh's support for J e r e m i a h . It would be reasonable to expect that the legitimating intention of xx 7-13 would also be found in J e r e m i a h ' s other confessions. If these texts are legitimating in function and intention, one may argue that they were always used publicly. Though it is possible that the confessions were originally private and were later used as public legitimation, such an original function is not reflected in the intention of the texts. If Jeremiah was involved in public legitimating activity throughout his preaching, there is no reason that the confessions or their public use must have been only late developments (cp. Holladay, pp. 6, 361). T h e confessions were used for public legitimation.

V. Jer. xxiii 9-40 This complex of denunciations of false prophets contains legitimation in the face of prophetic conflict (Carroll, p. 450). Yahweh commands the people to ignore lying prophets who offer sayings of peace (xxiii 16). These other prophets have not been in Yahweh's presence (xxiii 18-22) and instead have prophesied of Baal (xxiii 13) and have lived immoral lives (xxiii 14). They should be rejected (xxiii 33-4). Yahweh warns the people not to listen to the false prophets. Their visions are self-originating (xxiii 16-17, 30-2), in contrast to J e r e m i a h ' s repeated claims that his oracles are from Yahweh. T h e content of their message is stereotyped as peace (xxiii 16-17); it is

what the people want to hear (Crenshaw, [n. 10], p. 25). T h e passage paints those who refuse to listen to Jeremiah in an unflattering light, and thus encourages people to listen only to him. By denying the legitimacy of the other prophets, J e r e m i a h ' s own legitimacy is upheld. Yahweh's council is central (xxiii 18, 22). Jeremiah has access to that council, but the other prophets are kept away. Yahweh denies having sent those prophets (xxiii 21) and is angry at them (xxiii 20). This legitimating technique claims that other prophets have no information of what will happen because they do not have a relationship with Yahweh. God is far away, and the optimistic prophets who claim immediate access to God are wrong. 2 0 Because they misrepresent the divine word, they will be destroyed, and Jeremiah will be vindicated.

Conclusions In conclusion, let us consider the impact of legitimation upon the understanding of these Jeremiah texts. Several ramifications can be stated. First, conflicts between the prophet and others have implications for a variety of texts within the book. Texts reflecting public situations of opposition are more common than has usually been noted, and these texts exist in a variety of genres. Legitimation is a common response to opposition, especially opposition from other prophets. 2 1 Secondly, the confessions should be interpreted as part of J e r e m i a h ' s public ministry. They were not composed as private reflections upon the problems of being a prophet; rather, they are proclamations to the people for a specific public purpose. This is not to deny that these passages have a personal dimension. These speeches expressed J e r e m i a h ' s own concerns about his qualifications and reassured Jeremiah of his legitimacy. However, these are not the main functions of the confessions. Any solely personal application of the confessions must have been in a hypothetical earlier period.

20

W. E. Lemke, " T h e Near and Distant God: A Study of Jeremiah 23:23-24 in its Biblical Theological Context", JBL 100 (1981), p. 554. 21 Legitimation is present in ix 1-6, xi 18-xii 6, xv 10-21, xvii 5-18, xviii 18-23, xx 1-6, xx 14-18, xxvi 7-24, xxxii 1-44, and xxxvi 1-32.

Thirdly, some passages seem to have developed over time for the purpose of legitimation. T h e call complex (i 4-19) grew in several phases, and material in new genres was added to its original form. If the confessions originated in some cycle, then the entire cycle may well have been constructed for legitimation. Prophetic legitimation, then, is not only a significant factor in the original composition of J e r e m i a h ' s spoken words, but it also helped to shape the redaction and transmission of the material. Lastly, legitimation can be expressed in at least two ways. T h e prophet may stress a connection or close relationship with Yahweh, thus claiming that the prophetic word is actually Yahweh's word. In this way, responsibility for the prophecy is placed upon Yahweh. Also, other prophets may be condemned for being aligned against Yahweh. Alternately, the prophet may stress Yahweh's coercion, often expressing a negative relationship between Yahweh and the prophet, perhaps even to the point of condemning Yahweh. T h e audience and the prophet are thus aligned, sharing the pain of Yahweh's punishment. Paradoxically, prophetic legitimation can occur when the prophet depicts Yahweh as supporting or as damaging. Both images may even co-exist in the same passage.

1 KINGS XIII: T R U E A N D FALSE

PROPHECY1

by D. W . V A N W I N K L E Seattle Introduction

T h e story of the man of God who condemns the altar at Bethel and his subsequent demise recorded in 1 Kgs xiii has proven to be a difficult narrative to interpret. Scholars have suggested markedly different interpretations which indicate significant variations in their appraisal of its theological value. J . Skinner alleges that it is one of the strangest narratives in the Old Testament (p. 194). With a few exceptions, the one thing scholars can agree upon is that this narrative does not advance any criterion for distinguishing between the message of a true and a false prophet. For example, J . L. Crenshaw declares, " A t the outset it must be declared that this passage deals the death knell to every attempt to specify absolute criteria by which to differentiate the true from the false prophet, . . . " (p. 47). W . Gross adds, " T h i s story is not interested in providing help in distinguishing true prophets from false" (p. 129). This article will challenge this consensus by arguing that in addition to other functions this story may have, it advances just such a criterion. T h e article will identify this criterion and argue that it was important to the Deuteronomistic editor(s). However, before such a criterion can be advanced, several tasks must be accomplished. T h e history of interpretation needs to be reviewed. The origin and limit of the story must be discovered and any significant textual problems need to be solved. T h e story's structure must be ascertained and its genre identified. Finally, the criteria for discerning true prophecy which are supposedly advanced by this narrative must be evaluated. T h e n , and only then, can a new criterion be promoted.

1

A list of the works cited will be found at the end of the article.

History of Interpretation Disparate interpretations have been suggested for this narrative. Rather than providing an exhaustive list of these various interpretations, the following survey traces only the major trends and concentrates on the most recent ones. Several scholars agree that the story indicates that the man of G o d ' s errand is to be devoted singly to the divine purpose, (e.g. Skinner, p. 196; Montgomery, p. 261; Hossfeld and Meyer, p. 26) although one of the proponents of this interpretation concedes that the lesson is lost on the modern audience since the disobedience of the J u d e a n was completely innocent because he had no reason to suspect the other prophet of lying (Dentan, p. 51). If this article succeeds in advancing a criterion for the discernment of true and false prophecy, it will show that the disobedience of the J u d e a n was not completely innocent. Furthermore, the lesson of the importance of obedience to Yahweh's commandments might comport well with the criterion advanced in this article. Several other scholars agree that the narrative is concerned with the relationship between J u d a h and Israel. For example, J . Robinson comments that the editors included this story since it demonstrated the dangers of coming to terms with Canaanite civilization as the Northern Kingdom had done (p. 162). N. H . Snaith adds that it indicates that the J u d e a n s should avoid all relations with northerners (p. 120). However, K. Barth argues that the theme of the story is the manner in which the man of God and the prophet belong together, do not belong together and eventually and finally do belong together. M . A. Klopfenstein accepts a modified form of Barth's thesis (pp. 668-71). Some scholars stress the continuity of the theme of this story with other themes of the Deuteronomistic history. For example, M . Noth suggests that the Deuteronomistic history included it since it indicated that from the very beginning the word of G o d ' s rejection stood over the cult of Israel and since it shows that the progress of the history of Israel was determined through the accord between prediction and fulfillment (p. 305). Other scholars suggest interpretations which do not fit easily into any major categories. U. Simon states that the lesson of our narrative is that nothing avails against the word of the Lord, for he who impairs it will be forced to strengthen it, just as he who betrays his mission will be forced to bolster it even at the cost of his own life

(p. 112). According to S. J . De Vries it enhances belief in prophetic authority to challenge usurpations of Yahweh's supremacy (1978, p. 55). Gross declares that its point is that you, a prophet, may under no circumstance turn aside from the word from Yahweh which you have received even if a king tries to lead you astray with rich gifts or another nābP misleads you with a different word from Yahweh (p. 129). J . Lindblom (p. 64) and R . R . Wilson (p. 191) indicate that the moral of the story is that prophets who receive divine messages should obey those messages, even in the face of contradictory oracles. A. Rofé suggests that the moral of this parable is that the prophet is G o d ' s maPāk and his behavior must conform to this role (p. 161). Finally, according to T . B. Dozeman, a major theme which unifies this narrative is true and false prophecy. H e explains that this narrative advances fulfillment, prophetic confirmation and the character of the prophet as tests for the discernment of true and false prophecy (p. 392). With only some exceptions, scholars have detected only one theme for this story. After classifying this story as Midrash, Robinson remarks that as such it makes a single point which oversimplifies issues and distorts truth (p. 162). However, a survey of the history of the interpretation of this narrative indicates that there are probably several themes and points made by this story. T h e present article will argue that in addition to other themes, this story advances a criterion for distinguishing true from false prophecy. However, before a new criterion can be advanced, the origin and limit of the story must be discovered.

Origin and limit of the Story Both the origin and the limit of this story are disputed. Some have concluded that it is a post-Deuteronomistic addition to 1 Kgs (e.g. Wellhausen, p. 280; Eissfeldt, p. 388, E. tr., p. 290; and Rofé, p. 163). Others maintain that a pre-Deuteronomistic story lies behind the present narrative (e.g. Noth, 1968, p. 293; Gross, pp. 97-135; Simon, pp. 81-117; and Dozeman, pp. 379-93). In addition, some have argued that 1 Kgs xiii comprises a unit (e.g. Dozeman, pp. 381-2; and Long, pp. 143-52) while others have argued that the original unit also included 2 Kgs xxiii 16-18 (e.g.

Jepsen, p. 171; and Simon, pp. 81-117). W . E. Lemke has demonstrated that this is not a post-Deuteronomistic addition to 1 Kings since it uses key expressions and dominant motifs which are paralleled elsewhere in the Deuteronomistic history (pp. 301-26). 2 In addition, Wilson has demonstrated that the tensions which exist between the account of Josiah's destruction of the altar in 2 Kgs' xxiii and 1 Kgs xiii suggest that older traditions lie behind the present form of 1 Kgs xiii (p. 188). 3 Furthermore, I would argue that the discrepancies between 1 Kgs xiii and 2 Kgs xxiii probably indicate that 1 Kgs xiii comprises an independent unit. Several attempts have been made to reconstruct the preDeuteronomistic narrative which most likely lies behind 1 Kgs xiii. However, no consensus has emerged (see for example the conflicting reconstructions of E. Würthwein, pp. 166-72; Gross, p. 106; Noth, 1968, p. 295; and Dozeman pp. 380-92). T h e markedly different reconstructions of the pre-Deuteronomistic narrative testifies to the difficulty in reconstructing this story. This has led both Wilson (p. 188) and B. O . Long (p. 145) to acknowledge that,· whatever the pre-history of the text may have been, earlier forms of tradition are hidden. For the purposes of this article, the reconstruction of the pre-Deuteronomistic text does not seem to be a profitable undertaking since the evidence is ambiguous, and since 2 The Key expressions are cārê sôm'rôn ("cities of Samaria"), kôhânê habbâmôt ("priests of the high places") bāttê habbâmôt ("shrines of the high places") limrôt ^et-pi yhwh ( " t o rebel against the mouth of the Lord") lišmār ^el-hammiswà ( " t o keep the commandment") and lāšûb min/b' hadderek ("to turn from/return by the way"). The two dominate motifs are the polemic against Jeroboam and the demand for obedience to the divine command. Rofé's counter-arguments (p. 163) are not convincing, mallāt ("present") instead of maPēt ("present") is not really such a late Hebrew idiom as to demand a late date for this story since mattāt is used in Prov. xxv 14 and Ezek. xlvi 5, 11, and since maPet is used in the Esth. ii 18. While it is true that the expression for eating, sā^ad instead of sāCad leb is unusual, the use of this one expression does not demand that this is product of the 5th century rather than the 6th century. Neither the theological expression if bar yhwh ("the word of the Lord") which replaces yhwh as the source of the prophetic message nor the historical references to the reform of Josiah and to the cities of Samaria preclude the 6th century dating of this narrative. 3 Josiah's reforms do not correspond perfectly with what is predicted in 1 Kgs xiii. Josiah destroyed the altar and pulverized the stones which was not a part of the original prophecy since the destruction of the altar is a sign whose immediate fulfillment is recorded in 1 Kgs xiii 5. Furthermore, although 1 Kgs xiii 2 predicts that Josiah will sacrifice the priests of the high places on the altar at Bethel, according to 2 Kgs xxiii 20 he slew them on the altars of the high places throughout the land.

this article is concerned with determining the criterion suggested by the Deuteronomistic History for distinguishing true from false prophecy. This determination is not affected by the reconstruction of the pre-Deuteronomistic narrative since the Deuteronomistic history advanced the criteria either by inclusion or by composition (Noth, 1957, p. 10, notes that the D H made a deliberate selection from the material at his disposal). However, for the purposes of this article, it is worth while to determine whether there have been significanct post-Deuteronomistic additions to the text. Text T h e most significant alleged post-Deuteronomistic addition to the text is kihēš lô, " h e lied to h i m " , in 1 Kgs xiii 18 (e.g. De Vries, 1978, p. 171; Quell, p. 70). Scholars who dismiss this as a later gloss suggest that Yahweh is the sender of the second oracle (e.g. Knierim, p. 232). However, in spite of the fact that the asyndetic joining of kihēš lô appears strange, it is probably part of the original text. Its originality is supported by the external evidence since no significant text or version omits it. Internal evidence also supports its retention since it is a rough reading. Either the phrase is an asyndetic explication of the earlier part of the verse (Driver, § 163) or perhaps there was a facilitating koh (Rudolph, p. 205) or a w (Gray, p. 330) before kihēš which was lost due to haplography. M . Sternberg notes that given the credibility of prophetic utterance it is no wonder that the narrator edges in the corrective aside " h e lied to h i m " (p. 380). Having discussed the significant textual problems, we shall now consider the structure.

The Structure of the Story T h e narrative may be easily divided into two parts. 1 Kgs xiii 110 is concerned with the oracle against the altar of J e r o b o a m at Bethel and xiii 11-32 is concerned with the disobedience of the man of God. These two parts are united by the statement that the man of God was not to eat drink or return by the way that he had come (xiii 9, 17, 22) and by the oracle against the altar given by the man of God (xiii 2) and repeated by the old prophet (xiii 32). While these two parts may have originally been independent, as the text now stands they are closely bound together into one story (Long, pp. 143-50).

T h e repetition of words and phrases for the commandments of God indicate that these commandments occupy an important place in the structure of our story. In 1 Kgs xiii 9, the man of God refuses the king's invitation stating, " F o r so it was commanded me (siwwâ ^ātí) by the word of Yahweh saying, 'You shall eat no bread, nor drink water, nor return by the way which you came... ' " I n xiii 17, he explains to the old prophet why he cannot accept his invitation stating, " F o r a commandment (dābār) came to me by the word of Yahweh, 'You shall eat no bread, nor drink water there; do not return by going the way which you have come.' " In xiii 21 the old prophet proclaims to the man of God, " T h u s says Yahweh, 'Because you have rebelled against the mouth of Yahweh (mārîtā pi yhwh), and have not observed the commandment ( « / / 0 ° šāmartā ‫?<נ‬/hammiswâ) which Yahweh your God commanded you e (siww kā)...' " Finally, in xiii 26 the man of God is referred to as the one " w h o rebelled against the mouth of Yahweh (mārâ ^et-pî yhwh)". Given that the commandments of God occupy an important place in the structure of this story, they should occupy such a place in the interpretation of this narrative. We have seen that the narrative may be divided into two parts which are closely bound together into one story and that the commandments of God figure largely in this story. But what is the genre of this story? Genre The determination of genre is important since it may help us to discover the purpose or purposes of the narrative. T h e consensus of scholarship views this narrative as a prophetic legend. Rofé challenges this consensus by suggesting that this is a prophetic parable. This challenge is significant. If it were a parable, the purpose would be didactic. Rofé notes that it cannot be a legend since there is no point in venerating an unknown holy man and because the M a n of God is condemned rather than venerated. In addition, he maintains that the anonymity of the M a n of God indicates that it is not a biography. H e concedes that the apparent lack of a clear moral has prevented scholars from recognizing it as a parable (p. 158). Long rejects this identification of the genre noting that Rofé's identification of a single moral for a complex narrative is too restric-

tive (p. 150). In spite of Long's objection, it appears likely that this is a prophetic parable rather than a prophetic legend. As G. B. Caird has demonstrated, parables like similes and metaphors may vary both in correspondence and development so that they may make more than one point (p. 163). Furthermore, it does not appear to be a legend since it is unlikely that the main characters in the narrative are historical figures 4 and since the story does not portray heroes who are to be emulated. Rofé also concludes that prophetic parables appear to be a late development in the prophetic narrative (163). However, this conelusion is unwarranted. As Rofé acknowledges, parables are well attested both in early wisdom literature of the ancient Near East and in early prophetic literature of Israel (e.g. N a t h a n ' s parable of the poor m a n ' s ewe-lamb and Isaiah's parable of the vineyard). Therefore, although 1 Kgs xiii is most likely a parable, it is not necessarily a late creation. I will argue that one of the purposes of this parable is to advance a criterion for distinguishing between the message of a true and a false prophet. However, before I advance a new criterion, I wish to evaluate the criteria which others have suggested that this narrative advances. Supposed Criteria Any criterion advanced by this narrative for determining the truth of a prophetic message must meet two tests. First, it must provide a criterion which would have helped the man of God to recognize the falsehood of the old prophet's assurance that it was proper for him to violate G o d ' s previous c o m m a n d m e n t . If it fails to do this, it does not resolve a major tension in the narrative. Secondly, it should provide a criterion which could be employed by any Israelite. If it fails to do this, it does not explain the reason for the 4 De Vries (1978, p. 101) argues for the historicity of this narrative since it retains traditions which are in opposition to the interest of its own tradents. He adds that this anti-Bethel story was preserved by the Bethelite tradents since no surviving Judahite had been on the scene to witness the events. But this argument is circular since he also argues that the narrative cannot have originated in Judah since the events recorded occurred near Bethel and since the sole Judahite witness to them died. Thus it is historically accurate since it was preserved by the Bethelite tradents and it was preserved by the Bethelite tradents since it was historically accurate.

inclusion of this narrative in the Deuteronomistic history since the rest of the Deuteronomistic history has this audience in mind. De Vries suggests that this story advances the criterion of radical theonomy. H e maintains that once the story is properly interpreted, it offers the clearest test of all: radical obedience. He coneludes that the prophet must be so committed to the transcendent truth of what he proclaims that his very life is affected by it (1985, pp. 173-4). However, this criterion would not have helped the man of God to discern that the message of the old prophet was false. Furthermore, it does not explain why the oracle proclaiming that the man of God would not be buried with his fathers should be considered a valid message of Yahweh since the old prophet's life did not reflect a radical theonomy. Wilson (p. 191) and Lindblom (p. 64) suggest that this story was originally addressed to a group of prophets who were faced with prophetic messages which contradicted their own. This story encouraged prophets to obey the message that they had received even in the face of contradictory oracles. However, if this interpretation were correct, the story would lack relevance for the broader audience addressed by the rest of 1 Kings. We are left to wonder why the editors of the Deuteronomistic history included it. In addition, the criterion advanced is problematic. R . P. Carroll is correct when he notes that the change in message could not have been grounds for knowing it to be false since part of the ground rules was that Yahweh was free to change his mind (p. 203). Dozeman suggests that the theme which unifies this narrative is true and false prophecy and that this narrative advances three criteria for determining the truth of prophecy. T h e first is fulfillment as in the case of the old prophet's prophecy concerning the man of God in 1 Kgs xiii 21-2. The second is prophetic confirmation which is suggested by the testing of the prophet from J u d a h by the old prophet and by the interdependency of the two prophetic words. T h e third is the actions and character of the prophet which must be considered when evaluating his prophecy. According to Dozeman, the emphasis on " t h e w a y " (derek) and the change of appellatives suggest this third criterion (p. 392). H e explains that the appellative for the old nābP changes immediately after the test to " t h e nabP who caused him to r e t u r n " (hannābP ^ašer hësîbô) and the " m a n of G o d " is described as "his carcass thrown down in the w a y " (niblātâ mušleket badderek) after the old prophet's prophecy is

fulfilled and the man of God has been killed by the lion (p. 389). While it is true that this narrative promotes the criterion of fulfillment, it also demonstrates its limits. When the man of God is killed by the lion just as the old prophet foretold, we are able to recognize this prophecy to be a legitimate word of Yahweh. Furthermore, fulfillment is important to the Deuteronomistic editor. However, this criterion would have proven to be unhelpful for assisting the man of God to determine the falsehood of the old prophet's assurance that it was proper for him to violate the previous commandment of God. This story also demonstrates the limits of both prophetic confirmation and evaluations of the character of the prophet. Prophetic confirmation would not have helped the man of God to recognize the falsehood of the old prophet's assurance that it was all right for him to return and eat. An evaluation of the character of the old prophet might have helped him to recognize the falsehood of this assurance, but it would not have helped him to recognize the truth of the prophecy that he would not be buried with his fathers. If anything, it would have led him to believe that this was a false message. Indeed, this story demonstrates the limited usefulness of evaluating the character of the prophet since God speaks through a lying prophet. In addition to the criteria which have been suggested, evaluated, and rejected; Rofé suggests that the man of God should have recognized the old prophet's message to be false since it was attributed to an angel. He notes, " W h e n the Old Prophet came forward claiming a revelation of a heavenly angel (vs. 18), the M a n of God easily couldhave (sic) rocognized (sic) his partner's blatant lie. T h e M a n of God was not merely deceived. He had already fallen into the snare of heresy, a belief in angels." (p. 162). If Rofé were correct, the narrative would advance a criterion for the determination of the true message from God. Messages attributed to angels should be rejected. While this criterion would have been easily applied by any Israelite, the man of God cannot really be faulted for believing in angels. If he had fallen into the snare of belief in angels, he had plenty of company (McKane, pp. 59-60, lists the passages in which an angel communicates Yahweh's word). Angels were considered to be acceptable messengers of Yahweh. Having examined the criteria which have been suggested and having found them to be lacking, I will suggest a new criterion.

A New Criterion This new criterion provides a test which would have helped the man of God to recognize the falsehood of the old prophet's assurance that it was all right for him to return and eat. It also provides a test which could have been employed by any Israelite. This criterion is the criterion of obedience to the commandment of Yahweh. T h e man of God should have recognized the assurance of the old prophet to be false since it encouraged him to violate the commandment of God. According to the Deuteronomistic history, Yahweh did change his mind about the future and communicated these changes through the prophets. For example, he responded to Ahab's repentance in 1 Kgs xxi by informing him through Elijah that he had postponed the judgement which he had threatened. However, there is no instance in the Deuteronomistic history where Yahweh is portrayed as instructing his prophets to encourage disobedience to his commandments. Therefore, the criterion of obedience to the commandments of Yahweh would have helped the man of God to discern that the message of the old prophet was false. T h e criterion of obedience to the commandment of Yahweh meets the second test. This criterion would have also been helpful for any Israelite since it provided a way of testing the message of a prophet. If the prophet encouraged disobedience to the commandment of Yahweh, that is the law, he was not to be regarded as speaking a message of Yahweh. In order to show the relevance of this criterion for his audience, the Deuteronomistic editor employs the term miswâ to refer to G o d ' s commandment. According to G. Braulik, Deuteronomy uses miswâ to refer to the Decalogue as well as the entire law promulgated by Moses, including the parentetic part and the legal corpus (p. 56). In the Deuteronomistic history, G o d ' s miswâ refers to the Decalogue or the entire Deuteronomic law (Josh, xxii 3, 5; 2 Kgs xvii 34, 37) and is used to refer to a single apparently cultic ordinance only in 1 Sam. xiii 13 (Gross, p. 104). This has led Gross to conclude, " W i t h respect to its singular n u m b e r and with respect to its signification (neither the deuteronomic law nor the Decalogue, but a specific prohibition against eating and drinking, limited to the man of God at Bethel), the usage of miswâ in 1 Kgs 13:21 lies outside of the field of typical dtr usage" (p. 104). The Deuteronomistic editor uses miswâ in an untypical manner in order to convey a double meaning much in the same way as he

did with the expression šûb min-hadderek. According to Lemke, " Q u i t e conceivably the author of vs. 26 intended to play on the various nuances of the meaning of šûb in conjunction with derek, leaving it purposely ambiguous in order to facilitate the transition from the literal sense (as in vss 9, 10, 17) to the metaphorical one (as in vs. 3 3 ) " (p. 311 and apparently independently Dozeman, pp. 386-7). In a similar m a n n e r , miswâ is used to refer both to the specific prohibition against eating and drinking addressed to the man of God and to the entire Deuteronomic law addressed to Israel. This ambiguity is further supported by the usage of mārâ pi yhwh. This expression is used in the Qal to refer to disobedience to the general commandments of Yahweh (e.g. 1 Sam. xii 15) and in the HiphHl to refer to disobedience to both general commandments (e.g. Josh, i 18 and 1 Sam. xii 14) and specific prohibitions (e.g. Deut. i 26, 43 and ix 23). 5 Just as the m a n of God was to recognize the old prophet's message to be false since it encouraged him to violate Yahweh's specific prohibition against eating and drinking, so too Israel should recognize false prophets' messages to be false since they encourage disobedience to the Mosaic law. T h e criterion of conformity with Yahweh's commandments is in accord with the criterion for distinguishing the message of a true prophet advanced by Deut. xiii. According to this passage, if a prophet or dreamer of dreams encourages the people to worship other gods, they are not to follow him even though he succesfully predicts the future. Instead of following this prophet, they are to put him to death. In this manner, Deut. xiii advances the test of conformity to the law as a criterion for discerning the message of a true prophet. This criterion takes precedence over the criterion of successful prediction of the future which is advanced in Deut. xviii. In addition, N u m . xii 1-16 may indicate that the clear teaching of Moses is made definitive for the work of a seer (Mays, p. 91). T h e Deuteronomistic editor's conception of the role of a prophet also promotes the criterion of obedience to the commandments of Yahweh. 2 Kgs xvii is a pivotal passage in the Deuteronomistic History containing the editor's explanation for the fall of both Israel and J u d a h . In 2 Kgs xvii 13, the editor expresses his view of the ministry of the prophets. This verse reads as follows: " Y e t Yahweh warned Israel and J u d a h , through all his prophets and every seer, 5

I am indebted to G. I. Davies for pointing out this usage of mārâ pi yhwh.

saying ' T u r n from your evil ways and keep my commandments, my statutes according to all the law which I commanded your fathers, and which I sent to you through my servants the prophets.' " According to this passage Yahweh sent prophets to Israel to encourage them to repent and keep the law. This indicates that the Deuteronomistic editor thought that the role of a prophet was to encourage obedience to the law. In addition, Moses is identified as the prophet (Deut. xxxiv 10-12) and the lawgiver. Even though J o s h u a is presented as a second Moses, he is dependent on the law of Moses. T h e Deuteronomistic editor's highlighting of Moses may reflect his conception that prophets were supposed to encourage obedience to the law.

Conclusion T h e narrative of the man of God who condemns the altar at Bethel and his subsequent demise recorded in 1 Kgs xiii is a parable which among other things advances a criterion for discerning the message of a prophet. This criterion is the conformity of the message to the commandment of Yahweh. J u s t as the man of God was to recognize the old prophet's message to be false since it encouraged him to violate Yahweh's specific prohibition against eating and drinking, so too Israel should recognize false prophets' messages to be false since they encourage disobedience to the Mosaic law. This criterion is in keeping with the rest of the Deuteronomistic History since its editor advances a similar criterion in Deut. xiii and since this is in accord with its conception that the role of a prophet was to uphold the law and urge people to repent and live in accord with it. This conception is also found in traditional Judaism. T h e opening paragraph of the Mishnaic treatise Pirqe Abot declares: Moses received Torah from Sinai and delivered it to Joshua; then Joshua delivered it to the elders, the elders to the prophets, and the prophets delivered it to the men of the Great Assembly.6

6

I wish to thank Dr G. I. Davies for his comments on this article. An earlier version of this paper was presented to the Northwest Regional SBL Meeting in April 1986 and to the National SBL Meeting in December 1986. I would like to point out that independently Auld (pp. 93-6) has proposed a similar interpretation.

List of works cited A. G. Auld, I & II Kings (Edinburgh and Philadelphia, 1986); K. Barth, Exegese von 1. Könige 13 (Neukirchen, 1955); G. Braulik, "Die Ausdrücke fur 'Gesetz' im Buch Deuteronomium", Bib 51 (1970), pp. 39-66; G. Β. Caird, The Language and Imagery of the Bible (London and Philadelphia, 1980); R. P. Carroll, When Prophecy Failed: Cognitive Dissonance in the Prophetic Traditions of the Old Testament (London and New York, 1979); J . L. Crenshaw, Prophetic Conflict-. Its Effect Upon Israelite Religion, BZAW 124 (Berlin, 1971); R. C. Dentan, The First and Second Books of Kings, The First and Second Books of Chronicles (Atlanta, 1964); S . J . De Vries, Prophet Against Prophet : The Rolee of the Micaiah Narrative (1 Kings 22) in the Development of Early Prophetic Tradition (Grand Rapids, 1978), and I Kings (Waco, Texas, 1985); T. B. Dozeman, " T h e Way of the Man of God from Judah: True and False Prophecy in the Pre-Deuteronomic Legend of 1 Kings 13", CBQ 44 (1982), pp. 379-93; S. R. Driver, A Treatise on the Use of Tenses in Hebrew (3rd edn, Oxford, 1892); O. Eissfeldt, Einleitung in das Alte Testament (3rd edn, Tübingen, 1964), Ε. tr. The Old Testament: An Introduction (Oxford and New York, 1965); J . Gray, I and II Kings (2nd edn, London and Philadelphia, 1970); W. Gross, "Lying Prophet and Disobedient Man of God in I Kings 13: Role Analysis as an Instrument of Theological Interpretation of an Old Testament Narrative T e x t " , Semeia 15(1979), pp. 97-135; F. L. Hossfeld and I. Meyer, Prophet gegen Prophet: eine Analyse der alttestamentlichen Texte zum Thema: Wahre und falsche Propheten (Fribourg, 1973); A. Jepsen, "Gottesmann und Prophet. Anmerkungen zum Kapitel 1. Könige 13", in H. W. Wolff (ed.), Probleme biblischer Theologie: Gerhard von Rad zum 70. Geburtstag (Munich, 1971), pp. 171-82; Μ. Α. Klopfenstein, " 1 Könige 13", in Ε. Busch et al. (ed.), Parrhesia (Karl Barth zum 80. Geburtstag am 10. Mai 1966 (Zürich, 1966), pp. 639-72; R. Knierim, "Offenbarung im Alten Testament", in Probleme biblischer Theologie, pp. 206-35; W. E. Lemke, " T h e Way of Obedience: 1 Kings 13 and the Structure of the Deuteronomistic History", in F. M. Cross et al. (ed.), Magnalia Dei: The Mighty Acts of God, Essays on the Bible and Archeology in memory of G. E. Wright (Garden City, New York, 1976), pp. 301-26; B. O. Long, I Kings: with an Introduction to Historical Literature (Grand Rapids, 1984); J . L. Mays, Leviticus, Numbers (Atlanta, 1963); W. McKane, Prophets and Wise Men (London, 1965); J . A. Montgomery, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Books of Kings (Edinburgh, 1951); M. Noth, Uberlieferungsgeschichtliche Studien: Die Sammelnden und Bearbeitenden Geschichtswerke im Alten Testament (2nd edn, Tübingen, 1957), and, Könige 1 (Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1968); G. Quell, Wahre und falsche Propheten: Versuch einer Interpretation (Gütersloh, 1952); J . Robinson, The First Book of Kings (Cambridge, 1972); A. Rofé, "Classes in the Prophetic Stories: Didactic Legenda and Parable", Studies on Prophecy, SVT 26 (Leiden, 1974), pp. 143-64; W. Rudolph, " Z u m Text der Königsbücher", ZAW 63 (1951), pp. 201-5; U. Simon, "1 Kings 13: A Prophetic Sign-Denial and Persistence", HUCA 47 (1976), pp. 81-117; J . Skinner, I and II Kings (London, n.d ); Ν. H. Snaith, " T h e First and Second Books of Kings", IB III, pp. 3-338; M. Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative: Ideological Literature and the Drama of Reading (Bloomington, Indiana, 1985); J . Wellhausen, Die Composition des Hexateuchs und der Historischen Bücher des Alten Testaments (3rd edn, Berlin, 1899); R. R. Wilson, Prophecy and Society in Ancient Israel (Philadelphia, 1980); E. Würthwein, Die Bücher der Könige. 1 Könige 1-16 (Göttingen, 1977)

S T R U C T U R E , G E N R E , A N D I N T E N T IN T H E OF

BOOK

HABAKKUK by

M A R V I N A. S W E E N E Y Miami

I In his Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture (London and Philadelphia, 1979), p. 448, Brevard Childs reports that modern biblical scholarship has reached a censensus concerning the structure of the book of Habakkuk. Following the superscription in H a b . i 1, the first major section is H a b . i 1-ii 4(5), a unity frequently described as a " d i a l o g u e " between the prophet and God, which consists of a complaint in H a b . i 2-4; a divine response in H a b . i 5-11; a second complaint in i 12-17; and a divine answer in H a b . ii 1-4. T h e second major section is H a b . ii (5) 6-20, a series of " w o e " oracles directed against an unnamed oppressor. T h e third major section is H a b . iii 1-19, a concluding psalm, which many scholars view as an independent composition that was added to H a b . i-ii. Despite this consensus, there remain a n u m b e r of persistent problems in the interpretation of the book. There is widespread disagreement concerning the genre of the work, which is variously described as a liturgical composition, 1 a prophetic imitation of a cultic liturgy, 2 a report of a visionary experience, 3 and a wisdom 1

S. Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien III(Kristiania, 1923), pp. 27-29; Ε. Sellin, Das Zwölfprophetenbuch (2nd and 3rd edns, Leipzig, 1930), pp. 381-2; P. Humbert, Problêmes du livre d'Habacuc (Neuchâtel, 1944), pp. 280-9; K. Elliger, Das Buch der zwölf kleinen Propheten II: Die Propheten Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephanja, Haggai, Sacharja, Maleachi (8th edn. Göttingen, 1982), p. 25; E. Nielsen, " T h e Righteous and the Wicked in H a b a q q u q " , Studia Theologica 6 (1953), pp. 54-78; J . H. Eaton, Obadiah, Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah: Introduction and Commentary (London, 1961), pp. 81-4; J . Jeremias, Kultprophetie und Gerichtsverkündigung in der späten Königszeit Israels ( Neukirchen, 1970), pp. 90-110; J . D. W. Watts, The Books of Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah (Cambridge, 1975), pp. 221-2. 2 G. Fohrer, " D a s 'Gebet des Propheten Habakuk' (Hab. 3, 1-16)", in A. Caquot, S. Legasse and M. Tardieu (ed.), Mélanges bibliques et orientaux en l'honneur de M. Mathias Delcor (Kevelaer and Neukirchen, 1985), pp. 159-67. 3 W. Rudolph, Micha-Nahum-Habakuk-Zephanja (Gütersloh, 1975), pp. 193-5; J .

text which centers on the question of theodicy. 4 Several aspects relevant to understanding the details of the book's structure remain unsettled, including the meaning and character of H a b . ii 4(5); the precise definition of H a b . ii (5)6-20 and its relation to the previous material in ii 1-4(5); and the relation of H a b . iii to H a b . i-ii. Finally, the identification of the anonymous referents of the book in relation to its historical background remains problematic, partieularly the " w i c k e d " and the " r i g h t e o u s " m e n t i o n e d throughout the book. Each identification proposed by scholars is accompanied by arguments for textual emendations, transpositions, and literary development which continue to provoke disagreement. 5 T h a t each of these problems is ultimately bound to our understanding of the final form of the book, including its structure, genre, and intent, is evident. It is therefore important to note that there are problems with the current consensus concerning the structure of the book. First, the superscriptions in H a b . i 1 and iii 1 suggest not a three-part structure for the book, but a two-part structure in which H a b . i 2-ii 20 is identified generically as " t h e maššā^ which Habakkuk the prophet s a w " , and H a b . iii 2-19 is identified as " t h e têpillâ of Habakkuk the prophet concerning ligyônôt". Second, the reporting language of H a b . ii 1-4(5) indicates that this text cannot be identified as the divine response to the complaint in H a b . i 12-27, but as the prophet's report of G o d ' s response. Because the prophet speaks in this section, H a b . i 2‫־‬ii 4 cannot be viewed generically as a dialogue between Habakkuk and God. Third, H a b . ii (5)6-20 lacks clear structural markers which precisely define the beginning of the unit and separate it from the preceding material. Finally, a n u m b e r of studies have pointed to features of H a b . iii

G. Janzen, "Eschatological Symbol and Existence in Habakkuk", C ß ß 4 4 (1982), pp. 394-414; B. Peckham, " T h e Vision of Habakkuk", CBQ 48 (1986), pp. 617-36. 4 C. A. Keller, Michée, Nahoum, Habacuc, Sophome (Neuchâtel, 1971), pp. 13843; idem, "Die Eigenart der Prophetie Habakuks", ZAW85 (1973), pp. 156-67; D. E. Gowan, "Habakkuk and Wisdom", Perspective 9 (1968), pp. 157-66; idem, The Triumph of Faith in Habakkuk (Atlanta, 1976); E. Otto, "Die Theologie des Buches H a b a k u k " , VT 35 (1985), pp. 274-95; A. H. J . Gunneweg, "Habakuk und das Problem des leidenden saddiq", ZAW 98 (1986), pp. 400-15. 5 For a survey of research on the book of Habakkuk through the mid-1970s, see P. Jöcken, Das Buch Habakuk (Köln-Bonn, 1977). In addition, see my forthcoming article, "Habakkuk, Book o f ' , in D. N. Freedman et al. (ed.), Anchor Bible Dietionary (Garden City, 1992).

which indicate that the psalm is integrally connected to H a b . i-ii. 6 These arguments indicate difficulties with the current consensus concerning the structure of Habakkuk and that a form-critical reassessment of the book, including its structure, genre, and intent, is necessary. It is the contention of this article that such a reassessment may aid in providing a solution to some of the problems in the interpretation of this book. Such a reassessment must begin with the structural observation that, in its present form, the book of Habakkuk comprises two distinct sections: H a b . i-ii, the " P r o n o u n c e m e n t " (maššā7) of Habakkuk, and H a b . iii, the " P r a y e r " (tepilla) of Habakkuk. These sections are demarcated formally by their respective superscriptions in i 1 and iii 1, the technical terms in iii 1, 3, 9, 13, and 19 which identify H a b . iii as a psalm, the distinctive mythological background of H a b . iii, and their respective generic characters. Each section will be analysed individually before its relationship to the final structure of the book is considered.

II With respect to H a b . i-ii, H a b . i 1 is generically identified as a superscription, whose function is to provide the reader with essential information that identifies or characterizes the material that follows. 7 As such, it is structurally distinct from H a b . i 2-ii 20 and identifies this material as " t h e pronouncement which Habakkuk the prophet s a w " . T h e Hebrew term massa3, " p r o n o u n c e m e n t " or " b u r d e n " , refers to a type of prophetic oracle, but its precise meaning is problematic. A recent study by R . D. Weis, however, argues convincingly that mass'ä•3 refers to a specific type of prophetic discourse which is intended to explain how Y H W H ' s intention is to be manifested in h u m a n affairs. 8 According to Weis, the genre is not constituted by a well-defined literary structure as examples of massa^ôt texts include a variety of literary elements. T h e maššā^ât are based on a revelatory experience, such as a vision, and are 6

For a survey of scholarly opinion on this issue, see Jöcken (η. 5), pp. 241-519. For a discussion of prophetic superscriptions, see G. M. Tucker, "Prophetic Superscriptions and the Growth of the C a n o n " , in G. W. Coats and B. O. Long (ed.), Canon and. Authority (Philadelphia, 1977), pp. 56-70. 8 A Definition of the Genre Maššā 3 in the Hebrew Bible (Ph. D. dissertation, Claremont Graduate School, 1986). 7

spoken in response to particular situations in h u m a n events. Weis identifies H a b . i-ii as an example of the masse2‫ י‬genre. 9 Although the details of the structure analysis offered below will differ from those of Weis, the identification of H a b . i-ii as a coherent generic entity may aid in resolving some of the text's interpretative problems. Following the superscription in H a b . i 1, the pronouncement in H a b . i 2-ii 20 contains four major sections: H a b . i 2-4, i 5-11, i 1217, H a b . ii 1-20. Each of these sections is demarcated by its syntactical features and the perspective of its verbs and pronouns which indicate the speaker of the section, the party that is addressed, and in some cases the subject of discussion in the passage. T h e first major section, H a b . i 2-4, is demarcated by its 1st person singular verbs and pronouns, which identify Habakkuk as the speaker, and its 2nd person singular verbs and pronouns, which identify Y H W H as the addressee. Generically, this sub-unit is a complaint by the prophet to God concerning the breakdown of social order. T h e prophet demands to know in v. 2 how long ( z ad•'ānâ) he must plead for help (šiwwaHî) and cry out ( ^ez^aq) concerning injustice (hāmās) before God will acknowledge the situation and correct it. A second question addressed by the prophet to God appears in v. 3, in which the prophet demands to know why he is forced to look upon the various crimes specified and the general contention (rib) and strife (mādân) that they generate. V. 4a follows u p by stating the consequences of this situation, i.e., the weakening of order (lord) and the lack of justice (mišpāt). V. 4b specifies this statement by stating that the u n n a m e d " w i c k e d " (rāšāC) party is oppressing an unnamed " r i g h t e o u s " (saddiq) party and reiterating that justice (mišpāt) is perverted. Apparently, this oppression of the " r i g h t e o u s " by the " w i c k e d " is the basic cause of the breakdown of order and the primary reason for the prophet's complaint. T h e language employed here is typical complaint terminology. It can appear in a legal disputational context such as J o b xix 1-7, where J o b responds to Bildad's charges that he is guilty by demanding to know how long Ç-ad-^ânâ) Bildad will accuse him (v. 1) and by lamenting the lack of a response to his cries of injustice; "Behold, I cry injustice (^es^aq hāmās) and I am not answered, I plead for help ( ‫ י‬àšawwa c ) and there is no justice (mišpāt)." Such language also appears in cultic lamentations, such as Ps. xviii 7, 42, 9

For his discussion of Hab. i-ii, see pp. 161-5, 250-2, 486-7.

where the verb siwwac is used to indicate a plea for divine deliverance from enemies. In either case, it is a demand for justice by a party that perceives its situation as unjust and untenable. T h e second major section of H a b . i 2-ii 20, H a b . i 5-11, is demarcated by its 2nd person singular plural address form, as indicated by the plural imperative verbs, 2nd person plural imperfect verbs, and the 2nd person plural pronoun suffix in v. 5; its 1st person singular participial formation in v. 6 which identifies the speaker as Y H W H ; and its 3rd person description of the Chaldeans in vv. 6-11. T h e 2nd plural address form indicates the addressee is not only the prophet himself, but those whom he represents, presumably the " r i g h t e o u s " mentioned in H a b . i 2-4. T h e address form, content, and placement of this sub-unit indicate that it is G o d ' s response to the preceding complaint. It begins with imperative instructions to the addressees in v. 5 to look among the nations and see the great deed (pôcal) which Y H W H is doing. T h e term pôcal is used in a n u m b e r of instances to refer to acts of Y H W H in history. 10 V. 6 identifies this act as the establishment of the Chaldeans, i.e., the Neo-Babylonian empire of Nabopolassar and his descendants. Nothing is said concerning the purpose for which the Chaldeans are established, although v. 9 indicates that they come for violence (hāmās). Thus, the sub-unit does not indicate that the Chaldeans are to be viewed as the means for correcting the injustice (hāmās) announced in the previous complaint; rather, they may be viewed as its cause. This is supported by the balance of the unit in vv. 6 a ß - l l which contain Y H W H ' s 3rd person description of the military might, fearsomeness, and success of the Chaldean army in conquering and dominating other nations. Of special note is the statement in v. 7b, " f r o m it (i.e., the Chaldean nation), its justice (mišpāt0) and its dominance (ûšPētâ) go f o r t h " . T h e Hebrew term šPēt, " d o m i n a n c e " , is frequently used to describe the pre-eminent or dominant position of the party under discussion, such as Cain in Gen. iv 7, Reuben in Gen. xlix 3, or Y H W H in J o b xiii 11. When combined with the Hebrew term mišpāt, " j u s t i c e " , and specified by 3rd person singular pronoun suffixes, the phrase mišpātâ ûsPëtô refers specifically to the imposition of Babylonian authority on the 10

24.

E.g., Deut. xxxii 4; Isa. ν 12; Ps. xliv 2; lxiv 10; Ixxvii 13; xcv 9; Job xxxvi

conquered nations. T h e formulation of this verse, with the noun mišpāt and the verbj^!? 3 , indicates that it is to be taken in contrast to v. 4aa of the preceding complaint which is formulated similarly. T h u s , the imposition of Babylonian justice or authority is concomitant with the breakdown of justice for the righteous in H a b . i 2-4. Additional support is found in 11.‫ע‬,which is syntactically connected to Y H W H ' s speech by the conjunctive ^āz at the beginning of the verse, and which indicates Y H W H ' s evaluation of the Chaldeans as an apostate and guilty nation that attributes its success to its own strength rather than to God. This evaluation is accomplished in part by a word play on the verb hālap. T h e verb means not only " t o pass t h r o u g h " as of wind, but also " t o transgress, overstep b o u n d s " , as indicated by its use in Isa. xxiv 5 where it refers to covenant violations. It is specified by the verbs wayyaCàbār wPāšēm, " a n d it passed by and incurred guilt". T h u s , Y H W H ' s response to H a b a k k u k ' s complaint presents a negative picture of the Chaldeans. They are established by Y H W H , but there is no indication that they are to correct the injustice announced in H a b . i 2-4. Instead, they appear to be the cause of that injustice. T h e third major sub-unit of H a b . i 2‫־‬ii 20, H a b . i 12-17, is demarcated by its 2nd person singular verbs and the pronoun ^attâ in vv. 12-14a which govern this text and identify Y H W H as its addressee; its 1st person singular pronoun suffixes in v. 12a, which identify Habakkuk as the speaker; its 3rd person singular portrayal of the Chaldeans; and the absence of any syntactical connection between vv. 12 and 11 at the beginning of the sub-unit and vv. i 17 and ii 1 at the end. T h e content and placement of this sub-unit indicate that it is a second complaint by the prophet to God concerning the oppressive nature of the Chaldeans. H a b . i 12-17 begins with a rhetorical question addressed by the prophet to God in v. 12a, which establishes Y H W H ' s antiquity and immortality. In this respect, it should be noted that the statement /0 ‫ נ‬nāmût, " w e shall not d i e " , is one of the Tiqqune Sopherim which should actually read /0 ‫ נ‬tāmût, " Y o u shall not die". 1 1 Like11 Contra C. McCarthy, The Tiqqune Sopherim and. Other Theological Corrections in the Masoretic Text of the Old Testament (Freiburg and Göttingen, 1981), pp. 105-11, who retains the reading of the M T . McCarthy's decision is based on her view that the Chaldeans function as Y H W H ' s agent for correcting the wickedness mentioned in Hab. i 2-4. Consequently, she maintains that Hab. i 12 expresses a hope for deliverance ("we shall not die"), in that the Chaldeans are established for

wise, the Hebrew term qedem, " a n t i q u i t y " , is frequently employed in biblical literature to refer to Y H W H ' s role as creator and master of the world. 12 This question therefore establishes the premise for the following material, that Y H W H , as creator and master of the world, is capable of intervening either to establish the Chaldeans or to remove them. This is made clear in the two statements that follow in vv. 12b and 13a. V. 12b states that Y H W H has appointed the Chaldeans for "justice/law" (mišpāt) and " a r b i t r a t i o n " (hôkîah), i.e., they have been established to rule. V. 13a states that Y H W H is incapable of looking upon, i.e., tolerating, injustice. This leads to the final section of this sub-unit, vv. 12b-17, which poses the question to Y H W H whether he will continue to tolerate the injustice of the Chaldeans. T h e question is initially posed in v. 13b which focuses on the issue of theodicy: will God remain silent in the face of treachery, when one who is evil swallows up one who is more righteous? This question is followed up by a description of the Chaldeans which is syntactically connected to v. 13b by its wawconsecutive verb formation. T h e description of the Chaldeans as a fisherman capturing fish/humanity in a net is particularly apt since it is similar to the imagery used for Y H W H ' s creative acts in subduing Leviathan in J o b xl 25-xli 26. Rather than acknowledging God as the source of their success, the Chaldeans look to their own power, worshipping their nets/weapons. T h e section ends with the prophet reiterating the question to God, how long shall the Chaldeans continue to empty their nets without regard for the nations which they have slain?" In sum, H a b . i 12-17 relates the prophet's dissatisfaction with Y H W H ' s answer to his initial complaint. If Y H W H has established the Chaldeans, they certainly do not recognize Y H W H ' s sovereignty nor do they recognize a responsibility to rule justly. T h e final major sub-unit of H a b . i 2-ii 20, H a b . ii 1-20, is demarcated by its 3rd person verbs in vv. l-2aa, 5-6a, 18, and 20, which convey the speaker's reports of Y H W H ' s speech and the nation's taunt song together with explications of both, and its 1st person singular verbs and pronoun suffixes in vv. 1-2 which identify justice (v. 12b). As the present analysis demonstrates, however, the purpose of the Chaldeans is not to correct injustice; they are the cause of the injustice which the prophet protests. 12 E.g., Deut. xxxiii 27; Isa. xiv 21, xlvi 10; Ps. xliv 2, lxxiv 2, 12, lxxvii 12, cxix 152; Prov. viii 22-3.

Habakkuk as the speaker. T h e contents of this sub-unit relate directly to the issues raised in Habakkuk's second complaint (i 1217) in particular as well as the entire exchange in H a b . i 2-17 in general. H a b . ii 1-20 therefore comprises the prophet's report of G o d ' s second response in H a b . ii 1-4 together with his explanation of the meaning of G o d ' s response in H a b . ii 5-20. T h e basic structure of Hab. ii 1-20 is determined by the narrative reporting language of vv. 1 and 2aa. V. 1 provides the context for the report/explanation of Y H W H ' s response in vv. 2-20 and therefore constitutes the first basic structural division of this sub-unit. Vv. 2-20, introduced by the response report formula in v. 2aa, constitute the second basic structural unit. In 1.‫ע‬,the prophet reports that he is at his watch station waiting for Y H W H ' s response. T h e precise meaning of the watch station imagery, expressed through the Hebrew nouns mišmeret, "watch station", and mâsôr, "wall, fortification", and the piel form of the verb sāpâ, " t o act as a lookout/watchman", is not entirely clear. A n u m b e r of passages in 2 Chronicles (vii 6, viii 14, xxxv 2) identify the mišmeret as the priestly or Levitic temple watches and the appearance of mismeret and mësappeh in Isa. xxi 1-10 associate such watch station functions with the reception and conveyance of prophetic mass'â-'ôt. This suggests that Habakkuk, in his role as conveyor of a prophetic masšā^, is associated with the Temple, perhaps as a priest or Levite standing his watch (cf. Ezek. iii 16-21, xxxiii 1-9). T h a t Habakkuk anticipates an estatic prophetic experience is evident from the statement HPôt mah-yêdabber-bî, " t o see what he will speak through m e " . 1 3 Finally, v. lbß must be taken as a parallel to v. Iba, as indicated by its use of mâ, " w h a t ? " and its terminology. T h e Hebrew term tôkahat, " r e b u k e " , is frequently understood as a rebuke or chastisement of the prophet for the sin of challenging the righteousness of God, but this is due in part to the L X X ' s rendering of the term as έπί τόν ελεγχόν μου, " o n account of my rebuke/disgrace", and its contrast with the projected " f a i t h " of God (έκ πίστεώς μου) in L X X H a b . ii 4. T h e present context, however, contains no indication that the prophet expects to be punished. In J o b xiii 6 and xxiii 4, tôkahat is used for J o b ' s legal charges and arguments against God. This indicates that in H a b . ii 13 Cf. N. G. Cohen, " 'dbr... by : An 'Enthusiastic' Prophetic Formula", ZA W 99 (1987), pp. 219-32.

1 tôkahat refers to the prophet's rebuke of God in the previous sections. In this instance, the use of the hiphil verb ^āšîb, " I will cause to r e t u r n " , indicates that Habakkuk expects to provoke a divine response. This is precisely what follows in vv. 2-20, as indicated by the use of the verb Cānâ, " t o a n s w e r " , which is frequently employed in situations of response to legal argument or complaint (cf. J o b ix 14, 15, 16, xxxviii 1). Habakkuk's report and explication of Y H W H ' s response appears in vv. 2-20. T h e structure of this section is governed by its 3rd person reporting perspective in v. 2aa and the 3rd person participial formations with their explanatory perspective in vv. 5-6a and 18-20. Consequently, the section comprises two basic parts: the report of Y H W H ' s response in vv. 2-4 and Habakkuk's explication of that response in vv. 5-20. Following the response formula in v. 2aa, the response by Y H W H which the prophet reports appears in vv. 2aß-4. It contains two basic sections. T h e imperative verb kêtôb, " w r i t e " , defines the first section, vv. 2aß-3, as a command by Y H W H addressed to the prophet to write the vision on tablets. T h e practice of writing a prophetic vision (kāzân) and a pronouncement (masšā7) is attested in Isa. xxix 11-13 and xxx 6-8, respectively (cf. Isa. viii 1-4, 16-18). The precise meaning of the explanatory material is not completely clear, but it appears that the purpose for writing the vision is so that a runner or messenger may proclaim it at the appointed time. Furthermore, the prophet is reassured that if there seems to be some delay in the fulfillment of the vision, then he should wait, for it will surely come at the appointed time. T h e second section of Y H W H ' s response, v. 4, states the basic principle or meaning of the vision: the righteous shall live and the wicked shall fall, i.e., the righteous shall ultimately triumph. This verse, of course, has presented interpreters with many problems which will be discussed in greater detail below. Habakkuk's explication of Y H W H ' s response appears in H a b . ii 5-20. Although v. 5 is syntactically connected to v. 4 by the conjunctive particle wPap kî, " m o r e o v e r " , there are a number of reasons for maintaining that the prophet speaks in vv. 5-20 and not Y H W H . First is the explanatory character of 5.‫ע‬.Although the precise meaning of v. 5 will be discussed in relation to the meaning of 4.‫ע‬below, it can be noted here that v. 5 draws out the meaning of v. 4 by comparing the inflated instability of the " w i c k e d " with

the behavior of a drunk who initially appears strong but then passes out with the increased consumption of wine. It is the role of the prophet to explain the meaning of Y H W H ' s statement. Second, the report of the taunt song, which builds upon the mention of the nations and the imagery of collapse in v. 5, contains a number of 3rd person references to Y H W H in vv. 13, 14, and 16. Third, the commentary on the taunt song in vv. 18-20 contains another 3rd person reference to Y H W H in v. 20. Unlike the taunt song in vv. 6b-17, which is placed in the mouth of the nations, this last statement is clearly from the speaker in these verses who reports the nations' taunt song in vv. 6-17. This and the interconnectedness of vv. 5, 6-17, and 18-20 indicate that the speaker in vv. 5-20 is not Y H W H , but Habakkuk. In this respect, it is important to keep in mind that although vv. 2-4 report a speech by Y H W H , Habakkuk is the speaker there as well. T h e structure of Habakkuk's explication in vv. 5-20 includes two basic parts. V. 5 explains the meaning of Y H W H ' s response. Vv. 6-20, which are syntactically independent of v. 5 but depend on v. 5 for the referents of the pronouns in v. 6a, report the taunt song of the nations against the oppressor in vv. 6-17 together with a commentary in vv. 18-20. That vv. 18-20 are not a part of the taunt song, as many scholars maintain, is clear for several reasons. First, vv. 18-20 deviate from the form of the previous woe oracles in vv. 6b-17. V. 18 refers to the problem of idolatry, but the " w o e " statement concerning idolatry appears afterwards in v. 19, not before as in the other " w o e " oracles. M a n y scholars argue that vv. 18 and 19 have been transposed (e.g. Keller [n. 4], p. 166), or that v. 18 is a secondary addition to the text (e.g. Rudolph [n. 3], pp. 229-30), but few have considered the possibility that the present order is intentional. 1 4 In fact, vv. 18-20 differ formally from the " w o e " oracles in vv. 6b-17 in other ways as well. Vv. 18-20 are cast in 3rd person form, whereas the previous " w o e " oracles, with the exception of vv. 1214 which are constructed entirely from variant forms of other prophetic texts (viz., Mic. iii 10; J e r . li 58; Isa. xi 9b), are cast in 2nd person singular form which addresses the oppressor. T h e four 14

Cf. D. Bratcher, The Theological Message of Habakkuk: A Literary-Rhetorical Analysis (Ph.D. Dissertation, Union Theological Seminary in Virginia, 1984), pp. 169-70, 198-207.

" w o e s " also contain a refrain in vv. 8b and 17b, "because of the blood of humankind and violence of the land, the city and all who dwell in i t " , which serves as a literary envelope for the song, following the first and final " w o e s " in the series. Vv. 18-20 differ from the preceding " w o e s " in terms of content as well. Whereas vv. 1820 focus on idolatry, vv. 6b-17 focus on crimes of violence and robbery. Vv. 18-20 are distinct from the taunt song in vv. 6b-17 in terms of both form and content, but by focusing on the issue of idolatry and employing the " w o e " form in 19.‫ע‬which appears in the preceding series they point to the root cause of the oppressor's atrocities: its failure to recognize Y H W H as sovereign. This is made clear by the concluding statement in v. 20 which portrays Y H W H in the holy Temple, the seat of Y H W H ' s sovereignty, and demands a respectful silence from all the earth in the face of the divine presence (cf. Zeph. i 7; Zech. ii 17; Ps. xlvi 11). In this respect, vv. 18-20 serve as a commentary on the taunt song which identifies the reason for the oppressor's crimes. Consequently, vv. 6-20 contain the prophet's introduction in v. 6a and the song itself in vv. 6b-17. T h e song consists of four " w o e " oracles concerning an u n n a m e d oppressor. These deal with plundering (vv. 6b-8), extortion (vv. 9-11), bloodshed (vv. 12-14), and degradation/rape (vv. 15-17). Ill This analysis of the form of H a b . i-ii presents a n u m b e r of problems which require discussion. T h e first involves the interrelated issues of the identity of the " r i g h t e o u s " (saddiq) and the " w i c k e d " (rāšāC) in i 4, 13, and ii 4 and the role of the Chaldeans mentioned in i 6. Scholars generally agree that the purpose of the Chaldeans in i 5-11 is to correct the situation of oppression to which the prophet refers in i 2-4. Their role is to punish the " w i c k e d " . Consequently, the oppression of the " r i g h t e o u s " by the " w i c k e d " refers either to an external enemy which is threatening righteous J u d a h or to an inner J u d e a n conflict in which a " w i c k e d " party is opposed to a " r i g h t e o u s " group. 1 5 T h e r e is currently no consensus on this issue because of the 15

For a survey of scholarly opinion on this issue which lists specific identifications, see my forthcoming "Habakkuk, Book o f ' (see n. 5)

problems engendered by the proposed identifications. Those who maintain that the wicked party is Chaldea must explain why Chaldea is established to correct oppression which it has caused. Those who argue that the wicked party is another foreign power or an inner J u d e a n group must explain why the concern of the book shifts from condemning the wicked to condemning Chaldea, partieularly since Chaldea is identified with the wicked in i 13. Clearly, the central problem has been to explain why Chaldea, which is established to correct oppression, is then accused as the oppressor. In fact, this problem may be misconstrued. M . D. Johnson notes that i 5-11 does not portray Chaldea positively, which indicates that the establishment of Chaldea is not the solution to the oppression described in i 2-4. 16 He therefore maintains that i 5-11 is a heightened form of the complaint in i 2-4. Instead of attempting to resolve the injustices mentioned in i 2-4, H a b . 15-11 indicates that Y H W H initiated the situation by bringing the Chaldean oppression. Although the paralysis of Torah in i 4 likely refers to the general breakdown of social order (cf. i 12) rather than a specific breakdown of the Josianic reform as Johnson suggests, this view resolves the difficulties presented by this text. It also explains the reference to the treachery of the Chaldeans in i 13 (cf. ii 5) when considered in relation to J u d a h ' s previous alliance with Babylon under Hezekiah and Josiah's death while attempting to support the Babylonians. The second problem centers around the meaning of H a b . ii 4 and the relation of ii 1-4 to its context. Scholars are virtually unanimous in interpreting ii 1-4 in relation to the dialogue of i 2-17, arguing that ii 1-4 constitutes Y H W H ' s response to Habakkuk's second complaint in i 12-17. H a b . ii 1-4 differs formally from the dialogue in i 2-17, however, in that it is not a direct speech by Y H W H , but Habakkuk's report of Y H W H ' s speech. T h e passage contains the prophet's description of his wait for the divine response (ii 1) and his report of that response (ii 2-4). In ii 2aß-3, he is instructed to write the vision on tablets in order to wait for its fulfillment. T h e substance of the report then follows in ii 4. H a b . ii 1-4 is related to the preceding dialogue in terms of content, but it is generically distinct. 16

" T h e paralysis of Torah in Habakkuk i 4 " , VT 35 (1985), pp. 257-66, esp. p. 261.

Despite general agreement that H a b . ii 4 contains the essence of Y H W H ' s response to Habakkuk, its meaning is still disputed. According to the Revised Standard Version, the verse reads, "Behold, he whose soul is not upright in him shall fail (i.e., 'is puffed u p ' ) but the righteous shall live by his faith (or 'faithfulness')." J . A. Emerton has summarized the grammatical and lexical problems of the first half of the verse which confound its interpretation. 1 7 First, the meaning of the verb cuppelâ as " i s puffed u p " appears nowhere else in the Hebrew Bible and lacks support in the versions. Second, the antecedents of the 3rd person singular verbs and pronoun suffixes, i.e., " h e " and " h i m " , are uncertain. 1 8 Third, although the portrayal of a conceited and unjust (puffed up) figure in v. 4a provides an excellent contrast to the righteous (saddiq) of v. 4b, there is no antithesis to the statement that the righteous shall live. O n e expects a statement that the conceited one shall die or the like in v. 4a. Although scholars have advanced numerous textual emendations and interpretations in their efforts to resolve these problems, the result is an impasse. An examination of the vocabulary, grammar, and syntax of this verse in its present literary context may help to resolve this situation. First, cuppëlâ is a feminine singular pual perfect verb derived from the root cpl. T h e noun '-öpel, which is also derived from the root, means " t u m o r " , "swelling", or " h i l l " . Furthermore, the verb appears in the hiphil in N u m . xiv 44 where it means " t o act presumptuously, arrogantly, or heedlessly". The basic concept behind each meaning is that of inflation or swelling, whether it is understood literally or in the abstract sense of arrogance. The variations in the versions represent attempts to interpret a difficult statement that were probably motivated by the problems presented by this verse. Second, the 3rd person singular verbs and pronoun suffixes in v. 4a do not require an antecedent in this verse. A similar case appears in i 12b where pronouns lacking an immediate antecedent are used to refer to Chaldea. Furthermore, i 13 associates Chaldea with the wicked in contrast to the righteous, which has obvious implications 17

" T h e Textual and Linguistic Problems of Habakkuk ii 4-5", JTS, NS 28 (1977), pp. 1-18. 18 J . G. Janzen, "Habakkuk 2:2-4 in the Light of Recent Philological Advances", HTR 73 (1980), p. 62.

for understanding the contrast of the arrogant figure of v. 4a with the righteous figure of v. 4b. Third, the vocabulary and syntax of v. 4a support a contrast with v. 4b. T h e subject of the verb cuppêlâ, " i s puffed u p " , is napšâ bô, " h i s soul within h i m " . Although the Hebrew word nepeš is frequently translated " s o u l " , this is a later meaning that was applied to the word under the influence of the Greek word ψυχή. T h e basic meaning of the word in Biblical Hebrew is " t h r o a t " or " l i f e " . Furthermore, ^uppêlâ is asyndetically specified by the verb lā^yāšêrâ, " i s not u p r i g h t " . Although yāšar is frequently used in reference to moral uprightness, its basic meaning is " t o be straight, even, tranq u i l " . It therefore indicates that "his life within him is puffed u p " means that " h i s life within him is not stable or secure". This becomes significant in relation to v. 4b which states that " t h e righteous shall live by his f a i t h " . Again, the Hebrew word ^êmûnâ, frequently translated as " f a i t h " , has been influenced by the Greek word πίστις and the interpretation of this verse in Christian Scriptures. 1 9 Its basic meaning is "reliability" or "steadfastness". In this respect, v. 4b portrays the stability of the righteous and provides the necessary contrast with one whose life is unstable due to arrogance. In the context of the preceding material, v. 4a refers to the Chaldeans and v. 4b refers to J u d a h . In sum, the verse promises that the oppression will end with the downfall of Chaldea. This understanding is supported by the material that follows in ii 5-20. Scholars have noted that v. 5 is connected to v. 4 by the particle wPap kî, " m o r e o v e r " , which establishes a qal wāhāmer or conclusio a minori ad maius relationship between the verses. 20 V. 5 employs the metaphor of " t r e a c h e r o u s " wine for the arrogant one of v. 4. T h e Hebrew word bôgêd, " t r e a c h e r o u s " , provides an appropriate contrast with the righteous one who is " s t e a d f a s t " or " r e l i a b l e " in v. 4. O n the basis of the reading hwn, " w e a l t h " , in 1 Q p H a b . viii 3, scholars have questioned the reading hayyayin, " w i n e " , as inappropriate in this context. 21 T h e explanatory statement, " t h e arrogant man will not e n d u r e " , reinforces the image of 19

Cf. Rom. i 17; Gal. iii 11; Heb. χ 38-9. Humbert (η. 1), pp. 150-1; A. S. van der Woude, " D e r Gerechte wird durch seine Treue leben: Erwägungen zu Habakuk 2:4-5", Studia Biblica et Semitica Theodoro Christiano Vriezen Dedicata (Wageningen, 1966), p. 367. 21 W. H. Brownlee, " T h e Placarded Revelation of Habakkuk", JBL 82 (1963), pp. 323-4; Emerton (η. 17), pp. 8-9. 20

instability and therefore illustrates the appropriateness of the metaphor to anyone familiar with the effects of excessive wine. T h e second metaphor is that of the insatiable appetite of death which illustrates the greed of the oppressor in swallowing nations. Vv. 620 contain the prophet's report of the taunt song (vv. 6-17) which the victimized nations will sing when the inflated oppressor collapses together with his comments indicating that the reason for the oppressor's crimes is its idolatry (vv. 18-20), i.e., not recognizing God as the source of its power (cf. i 11, 16). This raises the third major problem presented by H a b . i-ii; the identity of the oppressor in the woe oracles of ii 5-20. The localized nature of the crimes specified in these passages suggests to some scholars that they were originally directed against an internal J u d e a n group before later editors reapplied them against Chaldea. 2 2 Those who hold this position claim support from J e r . xxii 13-23 in which Jeremiah lambastes Jehoiakim for similar crimes. Other scholars maintain that these oracles were originally directed against Chaldea (Janzen [n. 3], pp. 406-8; Peckham [n. 3], pp. 619-20). In considering this problem, it is useful to recall R. J . Coggins's argument that all prophets do not necessarily share a unified viewpoint and that Habakkuk may represent a prophetic tradition quite distinct from that of Jeremiah. 2 3 It is not unusual for prophets to refer to international events in terms of localized crimes. 2 4 Furthermore, various statements in the woe oracles indicate that an international situation is presupposed, including references to peoples and nations (vv. 6a, 8a, 10b, 13b), the earth, humankind^ and the sea (vv. 8b, 14, 17b), and the violence of Lebanon (v. 17a). With regard to the last point, Nebuchadrezzar reports taking Lebanon and transporting its wood back to Babylon to build a palace. 25 This act corresponds to the concerns raised in Habakkuk's woe oracles which speak of extortion and plunder of nations (vv. 6b-8), unjust gain used for protecting one's house (vv. 9-11), bloodshed to build a city (vv. 12-14), and the ravaging of a

22 Jeremias (η. 1), pp. 57-89, 101-3; Ε. Otto, "Die Stellung der Wehe-Worte in der Verkündigung des Propheten Habakuk", ZA W 89 (1977), pp. 73-107. 23 "An Alternative Prophetic Tradition?", Israel's Prophetic Tradition: Essays in Honour of Peter R. Ackroyd (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 77-94. 24 E.g., Amos 13, 11, 13; Isa. χ 14; Nah. iii 5-7; etc. 25 J . Β Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament with Supplement (3rd edn, Princeton, 1969), p. 307.

land (vv. 15-17). Finally, the prophet's assertion that the reason for the oppressor's crimes is its idolatry (vv. 18-20) corresponds to the portrayal of the Chaldeans in i 11, 16 (cf. ii 13a). In sum, the identification of H a b . i-ii as a " p r o n o u n c e m e n t " (masšā7) allows not only for the solution of several outstanding problems on the interpretation of this passage, but also demonstrates a consistent concern for contrasting the present circumstances and ultimate fate of " r i g h t e o u s " J u d a h with those of " w i c k e d " Chaldea. T h e " P r o n o u n c e m e n t " (masšā7) in H a b . i-ii explains that the appearance of the oppressive Chaldeans is an act of God among the nations. T h e exact purpose of this act is not stated, however, the discourse makes it clear that Chaldea will eventually fall as a result of its excessive greed and oppressive policies. H a b . i-ii therefore reassures its audience that J u d a h will survive and that justice will ultimately prevail.

IV T h e second major section of the book, H a b . iii, begins with the superscription, " T h e Prayer of Habakkuk the Prophet concerning šigyānât". T h e term tëpillâ, " p r a y e r " , is a typical title for psalms of lament which petition God for deliverance. 2 6 T h e Hebrew term šiggâyôn likewise refers to lamentation as indicated by its appearance in Ps. vii, a song of lament, and the cognate Akkadian term šegu, " s o n g of l a m e n t " . 2 7 These terms correspond to the general situation of distress presupposed throughout the psalm. T h e present form of the prayer in vv. 2-19a is a petition to Y H W H to manifest divine power in the world in order to deliver the land from invaders (vv. 2, 16). 28 It is demarcated from the superscription in v. 1 and the instructions to the choirmaster in v. 19b by its 1st person singular perspective (vv. 2, 7, 14, 16, 18-19a). T h e petitionary character of this psalm is established by its framework which consists of an introduction in v. 2 and a conclusion in vv. 16-19a. T h e introduction is demarcated by the 1st person 26

E.g., Pss xvii 1, lxxxvi 1, xc 1, cii 1, cxlii 1. Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien IV (Kristiania, 1923), p. 7; contra M.-J. Seux, "Siggayon - šigu?", Mélanges bibliques et orientaux en l'honneur de M. Henri Cazelles (Kevelaer and Neukirchen, 1981), pp. 419-38. 28 For a survey of scholarly opinion on the genre of Hab. iii, see my forthcoming "Habakkuk, Book o f ' (see n. 5). 27

verbs in 2.‫ע‬,which identifies the psalmist as the speaker, and the masculine singular imperative and 2nd person imperfect verbs, together with the 2nd masculine singular pronoun suffixes and the vocative use of Y H W H , which identify Y H W H as the addressee. T h e psalmist petitions Y H W H to manifest divine acts in the world by referring to Y H W H ' s reputation for performing great works in v. 2aa (cf. the use of pöcal in iii 2 and i 5) prior to requesting Y H W H ' s action in in v. 2aß-b. The piel imperative verb hayyēhû, " m a k e him/it live", 2 9 refers to Y H W H ' s great deed (pocai) mentioned previously. T h e concluding section (vv. 16-19a) is likewise demarcated by its 1st person singular verbs, pronouns, and pronoun suffixes (in one case, 1st person plural,yëqûdennû, v. 16) which identify the psalmist as the speaker. Vv. 16-19a are not addressed to Y H W H , however, as indicated by the 3rd person references to the deity in vv. 18-19a. T h e addressee remains unspecified. T h e conclusion expresses the psalmist's confidence that God will answer the petition. V. 16 refers to the psalmist's nervous anticipation while waiting for the day of distress against the people who invade us. V. 17 refers to the present desolate state of the land 3 0 and vv. 18-19a express the psalmist's confidence in Y H W H (cf. Ps. xviii 34). T h e framework sections bracket a description of a theophany in vv. 3-15. Theophany texts recount the manifestation of Y H W H and are characterized by a description of the deity's approach and the accompanying natural upheavals such as wind, fire, storm, and earthquake. 3 1 T h e formal structure of the theophany report in vv. 3-15 consists of two parts. Vv. 3-7 are demarcated their 3rd person resporting language which describes Y H W H ' s approach and actions together with the reactions of the natural world. T h e appearance of the 1st person singular perspective in v. 7 does not 29

Or, reading with L X X Hab. iii 2, hawwēhû, "make him/it known"; cf. Κ. Marti, Das Dodekapropheton (Tübingen, 1904), p. 350; H. Junker, Die Zwölf Kleinen Propheten (Bonn, 1938), p. 54. Sellin (η. 1), p. 407, objects that this reading is an attempt to harmonize hayyēhû with tôdîac. 30 Cf. W. L. Holladay, Jeremiah 1 (Philadelphia, 1986), pp. 278, 4-6, 427-9, who compares Hab. iii 17 to Jer. viii 13 and argues that both verses have their setting in a lamentation ritual for a major drought which took place in NovemberDecember 601 B.C.E. According to Holladay, this drought was instrumental in convincing Jeremiah that Y H W H ' s judgement of Judah was inevitable. 31 J· Jeremias, Theophanie: Die Geschichte einer alttestamentliche Gattung (Neukirchen, 1965), pp. 69-72. Other examples include Deut. xxxiii 2; Judg. ν 4-5; Amos i 2; Mic. i 3-4; and Ps. lxviii 8-9.

disrupt the reporting language. It identifies the psalmist as the speaker and portrays the fear of the Midianites/Cushites as a social/human parallel to the natural upheaval. Vv. 3-7 differ from v. 2 in that they give no indication of addressee whereas v. 2 was specifically addressed to Y H W H . Vv. 8-15 are demarcated by the emergence of a 2nd person singular address style which identifies Y H W H as the addressee and appears throughout vv. 8-15. In addition, a 1st person singular pronoun suffix appears in v. 14, which identifies the psalmist as the speaker. These verses are also characterized by their use of mythological motifs, particularly of divine combat against the waters of chaos, to depict Y H W H ' s victory over the enemy. T h e theophany sections likewise express the psalmist's confidence that God will deliver the people (v. 13).In this respect, the psalmist demonstrates the steadfast faith of the righteous in ii 4. Although authorship of the psalm is disputed, modern scholars have identified a number of reasons for associating H a b . iii with H a b . i-ii. 32 Both sections share the theme of an enemy invasion of the land and G o d ' s deliverance of the people from oppression. They also employ similar language, especially the references to the " w i c k e d " (rāšāC) in iii 13 and i 4, 13 as well as Y H W H ' s great " d e e d " (pāCal) in iii 2 and i 5. Finally, there is a relationship between iii 2, 16-19a, which indicate confidence in Y H W H ' s deliverance, and ii 1-4 which instructs the prophet to wait for the fulfillment of his vision. From these considerations, it is clear that H a b . iii functions as a corroborating conclusion that responds to the issues raised in Hab. i-ii (Fohrer [n. 2], pp. 163-4). It expresses the psalmist's belief that the vision in ii 1-4 and Y H W H ' s righteousness will be realized when the people are delivered from oppression.

V In conclusion, this form-critical reassessment of the structure genre, and intent of the book of Habakkuk demonstrates that the book has a coherent structural unity and that its genre is based on the prophetic pronouncement (maššā^) and a petitionary prayer 32

Fohrer (n. 2), pp. 162-3; O. Eissfeldt, The Old Testament: An Introduction (Oxford and New York, 1965), p. 421 = Einleitung in das Alte Testament (3rd edn, Tübingen, 1964), pp. 568-9.

(têpillâ). T h e intent and setting center around an attempt to explain the rise of the oppressive Neo-Babylonian empire in the late-7th century B . C . E . as an act of Y H W H which does not contradict divine righteousness and fidelity to J u d a h . H a b . i-ii establishes that Y H W H has raised the Chaldean empire as part of a divine plan or " d e e d " (/70ca/), which is not immediately explained. These chapters also make clear that the Chaldeans will be punished for their acts of oppression. H a b . iii verifies that this punishment will take place, demonstrating Y H W H ' s sovereignty over the world and ultimately, divine righteousness as well. T h e two parts of the book, the Prophetic Pronouncement in H a b . i-ii and the Prayer in H a b . iii, constitute a Prophetic Affirmation of Divine Sovereignty and Justice, the purpose of which is to convince its audience that Y H W H is maintaining fidelity in a crisis situation. 3 3

APPENDIX Structure analysis of the Book of Habakkuk Prophetic affirmation of divine sovereignty/justice i I. Pronouncement (massā7) of Habakkuk i A. Superscription: massa‫נ‬ Β. Pronouncement (massā7) Proper: Dialogue Report Form i 1. Habakkuk's complaint to YHWH: concerning oppression of righteous by wicked i 2. YHWH's response to Habakkuk: YHWH has established Chaldeans i

1-ii 20 1 2‫־‬ii 20 2-4 5-11

35 This article is a revised version of papers read at the 1987 Annual Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature in Boston (5-8 December 1987), and the W. F. Albright Institute for Archaeological Research, Jerusalem (8 January 1988). Thanks are due to the University of Miami Research Council which provided a Max Orovitz Summer Stipend to support this work; the American Council of Learned Societies and the University of Miami College of Arts and Sciences which provided travel grants to Jerusalem; and Dr Sy Gitin, Director of the Albright Institute, for my appointment as a Post-Doctoral Fellow for the 1987-88 academic year. Thanks are also due to Professors William L. Holladay, J r , and John A. Emerton for their encouragement and suggestions. Of course, they are not to be held responsible for the views expressed here.

STRUCTURE, GENRE AND INTENT IN HABAKKUK 3. 4.

II.

H a b a k k u k ' s second complaint to Y H W H : concerning evil n a t u r e of C h a l d e a n s i H a b a k k u k ' s report of Y H W H ' s second response ii a. narrative tag ii b. response report proper with explication ii 1) response report formula ii 2) response by Y H W H ii a) instruction: wait for vision ii b) basic statement of principle of vision: righteous shall live/ wicked shall fail ii 3) explication by prophet ii i. concerning oppressor: will not e n d u r e ii ii. concerning oppressed: report of taunt song against oppressor with p r o p h e t ' s c o m m e n t a r y ii aa. report of taunt song ii i) introduction ii ii) taunt song proper ii aa) woe no. 1: concerning plundering ii bb) woe no. 2: concerning extortion ii cc) woe no. 3: concerning bloodshed ii dd) woe no. 4: concerning rape ii bb. prophetic s u m m a t i o n / commentary ii

Prayer/Petition by H a b a k k u k to Y H W H A. Superscription: tepillâ B. Prayer/Petition P r o p e r 1. introduction: petition to manifest divine power

iii iii iii

1-20

1 2-20

2aa 2aß-4 2aß-3

4 5-20 5

6-20 6-17 6a 6b-17

6b-8

9-11

12-14 15-17 18-20

1-19

1 219‫־‬a

iii 2

2.

theophany report a. concerning YHWH's approach b. concerning YHWH's victory 3. conclusion: expression of confidence by psalmist Instruction to the Choirmaster

OFFICIAL ATTITUDES T O W A R D PROPHECY A T M A R I A N D IN I S R A E L by S I M O N B. P A R K E R Boston, Massachusetts

With the exception of a few scraps of information in the Lachish letters, we have no documentary evidence from ancient Israel of official attitudes toward prophecy. 1 T h e r e are, of course, many biblical narratives that recount or refer to communications between prophets and officials or communications about prophets between officials, but narratives have their own dynamics and purposes and, like the visual arts, may be closely or remotely related to historical realities. T h e lack of documentary evidence from ancient Israel leaves us without any firm basis for knowing whether the relationships portrayed in the narratives are realistic, idealized or variously manipulated to achieve particular narrative objectives, whether aesthetic, social or religious. It is now well known that outside Israel first- and second-hand reports of prophetic oracles have been recovered from the 18thcentury BCE archives of the palace at Mari on the middle Euphrates. Among the various Mesopotamian texts that are related to prophecy 2 (and indeed among all ancient near eastern " p r o phetic" texts) these are unique in their closeness to the moment of prophecy. They were written by various officials to the king, specifically the last king of Mari, Zimri-Lim, to inform him about oracles from various deities uttered by a variety of individuals usually in the official's hearing the same or the previous day. The letters conform to the general conventions of letter writing in the

1 See S. B. Parker, "Official reports on prophecy in the Lachish letters", in L. Hopfe (ed.), Uncovering Ancient Stones (H. Neil Richardson memorial volume) (Winona Lake, forthcoming). 2 For a critical and salutary review of these and recent treatments of them see the recent essay by M. de Jong Ellis, "Observations on Mesopotamian Oracles and Prophetic Texts: Literary and Historiographie Considerations", JCS 41 (1989), pp. 127-86.

Mari archives, and within them the oracular reports (and reports of dreams) share common patterns. 3 In most cases the prophecy is the one subject of the letter. Occasionally it is presented in a series of related prophetic phenomena (199; A 1121 +2731), or in conjunction with a related subject (221-bis; A 1121 + 2731), or even as one of two unrelated subjects (196, 199, 215, 217 and apparently 219). 4 In the latter case, the prophecy is always the first subject. These letters have been the object of numerous studies, most of which have concentrated on the form and content of the quoted prophecies and the roles of the prophets. 5 This is true above all of the many comparative studies that look to the Mari letters for illumination of aspects, or the origins, of biblical prophecy. 6 Continuing investigations of the texts are appropriate for several reasons: old texts are being collated and republished with improved readings, new texts are being published, and our knowledge, both of the language of the letters and of the institutions of Mari, is steadily growing. The publication in 1988 of ARM X X V I = AEM 1/1 by J e a n - M a r i e Durand has brought together almost all the pertinent texts in a new edition with an extensive introduction. 7 This is certain to stimulate many further studies. 3 K. Koch, "Die Briefe 'Profetischen' Inhalts aus Mari. Bemerkungen zu Gattung und Sitz im Leben", UF 4 (1972), pp. 53-77. 4 A new topic is introduced in the last two preserved lines: [ù ša-ni-ta]m sú-ra-haam-mu χ‫ [־‬/iš-l]a-na-ap-pa-a[r ] "Another matter: Sura-Khammu keeps sending [ ] " (11. 25‫׳‬-26‫)׳‬. For A 1121 + 2731 see B. Lafont, " L e roi de Mari et les prophètes du dieu A d a d " , RA 78 (1984), pp. 7-18. With the exception of the latter all texts are referred to by their number in AEM (see n. 7). 5 See the following general studies: W. L. Moran, "New Evidence from Mari on the History of Prophecy", Biblica 50 (1969), pp. 15-56; Koch (n. 3); J . F. Craghan, " T h e ARM X 'Prophetic' Texts: Their Media, Style and Structure", JANES 6 (1974), pp. 39-57; E. Noort, Untersuchungen zum Gottesbescheid in Mari: Die 'Mari-prophetie' in der alttestamentlichen Forschung (Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1977); I. Nakata, " T w o Remarks on the So-called Prophetic Texts from M a r i " , Acta Sumerologica 4 (1982), pp. 143-8. 6 Major studies include: F. Ellermeier, Prophetie in Mari und Israel (Herzberg, 1968); J . F. Craghan, " M a r i and its Prophets. The contributions of Mari to the understanding of biblical prophecy", Biblical Theology Bulletin 5 (1975), pp. 32-55; A. Schmitt, Prophetischer Gottesbescheid in Mari und Israel. Eine Strukturuntersuchung (Stuttgart, Berlin, Köln and Mainz, 1982); A. Malamat, " A Forerunner of Biblical Prophecy: The Mari Documents", in P. D. Miller, P. D. Hanson and S. D. McBride (ed.), Ancient Israelite Religion. Essays in Honor of Frank Moore Cross (Philadelphia, 1987), pp. 33-52. See also the wide-ranging study of a particular type of oracle: K. van der Toorn, "L'oracle de victoire comme expression prophétique au proche-orient ancien", RB 94 (1987), pp. 63-97. 7 J . - M . Durand, Archives Epistolaires de Man I/1 (ARM 26; Paris, 1988), pp. 377452 (henceforth AEM).

Though they provide only indirect evidence of the prophecies that they report, the letters are themselves direct testimony to what the officials thought appropriate to tell the king, 8 and invite an investigation of the attitudes of these officials towards the prophets/prophecies—an investigation not as yet undertaken. 9 Recent comment on the process of communication between prophet and king has taken the form of surmises, vague generalizations, or conelusions from a single passage in which a word is assigned an unexpected meaning. 1 0 It has remained undemonstrated whether the officials were conveying to their sovereign a fairly literal report of the original prophecies, or a mere summary, or indeed a free adaptation according to their own sense of what needed to be said or could be said. Since we now have, for example, identical prophetic utterances used in more than one prophetic report, and more than one version of a single prophecy, and reports of officials checking their understanding of an oracle with the prophetic author, it is possible to be more secure in our j u d g m e n t on some of these matters. T h e following questions seem pertinent: (1) What information do the officials give about how the prophecy came to their attention? (2) What kind of background information do they find it necessary to include for the appreciation of the prophecy? (3) What do the letters reveal of the reliability of the quotations of prophecies? (4) What indications do the letters give of the officials' understanding, interpretation or evaluation of the prophecies? (5) What do the letters reveal of the official's anticipation of the monarch's response? Finally, I shall consider the question whether the attitudes of Mari officials toward local prophecy are likely to have been similar to or different from those of Israelite officials toward Isrealite prophecy. I How the Prophecy Came to the Writer's Attention Most frequently the prophecy is introduced by a reference to the prophet's standing in the temple (tebûm or uzuzzu) or coming to the 8

On the Neo-Assyrian records of oracles see M. Weippert, "Assyrische Prophetien der Zeit Asarhaddons und Assurbanipals", in F. M. Fales (ed.), Assyrian Royal Inscriptions: New Horizons (Rome, 1981), pp. 71-115, esp. 72-4 and Tabelle I. 9 On the recognition of the public, political influence of oracles in the late Assyrian empire see van der Toorn (n. 6), pp. 89-93. 10 J . M. Sasson, review of Noort (n. 5) in AfO 27 (1980), p. 130a; Malamat (n. 6), p. 34; Durand, A EM (η. 7), pp. 391-2.

speaker (illikam) and speaking, but sometimes simply as prophesying (mahûm) or giving an oracle (têrtam nadānum)—presumably in the temple. T h u s the prophecy usually comes to the attention of the official in one of two ways: either at the initiative of the prophet, who brings his divine message to the official, or on a cultic occasion in the temple when the official is present (so Koch [n. 3], p. 59). Sometimes the cultic occasion is spelled out in the letter. In rare instances the official reports that he or she had inquired of the prophet." O n more than one occasion there is another link in the chain of communication: the prophecy is heard by another party, who has given his report to the official who is now writing to the king. T h u s Kibri-Dagan, governor of Terqa, has apparently written to his son Kanisan about a prophecy. We know the prophecy only through Kanisan's quotation of his father's letter in his own letter to the king (202). O r again, A k h u m , the priest of the temple of Annunitum, brought his report of a prophecy to Queen Shibtu, who wrote her report to the king (214; Akhum, the priest in question, also brought a report of a dream to Kibri-Dagan, who reported it to the king in 235). 12 In all cases the official reports how he or she came to hear the prophecy—the means of eliciting the oracle, if it was not spontaneous; the immediate source of the official's information, if not the prophet in person; 1 3 and the cultic setting or personal visitation of the prophet, if the oracle was delivered in the official's hearing. Also included are basic data about the prophet: name or title, deity, location, occasion—where these are not obvious.

11

So Queen Shibtu: 207 and 212; the king had sent an āpilum to enquire of the deity according to 199: 7-10, and the writer of that letter reports that he had sent the same individual to enquire of another deity (lines 17-18, 22-8). For a corresponding enquiry represented as taking place entirely within the divine world cf. 208 (also from Shibtu) and the comparison of 207 and 208 in J . - M . Durand, MARI 3 (1984), p. 153. 12 In 201 Bakhdi-Lim does not give his own report of an oracle to which he refers because his letter is a cover letter for a more complete report in a tablet that Akhum has addressed to the king (preserved in 200). For a fuller discussion see Parker (n. 1). 13 For the last point cf. the discussion of Lachish letter III in Parker (n. 1).

II Provision of further background information14 T o introduce her report of an oracle she has just heard, warning Zimri-Lim not to set out on a campaign but to stay in Mari, Adduduri recalls two dreams she has not had since the fall of YakhdunLim (237). In the dreams she says she saw the temple of Beletekallim abandoned by its god and images, and heard a voice crying: " C o m e back, D a g a n ! " Clearly these dreams anticipated the fall of M a r i at that time. T h u s previous revelations that proved only too correct are recalled as bearing on the present oracle and suggesting the seriousness with which it should be taken—if Zimri-Lim leaves Mari on a campaign, perhaps the city will fall. In 197 Inib-shina begins by reminding the king that previously she had written to him about an oracle that Shelebum the assinnu had given her. This is not quoted, but it must be assumed that she expects the king to remember it and to read the oracle she goes on to report with the earlier one in mind. It is likely that the earlier oracle had a similar purport to the present one, if indeed it was not the same. 1 5 In citing similar earlier oracles as precedents officials were doing what prophets themselves did. 1 6 In 199 the citation of an oracle of the goddess Diritum includes her reference to a previous oracle she had uttered. After warning the king not to commit himself to an agreement with Eshnunna without enquiring of the god, she says: " A s it was earlier, when the Benjaminites went down and settled in Sagaratim, and I said to the king: 'Do not enter into an alliance with the Benjaminites. I will send them off to their ... nests and the River will finish them off for you.' " Again, the earlier warning and promise must have been proved right and are cited here as a forceful motivation for taking the present oracle seriously. Officials also mention the previous utterance and present réitération of the same oracle. This is what Kibri-Dagan does in the letter

14

See earlier Koch (n. 3), pp. 57-8. It seems unlikely that 198, which introduces an oracle by Shelebum, is the one she is referring to (as proposed oracle by Shelebum, is the one she is referring to (as proposed in AEM [n. 7], p. 425). That oracle is concerned entirely with the bad food and drink being provided in the temple of Annunitum. 16 For other prophetic references to the fulfilment of previous oracles as motivation for taking the present one seriously see the Neo-Assyrian oracle translated in ANET», p. 605 (i 15-17), and Isa. xlviii 3. 15

quoted in the report of his son, Kanisan. Citing what he had heard earlier, he adds: " N o w the muhhûm keeps on crying as b e f o r e . " T h e writer of A l 121 + 2731, Nur-Sin of Aleppo, recalls that he has written five times to the king about a sacrifice and property requested by " A d a d , lord of Kallassu". T h e sacrifice has now been authorized and performed, but he has to report that during the extispicy—presumably on the occasion of the sacrifice—Adad pronounced another oracle, demanding once again the property already mentioned. T h u s there is apparently a history of oracles and letters from Nur-Sin to the king reporting the god's requests. The brief allusion to this history in the opening lines of the letter gives extra force to the reiterated request in the ensuing oracle, which is quoted at some length (14 lines on a large tablet). A royal sacrifice also seems to be the occasion of an oracle in 215. Lanasum reports that a sacrifice the king had provided had been offered and enjoyed by the town amid great rejoicing. In this setting 17 a prophet arose through whom Dagan demanded clean water. 219 reports that a prophecy was uttered " o n the day of the sacrifice" (ûm niqîm) by the āpilum of the goddess in whose temple the sacrifice was made. 1 8 In 221-bis the oracle is addressed not to the king, but to the writer, Kibri-Dagan. Kibri-Dagan begins his letter by telling the king that he is busy harvesting the barley of his district and piling it on the threshing floors (lines 7-9). H e then reports that a prophet had come to him previously demanding that he work on the city gate, and has now ("this very d a y " ) returned and addressed him more sharply with the same demand and an added threat. 1 9 KibriDagan protests to the king that he cannot afford to abandon the harvest or release any of his workers and suggests that the king might provide him with some assistance. This is his real reason for writing to the king. But to justify his request he explains that he is under pressure from a divine oracle, recounting the history of the

17 The prophecy is introduced not by šanītam (introducing another topic), but by the clause u muhhûm ina pan Dagan itbima "then a prophet stood before Dagan". 18 Durand sees the āpilum on such occasions as serving as both diviner and prophet, giving a "commentary inspired by the examination of the entrails and the liver" (AEM [n. 7], p. 389). But in 215 the speaker is a muhhûm. 19 There is a shift from 2nd person singular in the first oracle to 2nd person plural in the second. Presumably, the god/prophet is now addressing a larger audience than just Kibri-Dagan?

oracle and the circumstances which prevent his acceding to the divine demand. After reporting the oracle that the qammatum of Dagan of Terqa had brought him, Sammetar writes that he gave her a garment of some kind and a nose-ring that she requested (199). According to 206 a muhhûm of Dagan came to Yaqim-Addu and said: "Shall I eat [ ] of Zimri-Lim? Give me one lamb to eat. 5 ' Sammetar reports that he gave him a lamb which he ate raw in front of the gateway. Toward the end of the oracle which he then addressed to YaqimAddu, the muhhûm says: " F o r the welfare of your lord, Zimri-lim, you shall clothe me with one g a r m e n t . " Yaqim-Addu reports that he did just that. Reference to such compensation is exceptional in these letters. What is the significance of it here? Presumably, it is not a matter of giving an account of disbursements, but rather of indicating all circumstances that way be pertinent to the recipient's judgement of the oracle. T h e prophet's own interests are germane. Requests for a whole lamb, clothing and a nose-ring disclose major personal interests on the part of these two prophetic figures. In neither case does the writer express his own judgement on the oracle in question. But the second of these two texts, 206, includes further circumstantial details. After eating the lamb, the prophet gathered the elders before the gate of Sagaratim, and then pronounced his oracle. T h e writer concludes his letter as follows: " H e did not pronounce his oracle in private; he gave his oracle in the gathering of the elders." While he gives no particular recommendation with respect to the oracle, this emphatic final statement suggests that the oracle has to be considered in a special light. Having been uttered before a convened assembly of elders, it is now in the public domain. It will be important for the king to take this political fact into consideration in deciding how to respond to the oracle (cf. η. 9).

T h u s the officials include in their letters any previous history of the oracle in question, or of similar revelations (as in dreams), or of other oracles uttered in similar circumstances that were proved correct. They also note when the oracle is produced on the occasion of, and therefore perhaps in response to, a sacrifice (in some cases explicitly said to have been sponsored by the king). Finally, they mention any interests of the prophet (his or her demand for food or clothing), and refer to other interested parties privy to the oracle.

III Reliability of quotation Koch distinguished sharply between the lack of any trace of the officials' own views in the body of the letter (containing the quoted prophecy) and the presence of various such indications in the conelusion (Koch [n. 3], p. 72). From some of the letters now published it is possible to see how the interests of the writer of the letter are revealed even in the quoation of the oracle. Durand writes that for the prophet at least "le discours est en quelque sorte fixé ne varietur'''' (AEM [η. 7], p. 382). But 207 is a clear case of prophets changing the wording of an oracle (see below). Unfortunately, since we do not have the prophets' own records of their words, we cannot systematically compare the original with the official's report. We are now in the fortunate position of having three letters from three different officials all of which report a prophecy with essentially the same message: a warning about Eshnunna's treachery (197 from Inib-shina, 199 from Sammetar, 202 from Kanisan— who, however, quotes a letter from his father, Kibri-Dagan, which reports the prophecy in question). T h e common wording of the three appears in a (quasi-)proverbial saying: šapal tibnim mû illakü " b e n e a t h straw water flows". In two cases the same prophetess is involved. A qammatum of Dagan of T e r q a came and spoke to Inibshina (according to 197) and Sammetar (according to 199). 20 Any doubt that it is the same prophetess in both cases is removed by Sammetar's remark, after quoting what she had said to him, that she also "gave her message to the priestess Inib-shina in the temple of Belet-ekallim" (199: 52-4). In 202, Kibri-dagan's letter as quoted by Kanisan, we learn initially that the oracle was heard in the temple of Dagan of Terqa, and then that the muhhûm kept on crying out as before. Clearly this is a different prophet, though he is addressing the same situation in the name of the same god with the same message—and repeating it, as apparently is the qammatum referred to in 197 and 199. According to Kanisan's letter (202) Kibri-Dagan has heard the following utterance in the temple of Dagan: " U n d e r straw water flows. The god of my lord has come, and will deliver his enemies into his h a n d . " Here what sounds like a proverbial saying 21 is 20

On the qammatum!qabbatum see now AEM (n. 7), p. 396. So Durand, who suggests that the qammatum might be the source of all the citations of this proverb—AEM (n. 7), p. 405. But this raises questions about her relationship to the muhhûm. 21

quoted without interpretation or application. The general sense is obviously a warning: things are not what they seem on the surface. This is followed by a promise of victory. This too is non-specific. T h e present situation, the identity of the enemies, the manner of their defeat—all this is left unsaid. Was the original oracle so vague? O r is Kibri-Dagan—or Kanisan—just giving the essence of it, 22 knowing that all interested parties understood the particular circumstances to which it applied? What is distinctive about this letter—the fact that it is transmitting a prophecy second hand— suggests that successive communications have reduced it to its mere essence. (Cf. the prophecy quoted in Lachish letter no. Ill: hšmr.) T h e oracle as quoted by Inib-shina reads as follows: " T h e proposais of peace of the ruler of Eshnunna are treacherous. U n d e r straw water flows. But I will gather him into the net I am making. I will destroy his city and have his hoary wealth looted and plundered" (197: 11-19). This supplies initially the key to the application of the proverbial saying. It then quotes the proverb, as the general truth applicable here. This is followed by victory oracles, which introduce another metaphor, and then spell out the fate of Eshnunna and its riches. Could these be Inib-shina's own elaboration of the brief oracle quoted by Kibri-Dagan/Kanisan? Since the specificity and color of Inib-shina's version conforms more to the rhetoric of typical prophetic statements, it seems more judicious to conclude that Kibri-Dagan and Kanisan have dropped the original concreteness, reducing the warning to the proverbial saying, and summarizing the promises with a brief, general, colorless statement. The fact that the essential message—a warning against treachery and a promise of victory—is shared by both reports justifies speaking of the two as being different versions of a single divine message. 2 3 Finally, Sammetar quotes the oracle as follows: " U n d e r straw water flows. They keep writing to you proposing peace; they send their gods to you; but in their hearts they are concocting a different brew. T h e king must not commit himself to an agreement without 22 So that it resembles an omen apodosis. Cf. Durand's discussion of apparent citations of such in AEM (n. 7), pp. 55-6. 23 The promise of victory is in both versions theological: it promises what the god is going to do, not what the king will succeed in doing. The oracle as quoted in Kibri-Dagan's letter, as quoted in Kanisan's letter, may well have led the king to write back requesting a first-hand report. Cf. η. 12 on 201 and 200.

enquiring of the g o d " (199: 44-50). Whereas Inib-shina's version first exposes the policies of Eshnunna, then quotes the proverb, S a m m e t a r ' s version first quotes the proverbial saying and then explicates it in terms of the present policies of Eshnunna. Whereas Inib-shina's quotation (like Kibri-Dagan's) balances the exposure of Eshnunna's treachery with divine promises of its destruction, there is no trace of a promise in Sammetar's version. Sammetar concludes his quotation with a statement about the behavior consequently incumbent on Z i m r i - L i m — " T h e king must not commit himself to an agreement without enquiring of the god"—which appears in neither of the other versions. It does appear, however, in the concluding words of an oracle of Diritum that Sammetar has quoted earlier in his letter (lines 38-9). Since this oracle of Diritum also began with similar words—"Perhaps the king will commit himself to an agreement without enquiring of the g o d " (199: 30-2)—Sammetar himself may have introduced the warning against so proceeding at the end of the qammatum s oracle, seeing this as in effect the practical consequence of both oracles. This insistence on the king's consultation of the god before making any commitments to Eshnunna explains Sammetar's omission of the victory oracles found in Inibshina's letter. He does not want the king to be overconfident. For this reason it is better to understand the extended warnings of S a m m e t a r ' s version of the oracle as his own elaboration of the prophet's words. If they were original, we would expect Inib-shina to have cited them in support of her own cautionary message. T o summarize: Kibri-Dagan and Kanisan quote the proverb—a warning—and a general promise of victory. I have suggested that Kibri-Dagan's/Kanisan's version is a précis. T h e warning in Inibshina's version begins by specifying Eshnunna's treachery, and then cites the proverb. This is followed by vivid promises of defeat of the enemy. I have suggested that the unique promises in Inibshina's oracle may be authentic prophetic material, and not of her own invention. This is perhaps supported by the contrast in her letter between the vivid representation of the promises and her own expression of anxiety about the king's welfare. In Sammetar's version the warning begins with the proverb and then spells out its relevance in terms of Eshnunna's treachery. There are no promises, but Zimri-Lim is enjoined to behave religiously in the light of the warning. I have suggested that Sammetar may have elaborated the

warnings and omitted the promises in order to ensure that the warning is taken seriously; and that the insistence on consulting the god, also found elsewhere in the letter, is here supplied by Sammetar himself. It seems justified to conclude that these officials did not always think it important to replicate the precise wording of oracles, and indeed might go so far as to omit any reference to a promise alongside a warning. This does not prove that the original prophecy did not come in different forms. But the fit or contrast between the specific form of the prophecy and the particular character and concerns of the letter in which it occurs does give reason for thinking that the writers might exercise considerable freedom in shaping it themselves. T h e persuasiveness of the preceding suggestions for attributing most of the differences among the versions in these three letters to the writer's differing competences and interests rather than to the original oracles may be slightly reinforced by the first example under the next heading. IV Understanding, interpretation, evaluation of oracles24 In Shibtu's lengthy account of her interrogation of the male and female prophets in 207, there is an interesting direct glimpse of the reporter's interpretation of a prophecy. Shibtu has just quoted the prophecy, which seems strikingly close to poetic forms: bêlī humāšam IJ[/Î] ana Išme-Dagan humāšam iššima umma\ "ina humāšim ele^ika šitpusum šitpasma ina šitpusu ele^ika" My lord raised the staff raised the staff against Ishme-Dagan, saying: " W i t h the staff I'll defeat you. Struggle for all you are worth. In the struggle I'll defeat you." (207: 13-17). 24 Koch believes that the writers personally accept and share in the message of the prophet ([n. 3] p. 74). Noort concludes that the letters show less respect for the prophecy than for the addressee, the king ([n. 5] p. 82).

She writes that she then asked the prophets: "Will my lord engage in armed c o m b a t ? " Clearly she is interpreting the prophecy literally, seeing Zimri-Lim personally engaged in hand-to-hand combat with Ishme-Dagan. But she checks her interpretation, asking the prophets if indeed the king will be directly involved. The following oracle reassures her. " T h e r e will be no fighting. O n arrival his allied forces will disperse. T h e head of Ishme-Dagan will be cut off and placed beneath my lord's foot with the words: 'Ishme-Dagan's army was great; but though his army was great, his allied forces have dispersed. My allied forces are (the gods) Dagan, Shamash, Itur-Mer, Belet-Ekallim and Adad, the Lord of Decision, who go at my lord's side' " (lines 20-34). While the first oracle is cast in the image of a single-handed combat between Zimri-Lim and Ishme-Dagan in which the former announces his victory, the prophets now recast it in more prosaid form and circumstantial detail: there will be no real military engagement— Ishme-Dagan will be abandoned by his allies, leaving him at the mercy of Zimri-Lim's men. Are they correcting Shibtu's too literal interpretation of the first oracle, or adapting their message to alleviate Shibtu's manifest anxiety—or both? In any case Shibtu reports the sequence: oracle—query—revised statement of oracle in order to show the king that she has checked her " r e a d i n g " of the first oracle (as the omen priest checks his reading of the omens). But does she understand the second version to be intended literally, or does she, like the omen priest, intend to suggest that it is not the details of the utterances that are significant in either case, but their common purport (like the " p o s i t i v e " or " n e g a t i v e " conclusion drawn from several omens)—in this case, that Zimri-Lim will be victorious over Ishme-Dagan? Shibtu concludes her letter with her own reiteration of the prophet's message (lines 40-5). Although she introduces this as a quotation of the prophets, there is no suggestion here that she has consulted them a third time, or indeed that they have spontaneously added a third version. This third " q u o t a t i o n " is really her own version, reflecting what she sees as significant in the previous oracle(s). In it she takes up and elaborates just one element of the second version, the dispersal of Ishme-Dagan's troops, making no reference to the decapitation of their leader or to the gods' support of Zimri-Lim: " T h e allied forces of Ishme-Dagan are (mere) captives. They go along with him in deception and

treachery. They will not obey him. His army will disperse before my l o r d . " With this she restates the message already received in two forms from the same prophets on this one occasion, focusing on the one element that strikes her as most important—the claim that the enemy allies will disband—and elaborating this with her own thoughts. While she is careful to spell out her clarification of the meaning of the first oracle, she also feels free finally to place the emphasis where she will and to provide an explanation and justification of it within the citation itself. In sum, this letter reflects Shibtu's anxiety about the possible implications of the first oracle; is the king actually going to have to engage in hand-to-hand combat? She reports that she checked this interpretation with the prophets and discovered that she had misinterpreted it by taking it too literally. A second oracle changes the force of the first by dropping its métonymie language for more literal and circumstantial wording. In her own final version of the prophets' message she reiterates one element of the second version, the one that impresses her as most significant, and elaborates it, including a justification for it. 25 It is worth noting that this clarification and justification take place in the course of one oracular consultation and are reported in one letter probably written the same or the next day, 2 6 and not over decades or centuries, as is usually assumed of an accumulation of levels of interpretation in the case of the Hebrew Bible. It is an awareness of such interpretation and variation as we have been discussing that would lead the king to request a first-hand report in cases where he had only heard a second-hand report—a request that I have argued lies behind 200 and 201. In 197, already discussed above, Inib-shina, daughter of ZimriLim and priestess of Adad, reports that a prophetess (qammatum) of 25

It may be asked why Shibtu includes all three versions and not just the one that she thinks most appropriate to pass on to the king. This question has been partly answered above in the discussion of the writer's obligation to report how the prophecy came to his or her attention and to supply other relevant background information. The reason for her addition of the third version is the fact that she has had to deal with the king's anticipated suspicions about her interrogation of the prophets, and wishes to conclude by reasserting the (for her) central point of the prophecy. 26 Contrast the picture of the unaltered preservation of oracles in A. R. Millard, " L a prophétie et l'écriture—Israel, Aram, Assyrie", RHR 202/2 (1985), pp. 125-45.

D a g a n of T e r q a came to her and delivered an oracle a n n o u n c i n g the treachery of the ruler of E s h n u n n a and promising his overthrow. She is evidently more impressed by the former than the latter, as the rest of her letter expresses her anxiety for the king's safety: " T a k e care of yourself. D o n ' t go into the city without an o m e n . I have heard it said: ' H e is always distinguishing himself.' D o n ' t distinguish yourself!" (lines 21-7). T h o u g h she faithfully transmits the whole oracle, Inib-shina is affected by one part of it—the w a r n i n g — a n d so urges the king to attend to his own welfare. O n the other h a n d , Kanisan, reporting on the letter from his father which also cites prophecies about E s h n u n n a ' s treachery and its defeat by M a r i (202) gives more balanced advice. While urging the king not to be negligent in having omens taken concerning his welfare, he also (following a three-line gap in the text) advises the king not to delay in offering a sacrifice a n d going (to war?). In other words Kanisan appears to take both parts of the oracle seriously and to advise the king to act on it in all respects. S a m m e t a r ' s version (in 199) of the oracles of D a g a n of T e r q a about E s h n u n n a ' s treachery is more monitory than Inib-shina's and lacks the promise of her version. But although this reinforces the message of an oracle that he reports having received the previous day from D i r i t u m , both contrast with the oracle of reassurance from Dagan of T u t t u l with which the letter begins. T h u s in his final recommendation S a m m e t a r is neutral—as well as deferential: "let my lord deliberate and act according to his great r o y a l t y " (56-7). T h u s in these three letters, also discussed in the preceding section, the three authors give quite different advice concerning the oracles they report. In 204 Inib-shina reports on another prophetess (āpiltum), whose oracle, so far as it is preserved (three lines are missing) consists entirely of a warning. H e r e she also advises: " L e t my star (her sobriquet for the king) have an omen taken, and let my star act according to his omens. Let my star take care of h i m s e l f " (lines 22-6). In each of these letters the general oracular warning p r o m p t s the official to refer the king to the omens for specific guidance about each decision he faces. O n the one hand, this shows the seriousness with which the official takes the oracle, especially if it is monitory in p u r p o r t . O n the other h a n d , it also shows how in practice the

élite of the society depended on divination for specific guidance. In 217 an unknown official (the beginning of the letter is missing) reports an oracle that is at once a rebuke, a request, and a promise conditional upon compliance with the request. T h e writer then urges the king to have omens taken and to act according to the god's reply. In this case, the oracular request is itself specific, so the omens are not for the purposes of specific guidance. They can only be to confirm whether the king should comply with the request in the oracle. This clearly casts doubt on the reliability of the prophet (whose hair and hem are sent with the letter) and hence on the validity of the claim. T h u s officials may report both an original oracle and a revised version given in response to questioning. They may restate an oracle in their own words, ignoring parts of it while taking up one part to which they may add their own explanatory or justificatory clauses. They may, after citing an oracle more fully, add their own recommendations, especially advising that the omens be consulted.

V Anticipation of response In 207 Queen Shibtu gives an extensive report of a consultation she had undertaken. She had given drink to two prophets (referred to as ittātim " s i g n s " ) , one male and one female, whom she then asked about a campaign on which the king was to go. T h e oracle was favorable. She then asked them about his enemy, Ishme-Dagan of Assyria. T h e oracle was unfavorable. She then quotes the oracle. After checking the meaning of the oracle—which she found alarming—and being reassured (as reported above), she writes: " P e r h a p s my lord will say: 'She used guile to make them speak.' O n e does not make them speak! Some speak, some resist" (lines 35-9). Shibtu seems here to be acknowledging that the king may think that her interrogation of prophets is susceptible to corruption. Shibtu, as the king's wife, would have a strong interest in a favorable oracle, so the prophets may find it in their interest to produce such. Accordingly, anticipating scepticism on the part of the king, she attempts to counter it by insisting that a response to an inquiry is not guaranteed. Prophets, she alleges, are not under the control of the inquirer. Shibtu's anticipation of the king's seepticism and her insistence on the prophets' independence suggests

that elicited oracles, unlike omens, may be, in the eyes of the king, suspect (so D u r a n d , AEM [n. 7 pp. 394, 409], particularly when elicited by someone with such obvious personal interest in the matter. T h e king was not a passive and credulous believer of every oracle he received, but rather judged its divine authority in the light of the possibility of its being shaped by specific h u m a n interests. Shibtu also reports another oracle she initiated by giving drink and then making an enquiry (212). She concludes this letter by asserting that she had made this enquiry before receiving an oracle from the goddess A n n u n i t u m brought by the assinnu, Ili-khaznaya, and that " t h e report which A n n u n i t u m sent for you and what I asked for are identical". As Durand has noted, the fact that she waited until she had received Ili-Khaznaya's oracle before sending word of her elicited oracle and then emphasized the identity of the two suggests that the latter alone may have been received with some scepticism ([n. 11] p. 152). It is perhaps also significant that, though the oracle she herself had elicited antedated the spontaneous oracle which had been brought to her by Ili-khaznaya, she reverses this order in her report. 2 7 T h u s this letter seems to confirm that a solicited oracle is not quite as convincing in itself as a spontaneous one. 2 8 Elsewhere the king writes to Shibtu telling her to make an enquiry concerning H a m m u r a p i of Babylon, and, when she has completed one enquiry, to go back and make another, and then send him a full report of all her enquiries (185-bis). Noting that such a second enquiry was automatic in the case of hepatoscopy, D u r a n d suggests that the king must be referring to oracular prophecy, known to be favored by the queen, at the same time drawing on the divinatory model for the technique of checking. 29 According to 199 the king himself sends an āpilum to Dagan of T e r q a to check an oracle concerning him (piqdanni) (lines 5-9). T h e āpilum returns with the answer, an oracle which is then quoted (lines 9-16). 27 Unfortunately, the wording of Ili-khaznaya's oracle has not been preserved on the tablet. Otherwise we would have had an opportunity to see what an official meant by "identical". 28 According to Durand Shibtu, as a native of Aleppo, may have been more inclined to make inquiries of prophets than of hepatoscopists (AEM [n. 7], p. 394). 29 Durand, AEM [n. 7], p. 369. Fr. Joannès has suggested that 212, which also seems to be about Hammurapi, is Shibtu's response to 185-bis (apud Durand, AEM, pp. 369, 441). In any case, it comes from the same time of concern about Hammurapi.

Another apparent case of consultation is found in 216, where the unique appellation nabi sa hanê " t h e prophets (?) of the H a n e a n s " appears. The writer reports that he assembled this group and had an omen taken (tertam ... ušêpis) concerning the king's welfare during a forthcoming ritual. After a gap of a few lines, he cites a reply urging due caution and military preparedness. Unfortunately the lacuna permits us to discern neither the relationship between the omen and the reply, nor, consequently, the particular behavior of the nabi. Is this another case of the utterance of an inspired oracle on the occasion of the taking of omens, or of the rhetorical élaboration of the results of an extispicy? 30 I n A 1 1 2 1 + 2731 Nur-Sin, Zimri-Lim's ambassador, writes from Aleppo to report a prophecy in which Adad of Kallassu requested a piece of land—something about which Nur-Sin has written to the king five times already. After quoting the prophecy he spells out the circumstances: " T h i s is what the āpilū said. H e (the god) keeps emerging at the time of the oracles. And now, moreover, the āpilum of Adad, Lord of Kallassu is claiming the territory of Alakhtum as his property. Let my lord be i n f o r m e d . " But this news is not going to please the king. So he goes on: " F o r m e r l y when I lived in Mari I would pass on to my lord any word that an āpilum or āpiltum would say. Now that I live in another country, should I not write to my lord what I hear and what they say? If at some future date some disaster occurs, will my lord not say: ' W h y did you not write to me the message that the āpilum said to you—he is claiming your territory?' So now I am writing to my lord. Let my lord be i n f o r m e d . " Nur-Sin faces a dilemma. H e anticipates that he himself may well bear the brunt of the king's anger at this divine request that he is reporting, but also that if he does not report the prophecy, and then something goes wrong, he will be blamed for not letting the king know what the god expects. From this it is clear that when the king receives word of displeasing oracles his wrath is likely to fall on the immediate source; but also that it is likely to be worse for the official if he fails to make the report. T h e king regards real prophecies as revelations of the divine will, and knows that, if he does not respond, some disaster may strike him or his domain. However

30

For the use of common speech forms in the two procedures see van der Toorn (n. 6), pp. 68-71.

displeasing the oracle, it is essential that he take it into account. 3 1 In conclusion, while there is some deferring to omens for more specific guidance or occasionally even for confirmation of the validity of an oracle, prophecy itself is taken very seriously. As a spontaneous message from the deity, it appears to have its own respected place alongside the quasi-scientific enquiries of the diviner. However, since it does not itself have any pretensions to such " s c i e n c e " , oracles given in response to queries may be suspect, being more vulnerable to h u m a n interests. O n the other hand, an initial prophecy is sometimes checked by a further inquiry also addressed to a prophet. Clearly this does not express doubt about the institution, but rather the need, institutionalized in extispicy, to check and control for possible misreadings of the divine message by the prophet, as by the diviner.

VI A model for Israelite officials' responses to prophecy? There is no reason to think that the attitudes of Mari officials toward prophecy were unique in the ancient near east. Rather, for lack of other evidence they may be taken to be representative. But given the unique development of Israel and the peculiar prominence of prophetic texts in the surviving Israelite literature, it is appropriate to ask whether the situation in Israel would have been an exception. T o answer that question, it is necessary first to clarify whether prophecy in Israel was the same phenomenon as prophecy in Mari, and whether it occupied the same place and performed the same role in Israel as in Mari. Recognizing that prophecy in Israel included a wide range of phenomena and institutional arrangements, we must specify what it is that we are comparing. If Mari prophecy may be defined as the oracular utterances of religious specialists addressed by a deity to the king (more rarely one of his officers) in the form of promises and assurances, threats against other kings or states, warnings, and demands or requests, and concerned variously with international relations, warfare, cultic matters and the king's wellbeing, then it is clear from the

31 Contrast the more formal obligations assumed by the diviner in "the diviner's protocol" (AEM 1 [n. 7]): he swears to tell and not hide from the king any inauspicious omen that he sees.

biblical evidence that essentially the same institution is found in pre-exilic Israel. "Essentially the s a m e " does not exclude various culture-specific features beyond this general characterization. If that be granted, is it reasonable to assume that officials in Israel would have responded to such prophecies with much the same range of behaviors as at Mari? While various forms of (deductive) divination were practiced in ancient Israel, there does not appear to have been, from the indirect evidence that we have, any hierarchical structure of authority a m o n g them 3 2 —although we cannot, of course, exclude the possibility that different kings may in fact have favored or promoted one form over others, as, on the negative side, Saul and Josiah are said to have eliminated necromancy as a legitimate institution. In the indirect evidence at our disposal there is nothing to suggest that prophecy regularly took second place to any other medium of revelation. Thus, it would be inappropriate to carry over to Israel a model in which officials recommended taking omens or consulting other media of revelation. It would be similarly erroneous to introduce the notion that consultation is more suspect than spontaneous oracles, since the Hebrew narratives portray prophetic consultation as standard practice. This is only what we would expect, given the absence in Israel of an established and authoritative class of extispicists. Provided that allowance is made for the presence in Mari and absence in Israel of such an established divinatory " s c i e n c e " , and for the presence in Israel (after c. 750) and the absence in Mari of individual prophets who address the authorities in general and the public at large on broader social, ethical and religious matters ("classical prophecy"), 3 3 I conclude that the conduct of Mari officials with respect to prophecy may, in the absence of direct evidence beyond the minimal yield of the Lachish letters, be taken to be illustrative of the relations between prophets and officials in and around the royal courts of Jerusalem and Samaria; and that the Mari evidence may serve as a check on the verisimilitude of the biblical narratives about such relations. 32

While the wording of 1 Sam. xxviii 6 might suggest that the king first sought a dream, then had recourse to Urim, and finally consulted prophets, such a hierarchy does not appear elsewhere. The similar lists of media in Hittite prayers vary from text to text (v. ANET pp. 394-5, 396a, 400b). 33 On this innovation of the mid-8th century see J . S. Holladay, "Assyrian Statecraft and the Prophets of Israel", HTR 63 (1970), pp. 29-51.

INDEX O F A U T H O R S

Ackroyd, P.R. 119, 119n10, 148n2, 150n7, 178n22, 189n4 Albeck, Ch. 96n75 Alt, Α. 175 Anderson, B.W. 1n2, 45n4, 124n1, 176n12 Auld, A.G. 223 Austin, J.L. 176n11 Bach, R. 20, 20n2 Bächli, Ο. 43n1 Barth, Η. 151, 153n13, 160, 161n21 Barth, Κ. 212, 223 Baumgarten, W. 8nl, 52n1 Begrich, J. 46n3 Berger, P.R. 86n13, 87n23 Bernstein, Β. 174 Bcrridge, J.M. 206n14 Beuken, W.A.M. 115, 115n2, 116, 118, 120, 123, 188n1, 190n7 Birch, B.C. 131n19 Bitzer, L.F. 181n33 Black, M. 3n4 Blank, S. 52n1 Boecker, H.J. 54n2 Boer, P.A.H. de 30n2 Borger, R. 91n40, 100n86, 100n87 Bourguignon, Ε. 125, 126, 126n4, 128, 130n15, 130n17, 131, 132, 132n21, 133n24, 134, 137n34 Bratcher, D. 233n14 Braulik, G. 220, 223 Briggs, C.A. 8n1 Bright, J. 124n1 Brongers, H.A. 32n4 Brown, F. 8n 1 Brownlee, W.H. 237n21 Busch, Ε. 223 Buss, M.J. 177η 17 Caird, G.B. 217, 223 Campbell, Ε. J r 53η 1 Caquot, Α. 224n2 Carroll, R.P. 202n5, 205n12, 207n16, 208, 218, 223 Charles, R.H. 67n3 Cheyne, T.K. 143, 143n14

Childs, B.S. 81 η 1, 121r112, 129n13, 157η 19, 224 Clements, R.E. 45η 1, 54n3, 177n16, 179n25 C1incs, D.J.A. 206n13, 207n19, 208 Coats, G.W. 174n2, 200n2, 226n7 Coggins, R.J. 238 Cohen, N.G. 231n13 Corbett, E.P.J. 185n46 Cornill, C.H. 6n2 Cowley, Α. 94n60, 95n67 Craghan, J.F. 91n44, 246n5, 246n6 Crenshaw, J.L. 41n1, 55n4, 204n10, 207n18, 209, 211, 223 Cripps, R.S. 41n2, 45, 45n5 Cross, F.M. 223 Dahood, M. 140n6 Daiches, D. 92n52 Dascal, M. 178n20 Davies, G.I. 221n5, 222n6 Deden, D. 31n1, 32n2 Dentan, R.C. 212, 223 De Jong Ellis, M. 245n2 DeVries, S.J. 213, 215, 217n4, 218, 223 Donner, H. 183n38 Dossin, G. 92n53 Dozeman, T.B. 213, 214, 218, 221, 223 Draiïkorn-Kilmer, Α. 95n66 Driver, S.R. 4n3, 8nl, 57n4, 215, 223 Duhm, Β. 6n2, 31, 31n3, 41 n2, 139, 139n3, 142, 176n10 Durand, J.-M. 246, 246n7, 247n10, 248n11, 250n18, 252n21, 253n22, 260, 260n28, 260n29 Dürkheim, Ε. 183n41 Eaton, J.H. 224n1 Ebcling, E. 86n15 Edsman, C.-M. 62n5, 124n3 Ehninger, D. 184n43 Eliade, M. 58n3, 62n5, 62n9, 185n48 Eliot, T.S. 180n29 E11ermeier, F. 246n6 Elliger, Κ. 55n4, 142, 224n1

Eissfeldt, Ο. 24n3, 69n3, 72n2, 80n2, 109n8, 110n8, 112n10, 113n11, 115, 1 16, 119, 213, 223, 241n32 Emerton, J.A. 236, 237n2I, 242n33 Eppstein, V. 124n2, 131n19 Evans-Pritchard, E.E. 130n14, 132n22 Fales, F.M. 247n3 Faulkner, R.O. 97n77 Fecht, G. 96n73, 96n74, 96n75 Fensham, C. 51n3 Fohrer, G. 14, 15, 25, 26n1, 26n2, 72n2, 124n1, 177n18, 178n22, 224n2, 241, 241n32 Frankfort, H. 178 Freedman, D.N. 2n2, 45n1, 48n1, 54n3, 139, 139n1, 141, 141n9, 142, 225n5 Gehman, H.S. 135n28 Geiger, Α. 105n4 Gerstenberger, E.S. 55n4 Gese, H. Ì95n15 Gesenius, W. 27n1 Gevaryahu, H.M.I. 174n2 Gevirtz, S. 139n2 Giglioli, P.P. 174n3 Gitay, Y. 178n19, 179n27, 181n32, 184n42 Gitin, S. 242n33 Goedicke, H. 127n8 Goetze, Α. 86, 86n17, 94n64 Goldammer, Κ. 124n3, 132n21 G0mbrich, H. 180n30 Good, E.M. 49n2, 143 Good, R.M. 190n10 Gordon, C. 93n55 Gottlieb, Η. 44n1 Gowan, D.E. 225n4 Gray, G.B. 139 Gray, J . 74n1, 79n1, 80n2, 137n38, 215, 223 Greenbaum, L. 126 Greenberg, M. 98n80 Greenfield, J.C. 90n38, 90n39, 98n80 Greengus, S. 93n57, 94n59, 94n65 Gressmann, H. 74, 74n2, 75n1 Grether, Ο. 12n2 Gross, W. 211, 213, 214, 220, 223 Guillaume, Α. 126n5, 127, 127n6, 136, 136n31, 137n37 Gunkel, H. 72, 72n1, 99, 107n6, 111n10, 174n5, 175, 175n7, 175n8, 175n9, 176 Gunn, D.M. 206n13, 207n19, 208

Gunneweg, A.HJ. 42n3, 225n4 Gurney, O.R. 79n3 Gussler, J. 130n15, 130n16 Guthrie, H. 51n2 Habel, Ν. 201n3, 202 Haldar, A. lnl Halpern, Β. 188, 189, 190n9 Hals, R. 72n3 Hanson, P.D. 160n20, 203n7, 246n6 Haran, M. 183n40 Harper, W.R. 49n3, 142, 142n12, 143n13 Harrelson, W. 1n2, 45n4, 176n12 Hartman, L. 160n20 Harvey, J . 94n62, 176n12 Hayes, J.H. 173n, 176n9, 183n38 Heimpe1-Guidi 85n7 Heintz, J.G. 90n37, 90n39 Held, M. 91n44 Henry, M.L. 179n25 Henton Davies, G. 3n4 Hempel, J. 43n2 Herrmann, S. 14 Hertzberg, H.W. 131n20 Hillers, D.R. 41n3, 51n3, 134, 135n27 Hirsch, E.D. 173n1 H offner, H. 79n3 Holladay, J.S. 263n33 Holladay, W.L. 71n2, 12n35, 203n8, 205, 206, 208, 240n30, 242n33 Hölscher, G. 11, 111n10 Hopfe, L. 245n1 Hossfeld, F.L. 212, 223 Hufmon, H.B. 94n63, 176n12, 176n13 Humbert, P. 224n1, 237n20 Hyatt, J.P. 3n5, 121, 121n13 Irwin, W.A.

11

Jacob, Ε. 24n1, 72n2 Jakobson, R. 180n29 Janzen, J.G. 225n3, 236n18, 238 Jepsen, Α. 3n5, 112r.10, 127, 127n6, 138n39, 214, 223 Jeremias, C. 188n1, 198n18 Jeremias, J. 95n69, 224n1, 238n22, 240n31 Joannès, Fr. 260n29 Jöcken, P. 225n5, 226n6 Johnson, A R. 1n2, 61n7, 71n1, 127, 127n7 Johnson, M.D. 235 Junker, Η. 240n29

Kaiser, Ο. 176n13, 177n15, 182n36 Kapelrud, A.S. 62n5, 124n3 Kamel, T. 178n20 Kaufmann, Y. 84, 84t11, 85n5, 88n25, 99, l07n6, 110n8, 113, 113n12, 136n32 Kautzsch, Ε. 27n1 Keel, Ο. 90n36 Keller, C.A. 225n4, 233 Kessler, W. 21n3 Kittel, G. 47n2 Kittel, R. 43n2, 74n1, 79n1, 80n2 K1auber, E.G. 79n3 Klopfenstein, Μ.Α. 212, 223 Knierim, R. 177n17, 215, 223 Knight, D.A. 177n17, 179n25 Koch, Κ. 46n2, 72n4, 175n7, 179n24, 246n3, 246n5, 248, 249n14, 252, 255n24 Koehler, L. 8n 1 Kraeling, E.G. 94n60 Kramer, S.N. 90n35, 100n88 Kraus, H.-J. 57n3 Kühl, C. 72n2, 93n55 La Barre, W. 132n21 Labuschagne, C.J. 24n, 50n1, 54n3 Lafont, B. 246n4 Lambert, W.G. 79n3, 92n53, 97n78, 101n89, 101n90 Landsberger, Β. 89n30 Largement, R. de 92n52 Laurentin, Α. 32n4 Lausberg, Η. 140n5 Legasse, S. 224n2 Lemke, W.E. 209n20, 214, 221, 223 Lessa, W.A. 137n35 Levenson, J.D. 195n15, 196, 197 Lewin, E.D. 206n13, 207 Lewis, C.S. 179n28 Lichtheim, M. 96n71, 98n81 Lieberman, S. 96n75 Limburg, J. 93n56 Lindblom, J . 1n1, 1n2, 4n4, 14n2, 62n7, 63n2, 111n9, 129n12, 131n19, 213, 218 Liver, J. 92n52 Lods, A. 92n53, 111n10 Long, Β.Ο. 174n2, 200n2, 202n4, 204n9, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 223, 226n7 Lund, N.W. 145 Lundbom, J.R. 203n6, 207n13

Mackay, C. 195η 16 MacRac, W. 176n9, 177n17 Malamat, A. 85, 85n2, 85n3, 85n4, 91n43, 91n45, 93, 203n7, 246n6, 247n10 Malinowski, Β. 174 Marti, K. 41 n2, 240n29 May, L.C. 126n4 Mays, J.L. 136n29, 143, 143n13, 143n16, 149n5, 221, 223 McBridc, S.D. 203n7, 246n6 McCarthy, C. 229n11 McKane, W. 219 Meier, G. 85n8, 86n15 Merrill, A.L. 204n11 Messel, Ν. 11 Messing, S.D. 131, 131n18 Metzer, M. 46n2 Meyer, Ε. 45 Meyer, I. 212, 223 Mihelic, J.L. 24n3 Millard, A.R. 257n26 Miller, J.M. 183n38 Miller, J.W. 21, 21n1 Miller, P.D. 203n7, 246n6 Montgomery, J . 74n1, 79n1, 80n1, 135n28, 212 Moran, W.L. 85, 85n5, 86n9, 86n10, 87n22, 87n24, 88, 89n31, 91n44, 91n47, 92n49, 128n9, 246n5 Mowinckel, S. 50n2, 98n83, 112, 112n11, 113n12, 163n24, 224n1, 239n27 Muffs, Y. 94n61 Muilenburg, J. 2n1, 48, 48n2, 140n6, 181 Mullen, E.Th. 192n12 Myers, J.M. 121, 122n14 Nakata, I. 246n5 Nicholson, E.W. 57n3 Nielsen, Ε. 224η 1 Nock, A.D. 97n78 Noort, Ε. 246n5, 247n10, 255n24 Noth, M. 58n1, 61111, 68n1, 79n1, 87n21, 129n10, 129n11, 132n23, 212, 213, 214, 215 Notopoulos, J.A. 140n5 Oded, B. 183n38 Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. 179n26, 181n33, 185n49 Oppenheim, A.L. 179n28 Osswald, E. 24n2, 24n3, 25n1, 34n4

Otto, Ε. 225n4, 238n22 Overholt, T.W. 204n11 Park, G.K. 137, 137n35 Parker, S.B. 245n1, 248n12, 248n13 Parry, M. 179n28 Peckham, Β. 225n3, 238 Pelikan,]. 175n8 Perelman, Ch. 174n3, 179n26, 181n33, 185n49 Perry, M. 182n34 Petitjean, A. 190n7 Pfeiffer, Ε. 50n4 Pfeiffer, R.H. 1n3 Plöger, Ο. 73, 73n2, 76n1, 80n2,

122 Porteous, N.W. 1n2, 2n1 Prichard, J.B. 238n25 Quell, G.

4n2, 24n2, 215, 223

Rabe, V.W. 124n2, 126n5 Rabenau, Κ. von 11, 11n2 Rad, G. von 3n4, 4n2, 19, 19n1, 19n2, 26, 26n4, 34n1, 34n2, 38n4, 43n2, 46, 46n4, 49n1, 57n2, 89n33, 106n5, 148n1 Rai«, T.M. 45n1, 52n1, 52n2, 52n3, 54n1 Reiser, W. 74n3 Reisman, D. 100n88 Rendtorff, R. 19, 19n1, 46n2, 48, 48n2, 124n2 Reventlow, H. 41n3, 52n1, 55n4 Rhodes, A.B. 204n11 Richter, W. 55n4, 73n4, 77n2 Rignell, L. 189 Roberts, J.J.M. 128n9 Robertson, Ε. 182n35 Robinson, H.W. 41n3, 112n10, 126n5 Robinson, J. 2 1 2 , 2 1 3 , 2 2 3 Robinson, T.H. 111n10, 175n8 Rofé, A. 73, 73n3, 81, 81n3, 213, 214n2, 216, 217, 219 Rohland, E. 20n1 Römer, Ph. 86n9, 86n13 Rosenberg, B.A. 177n19 Rowley, H.H. 2n1, 3n4, 3n5, 5n2, 66n1, 92n53, 112n10 Ruben, P. 143n13 Rudolph, W. 5n4, 7n2, 9n1, 108n7, 189, 215, 223, 224n3, 233

Šanda, Α. 74η 1, 80n2 Sapir, Ε. 174 Sarna, N.M. 98n80 Sasson, J.M. 173n, 247n10 Sawyer, J.F.Α. 161n22 Schleusener, J. 180n29 Schmidt, W. 38n2 Schmitt, Α. 246n6 Schüpphaus, J. 76n 1 Schweizer, Η. 136n33 Scully, J. 180n29 Searle, J.R. 176n11 Sellin, Ε. 29, 29η 1, 32η 1, 34, 34n3, 37, 37η 1, 224η 1, 240n29 Seux, Μ.-J. 239n27 Seybold, Κ. 188, 189 Simon, U. 212, 213, 214, 223 Simpson, W.K. 97n77, 97n78 Sjöberg, A.W. 86n15 Skinner, J. 4n2, 4n4, 5, 5n1, 5n4, 7n2, 9, 211, 212, 223 Smend, R. 178n24 Smith, B.H. 140n4 Smith, G.Α. 41n2 Snaith, N.H. 129n12, 212, 223 Soden, W. von 86n13 Speiser, E.A. 92n53 Spiro, Μ.Ε. 130n17, 137n34 Steck, Ο.Η. 72, 73n1, 153n13 Sternberg, M. 215, 223 Stronach, D. 194 Sturdy, J . 13ln 19 Swantes, S.J. 34n5 Tadmor, H. 91n42 Talmon, S. 41n3 Tardieu, M. 224n2 Terrien, S. 1n2, 45, 54 Thordarson 54n 1 Thureau-Dangin, F. 95n66 Tompkins, J.P. 178n23 Toorn, K. van der 246n6, 247n9, 261n30 Torrey, C.C. 11 Tucker, G.M. 46n1, 72n3, 174n2, 226n7 Vermeylen, J. 151, 151n10 Vogt, Ε.Ζ. 137n35 V01z, P. 5n4, 7n2, 9n1 Vries, S.J. de 24n3 Vriezen, Th.C. 26, 26n3, 35, 35n1, 36n1, 49n2, 66n1

Waldow, E. von 51n1, 54n2 Walters, S.D. 128n9 Wanke, G. 33, 38n1, 39, 40n1, 149n6 Ward, J.W. 136n29 Watt, W.M. 136n31 Watts, J.D.W. 42n3, 55n4, 224n1 Weinfeld, M. 86n19, 90n35, 91n46, 92n51, 94n61, 95n68 Weippert, M. 247n3 Weis, R.D. 226, 227 Weiser, Α. 5n4, 7n2, 36, 36n2 Welch, A.C. 2n3, 5n4 Wellhausen, J . 213,223 Wente, E.F. Jr. 97n77 Westermann, C. 49n4, 51 η 1, 51n2, 53n2, 77n1, 118, 118n9 Whately, R. 184 White, E.E. 181n33 Whitley, C.F. 1n1, 1n3, 25, 25n3 Wijngaards, J.N.M. 49, 49n2 Wildberger, H. 34n2, 72n2, 153n13,

163n23, 178n22, 183n38, 185n47 Williams, R. 96n71 Wilson, R R. 213, 214, 218, 223 Wiseman, D.J. 95n66 Wolff, H.W. 45, 45n6, 46, 55n4, 136n29, 136n30, 142, 142n10, 143, 143n16, 144n17, 144n18, 149n5, 179n24, 223 Woude, A.S. van der 237n20 Wright, G.E. 3n4, 5n3, 176n12, 176n14 Würthwein, Ε. 41n3, 42n3, 79n2, 214, 223 Yaron, R. Yeivin, S.

95n66 87n21

Zicgler, J. 9n2 Zimmerli, W. 19n2, 46n2, 55n2, 179n25, 195n15

I N D E X O F BIBLICAL R E F E R E N C E S

Genesis 1.1-2.4 4.7 18.17 18.19 20.7 20.17 25.21-34 25.21-23 25.24-26 25.27-28 25.29-34 25.29f 25.33 27.15 27.39-40 27.42 28.10-22 28.12 28.13 29.16 29.18 32.9-12 32.9 32.10 32.11 32.12 37.5 40.9 40.16 41.17 41.22 41.25 41.28 41.32 42.13 42.15 42.20 42.32 42.34 43.29 44.2 44.12 44.13 44.20

77 228 92n48 100n85 58n2, 58n4 58n4 78 79 79 79 79 46 42n1 42 45n3 42 188 7n3 92 42 42 43 43 43 43 43 7n3 91 91 91 91 92n48 92 91 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42

44.26 48.19 49.3

42 42 228

Exodus 3.10 3.12 4. Iff 4.21 4.22 7.8f 9.29ff 9.29 9.33 9.34 9.35 14.13 14.16 15 15.14-16 15.20 15.24-25 16 18.7 18.13-27 18.21-22 18.25 19.16ff 20.2 20.3 20.18 22.23-24 25.22 30.10 33 33.5-11 33.7f 33.7 34.5 34.9 35f 35.29 36-40

36.2 38.8 40.34

121 105n4 104

Leviticus 85 86 85 85 61n5 85 53 52 52 52 117n8 89 67n6 191 135 102 81 68n1 54n2 129, 129n11 129 129n11 66n2 65n6 65n6 66n2 99 104 87 58n4 103 93 104 92 52, 53 121 117n8, 121 121n12

1.2 2.1 7.18 8.36 10.1-3 10.11 13.8 14.4 14.6 14.49f 16.2 17 18.17 18.22 18.23 25 26.46 27.28

20 20 46 117n8 68n6 117n8 46 86n19 86n19 86n19 104 20 55n4 55n4 55n4 168 117n8 48

Numbers 4.37 4.45 7.89 9.23 10.13 10.23 10.35 11 11.16-17 11.17 11.24-30 11.24-25 11.25 11.26-29 11.26 11.28 11.29 12.1-16

117n8 117n8 104 117n8 117n8 117n8 89 130 103, 128 129, 132 87 102, 103 128, 132 87, 129 132 87, 132 133 133 221

12.4-10 12.6 14.18 14.19 14.44 16 16.40 19.6 20.2-13 22.41 23 23.1 23.3 23.4 23.6 23.13 23.14 23.15 23.17 23.21 23.28 24.1f 24.2 27.23 34.9 36.13

103 92 53 52, 53 236 68n7 117n8 86 67n9 16n2 92 92 92, 93 92 92 16n2 92, 93 92 92 30n2 93 16n2 87 117n8 69n2 117n8

Deuteronomy 1-28 1.1 1.5 1.26 1.43 5.6 5.7 6.4-9 6.4 7.1-5 7.6-11 7.12ff 7.17ff 9.23 10.12-13 11.1 11.13-32 12.2-3 12.29-31 13 13.1-6 13.1-5 13.3 13.4 13.6-18

140, 140n7 140 141 221 221 65n6 65n6 3n6 65n6 4n1 3n7 3n7 89 221 3116 3n6 3n7 4n1 4n1 221, 222 4, 6, 7, 9 56n1 6 4 4n1

13.6 17 17.14-20 17.15 18 18.9-14 18.10 18.15-22 18.15-18 18.15 18.18 18.21-22 18.22 20.1-4 20.10-18 21.17 23.7-8 26.5 26.17-18 28 28.36 31 31.1-8 31.14-15 32.4 32.10 33.2 33.27 33.29 34.5 34.6 34.10-12 34.10

101 56n1 56n2 221 4, 4n1 9 4, 6, 8, 56n1 57n1 87n23 9, 87n23 25 4, 6, 8 89 4n1 61n5 45n3 54n2 27, 28 3n7 87n23

118 89 103

228n10 20 240n31 230n12 90 66n4 66n4 222

87n23

118 221 67n7 74 90 90 90, 118 220 220

1 Samuel 1-3 2.6 2.22

2.34 2.35 3.3-10 3.10 3.20 7.3 7.5ff 7.9 7.15ff 9. Iff 9.6 9.13 9.21

10ff 10 10.1

104n3 49 105, 105n4

86n11 87n23 104 92 60n1 95 62n2 62n1 60n3 78 62 η 3 62n1 43 124 131, 132 60n3, 61118,

10.5-7 10.5-6 10.5 10.6 10.10-13 10.10ff 10.10

10.25 11.6 12.1

Judges 2.1-5 2.18 3.10 5.4-5 6.8-10 6.14

90 67n2 134 95 87 87, 133 87, 133 42 133 87 90

86n11

Joshua 1 1.18 3 7.13 10.24-25 10.24 10.25 22.3 22.5

7.7 9 9.23 10.11 15 11.29 14.6 14.19 15.2 15.14-15 15.14 16.24

95 87n23 87 240n31 95 85n7

12.6ff

12.14 12.15 12.18 12.23

124, 128

102 60n1, 60n2, 62n9, 102 87 60n2, 102 62n7, 62n8 87, 125 60n3 87, 133

60n1, 60n3 95

221 221 62n2 62n2

13.13 14.10 14.29 14.35 15 15.1 15.17 16.11 16.13

16.14 16.15 16.16-23 16.16 16.23 17.14 18.10 19 19.9 19.20-24 19.20ff 19.20 19.21 19.23 19.24 23.4 24.5 26.8 28.6

220 86n11 53n1 53n1 134 60n3 43 43 60n3, 61n8, 87 134 134 134n26 134 134 43 127, 133, 134 131 134 102, 128 62n8, 124, 125 125 125 125 125 90 90 90 263n32

2 Samuel 7.4-17 7.4ÍT 7.18-20 7.18ff 7.21-24 7.25-29 7.28 8.16-18 11 12 13.21 20.23-26 22.15 24.11

60n3 64n5 44 44 44 44 44 130 118 82 47n2 130 89 61n9, 64n4

1 Kings 1.22-40 1.22ff

60n4 61n9

3.5 3.7 4.1-6 6.22f 8 8.30 8.34 8.36 8.39 8.50 8.53 8.56 10.28 11.3 11.13 11.29ff

12 12.15

13

13.1-10 13.2

13.5 13.9 13.10 13.11-32 13.17 13.18 13.21-22 13.21 13.22 13.26 13.32 13.33 14 14.1-18 14.1-6 14. Iff 14.2 14.7 14.12 14.16 14.17-18

7n3 43 130 87 l05n4 52 52 52 52 52 117n7 117n7 56n1 56n1 74 14n3, 60n5, 61n8 101 60n5, 117n4, 117n5 211, 213, 214, 214n3, 217, 222 62n4, 215 148, 214113, 215 214n3 215, 216, 221 221 215 215, 216, 221 215 218 216, 220 215 81, 216, 221 215 221 62n4 79 79, 79n1 78 60115 79 79, 79n1 87n23 79

14.17f 15.29 16. Iff 16.12 16.17 16.32 16.34 17-2 Kings 17 17.1 17.2 17.8-24 17.8-16 17.14 17.16 17.17ff 17.20 18 18.2ff 18.7-16 18.12 18.13 18.19ff 18.21 18.26-29 18.28 18.30ff 18.36ff 18.39 18.46 19 19.Iff 19.8-18 19.1 If 19.15f

19.16 19.19ff 19.19 19.21

20.13 20.28 20.35ff 20.35 21 21.13 21.20ff

79n1 81, 117n4 60n6 81, 117n4 117n4 65n1 81, 117n4 18 59n1 62n3 59n2 63n7 63n8 68n2, 81 74 81, 117n4 62n4, 63n4 63n5 63n9, 137 64n1 63n11 63n2 65n2 65n3 65n4 137 88, 102n1 62n1, 63n6 63n7 65n5 13 66n2 65n2 103 66n3 61n1, 61n8, 63n3 59n, 59n3 14n4 61n2 61n3, 63n6, 69n1 22, 90 22, 90 88 81 220 91 63n7, 64n1

21.27-29 22

22.4-6 22.4ff 22.6ff 22.7-9 22.8

22.13 22.15-18 22.24 22.29-36 22.38 22.51

149 61 η 10, 64n3, 92, 192 79 78, 79 70n1 76, 79 61n9, 64n3, 64n6 90 79 64n6 79 81 65n1

2 Kings 1 1.1-17 1.2ff 1.3 1.8 1.9 1.17 2.6-14 2.8-14 2.9-12 2.11 2.15 2.16 2.19-22 2.19ff 2.23-24 3

3.1-3 3.4-27 3.4-25 3.4-19 3.4-9 3.4-7 3.4 3.6 3.8 3.9-20 3.9-19 3.9-10 3.9 3.10-15

64n1, 68n5, 141 78 79 63n9 88 61n4 65n1, 81 67n5 61114 66n5 63n2 61n6 13, 63n11 63n4, 81 63n8 81 73, 76, 77, 79, 80, 82 74 74 82 74 76, 77 76 77 74 75, 76 67n9, 77 82 75, 76, 77 75, 76 76

3.10 3.11-27 3.11-16 3.11-12 3.1 Iff 3.11 3.12 3.13-18 3.13-14 3.13ff 3.13 3.15

3.16-19 3.16 3.17-19 3.17-18 3.17 3.18-19 3.18 3.19 3.20-24 3.20ff 3.20 3.21-25 3.22-23 3.24 3.25 3.26-27

3.26 3.27 4

4.1-7 4.8-10 4.32ff 4.33 4.38ff 4.42-44 4.42ff 4.43 4.44 5-8 5 5.8ff 5.14

76, 77 77 136 76, 77 61n10 69n1 75, 76 77 74, 76 63n9 76 13, 62n9, 63n2, 102 74 74, 75, 76, 77 76 77 74, 75, 76 74, 75, 75n1, 76 74, 75 75, 76, 77 75, 76 74 74, 75, 76, 77 74, 77 75, 76 74 75, 76, 82 75, 76, 77, 78, 82 75, 76 74, 77 62n3, 62n4, 63n8 68n3, 81 63n10 63n4 63n5 63n10 81 68n4 74 81 80 62n4, 63n4 64n2 81

5.26 6.1-7 6.1 Iff 6.17

6.18 6.32ff 6.32 7.Iff 7.16 8.1-6 8.4-5 8.7-15 8.7-9 8.7ff 8.9-13 8.10 8.1 Iff 8.13 8.14-15 8.15 8.18 8.26 9 9.1-3 9.11 9.13 9.20 9.26 9.36 10.17 10.18ff 10.18 12.9ff 14.25 16.8f 17.13 17.23 17.34 17.37 18.5 18.13-16 18.17-19.37 19.29 20.9 20.12-19 21.10 22.11-16

13 63n8, 63n10, 81 64n2 58n4, 62n2, 63n5 63n5 64n2 14 63n7 81 63n8 81 78, 82 78 63n10, 64n2 78 78 62n10 63n3, 78, 79 78 79 65n1 65n1 135 63n3 62n11, 135 135 62n11 81 H7n4 81 66n6 65n1 64n2 81, 117n4 149 117n4 117n4 220 220 87n23 156 150, 157 86n11 86n11 150, 157, 161 117n4 118

22.13-20 22.13ff 22.16 22.20 23 23.16-18 23.16 23.20 23.25 24.2 27 27.13 27.24 28.10-20

79 78 141 141 214 213 81, 148 214n3 87 81 221 221 32n2 118

1 Chronicles 3.16 5.26 6.14 25.3

119 120n11 119 137n36

2 Chronicles 6.21 6.25 6.27 6.30 6.39 7.6 7.14 8.14 10.15 20.14ff 20.14 21.16 24.20 29.25 33.8 34.14 35.2 35.6 35.21 36.15 36.22

52 52 52 52 52 231 52 231 117n5 89 87 120n11 87, 88, 118 117n5 117n6 117n6 231 117n6 52 117n5 120n11

Ezra 1.5

120

Nehemiah 9.14 9.30

117n6 117n5

Esther 2.18

214n2

Job 9.14 9.15 9.16 13.6 13.11 19.1-7 19.1 36.24 38 38.1 40.25-41.26

232 232 232 231 228 227 227 228n10 170 232 230

Psalms 7 14.7 15 17.1 18.7 18.15 18.34 18.39 18.42 19.11 24 25.11 27.14 31.25 35.10 36.4 44.2 45.6 46.7ff 46.11 48.3 48.5ff 50 50.8-13 50.8ff 50.13f 50.14 50.16ff 50.18ff 50.23 51.17-18 51.19 51.20-21

239 50 19 2391126 227 89 240 90 227 17 19 53 118 118 50 52 228n10, 230n12 90 33 234 39n3 33 95, 98 98 97 96 98 99 96 98 98 99 98n82, 98n83

53.7 55.7 60.11 64.10 68.2 68.8-9 69.31 71.19 73.24 74.2 74.12 76.4ff 77.12 77.13 77.14 81 86.1 88.4 89.7 89.9 89.11 90.1 94 94.16

94.17 95 95.9 102.1 107 107.11 107.23-32 107.32 119.103 119.152 142.1 144.6

50 50 50 2281110 89 240n31 98 50 50 230n12 230n12 33 230n12 228n10 50 95 239n26 185 50 50 89 239n26 52n1 49, 50, 50n2, 50n3, 54 50n2 95 228n10 239n26 97n78 50 97n78 97n78, 97n79 17 230n12 239n26 89

Proverbs 8.22-23 10.13 11.12 15.8 15.21 17.22 20.30 21.3 21.27 22.17-23.11 22.22

230n12 142 142 96 142 17 179 96 96 84 55n4

25.14 28.9

214n2 96

Isaiah 1-39 1-35

1 1.1 1.2-20

1.2-9 1.2-3 1.2

1.3 1.4-9 1.4 1.5-9 1.5-8 1.5-7 1.5 1.6-22 1.8

1.9 1.10-20 1.10-17 1.10

1.11-17 1.11-15

1.11-12

l.llff

1.11 1.13 1.14 1.15 1.16 1.18-20

1.18-19 1.19 1.21-26

1.21 1.23

163 150, 152, 160, 161 160, 178, 179, 180, 181 182 176n13, 182, 187 176n13, 182 176, 182, 183 177 94 181, 184 180, 182 182, 183 152, 180, 183 179, 182 8, 184 152 180, 183n39 152, 180, 182 182 183, 184, 185 177, 182 96, 182 183 185 96n70 96, 96n70, 182, 185 96n70 185 96n70 52 182, 184, 185, 186 152 96n70 149 182 100, 182

1.25 1.26 2-4 2 2.1-4 2.1-5 2.6-4.1 2.7ff 2.12-22 2.18f 2.20f 2.22 3.6-15 3.16-4.1 4.2-6 5 5.1-14.27 5. Iff 5.8-23 5.12 6 6.1-8.18 6.1-3 6. Iff 6.1 6.5 6.8 6.11 6.12-13 6.13 7 7.3 7.11 7.20 8.1-4 8.11 8.16-18 8.17 8.19-22 8.19-20 8.21-22 9.15ff 10.5ff 10.14 11.9 13 13.2-3 13.4ff 13.7-8 13.17-22 14

182 101 161 161 161, 162 151, 161 151, 160 161n21 158 153 153 52 149 149 151, 161 82, 161 160 151 149 228n10 86, 92, 192 160 104 62n12 114n13 39n3 85 154, 154n14 153 153 39n1 158 86 17 206, 232 12 232 86 154 154 154 100 6n1 238n24 233 156 156 156 135 156 156

14.4-21 15-16 17.1-6 17.7-9 17.7-8 17.9 17.12-14 19.17 20 21 21.1-10 21.3-4 22 22.1-4 22.5-8 22.6 22.8-11 22.8 22.12-14 22.14 22.15-18 22.19-23 22.22 22.24 22.25 23.1-12 23.13 24-27 24.5 29.11-13 30.1-7 30.1 30.6-8 31.1-5 31.1 31.6 35.4 36-39 36.1-37.38 36.3 36.11 39 39.6 40-55 40-48 40-46 40ff 40.1-8 40.1

156 156 155 154 155 155 33 30 15 155 231 134 30n1, 38n3, 156, 158, 159 156, 158 157, 158 33n1, 157 157, 158 158 156 157 159 159 159 159 159 155 155, 156 163 229 232 141 158 232 141 158 8 118 32n2 150 159 159 157, 161 32n2 51, 51n1, 156, 161 111 151, 161, 163 161, 162 165 165

40.3-5 40.5 40.6-8 40.9-11 40.9-10 40.10 40.16 40.27 41.24 41.29 42.22-25 42.22 42.24f 43.Iff 43.1 43.3 43.5 43.11 43.14-15 43.14 43.15 43.16-20 43.18ff 43.22f 44.2-8 44.6 44.23 44.24 44.26 45.9 45.12 45.14 45.15-17 45.21 45.22 45.23 45.24f 46.10 46.12-13 48.3 48.17 48.20 49.7 49.26 50.5f 50.10 51.4f 51.6 54.5 54.7-10 54.8 54.9f

165 170 166 165 166 170 97n76 170 51 51 168 170 171 168 166, 171 167, 168, 171 166 166 167 168 168 167 171 171 51n2 168 168 168 123 171 171 171 168 230n12 168 168 171 230n12 167 249n16 168 169 168 169 172 172 169 169 168 171 169 169

55.6 55.7 55.8

166 52 166

Jeremiah 1-20 1.1-3 1.2 1.4-19 1.4-10 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9-10 1.9 1.10 1.11-14 1.11-12 1.11 1.13 1.14 1.17-19 2.1 2.8 2.12 2.18-19 2.36-37 3.1-10 3.6ff 4.5-31 4.9 4.19-21 5.15-17 5.30-31 5.31 6.1-5 6.13-15 6.13ff 6.13 6.20 6.22-23 6.22ff 7.1-20 7.3-15 7.9 7.15 7.16-20

207n15 3n5 12n3 201, 202, 203, 210 203 12n4 201, 202 202 9, 85, 202 202 201 9, 203 203 62n10 191 12n4 12n4 6n3 203 12n4 3n2, 24 177 141 142 93n56 17 6n3 135 110r18 6n3 3n2 70n1 6n3 3n2 70n1 24 96 135 6n3 108, 108n7 108 19 108n7 108n7

7.21-28 7.22 8.8-12 8.13 8.18-23 8.19 9-20 9.1-6 10.23-24 11-20 11.18-12.6 11.18 12.6 12.7-11 12.14 13.1-11 14-15 14.1-15.9 14.1 14.10-16 14.11 14.12 14.13-16 14.13 14.14 14.16 14.17-18 15.10-21 15.16 15.17 16.1-9 16.19-20 17.5-18 17.5-8 17.9-10 17.12-14 17.14-18 18.18-23 19.1-15 20 20.1-6 20. Iff 20.7-18 20.7-13 20.7-12 20.7 20.9 20.10 20.11-12

108n7 96 3n2 240n30 110n8 30 109n8 209 110n8 206, 207 209 3n3 3n3 110n8 108n7 15n3 110n8 204 12n3 201, 204, 207 108n7, 204 205 3n2 204, 205 205 205 110n8 3n3, 209 17 12 201, 205, 207 110n8 209 110n8 3n3 110n8 3n3 3n3, 209 110n8 209 70n3 3n3 201, 206, 207, 208 7n1 207 207 208 208

20.13 20.14-18 21.1-10 21.2 21.9 22-39 22.13-19 22.13ff 23.9-40 23.9-33 23.9ff 23.13-14 23.13 23.14 23.16-17 23.16 23.17 23.18-22 23.18 23.20 23.21 23.25 23.28 23.29 23.30-32 23.33-34 24.8-22 26-29 26

26.2 26.4-6 26.7-24 26.16-19 26.18 26.19 27-35 27-28 27f 27 27.9 27.14 28 28.5ff 28.9 28.10f 28.12 28.16 29 29.7

208 209 6n2 7n4 6n2 3n1 3n2 101 201, 208 3n2 7 7 7, 208 7, 182, 208 208 208 8 208 24, 209 209 209 7 7 8 208 208 6n2 3n1 70n3, 107, 108, 149 108 108 209 149 149n3 149 110n8 8 15n2, 15n3 110n8 9 24 8, 25n2 3n2 8 70n2 12n3 8 5, 5n4 5

29.8-9 29.10 29.15-23 29.15 29.16 29.24-27 29.26 29.28 29.31-32 29.32 30.5-6 30.9 31.22 31.31ff 31.34 32.1-44 32.1-15 32.8 33 33.1 33.7 33.8 33.11 33.16 36-45 36.1-32 36.1-18 36.3 37.2 37.3-10 37.11-21 37.1 Iff 37.17ff 38.1-23 38.2 38.17-19 38.24ff 40.8-13 46-51 49.23 50.43 51.20-23 51.20 51.23 51.58 51.59-64

135 5 135 87n23 85n3 135 127 135 135 8 135 87n23 101 120 52 209 15n3 81 206 70n3 24n1 24n1, 52 24n1 24n1 110n8 209 107n6, 108 52 7n4 6n2 6n2 70n3 7n4 6n2 6n2 7n4 7n4 15n3 110n8 135 135 142 141 141 233 15n3

Lamentations 3.42 4.6

52 182

Ezekiel 1-3 1.3 1.1-3.15 1.28 2.2 2.3ff 3.16-21 3.19 3.22-5.17 3.22-27 3.22-24 3.24 4-5 4.1-3 4.4-8 4.9-11 4.12-15 5.1 5.1-3 6.2ff 6.11 7 7.2ff 7.6ff 7.7 8.1-11.25 8. Iff 8.3 11.15 11.24 12.1-16 12.Iff 12.17-20 12.17ff 12.22 12.27 13.17 14.1-11 14. Iff 14.13 16 16.2 16.3 16.4 16.15 18.2 18.5-9 18.5ff 18.5 18.7

111 11, 20 11n3 87 87 85 231 20 11n3 15n4 87 87 206 15n4 15n4 15n4 15n4 17 15n4 16 16 21 17 17 158 I1n3 13 13 18 13 l5n4 16n1 15n4 16 18 18 16 20 13 20 17, 20, 21 18 21 18 22 18 19 47, 49 20 19

18.10-13 18.14-17 18.25 18.29 19 20 20. Iff 20.3 20.4 20.32ff 20.40 21.3 21.7 21.11-12 21.1 Iff 21.19 21.23-29 21.24ff 22.2 22.6ff 23 23.36 24.15-24 24.15ff 25.2 25.3 26.2 27.21 33.1-9 33.2 33.6 33.9 33.10 33.13 33.15 33.17 33.20 33.24 33.21-22 33.31 34.23ff 35.2 36 37 37.1-14 37.Iff 37.1 37.7 37.11 37.12 37.15-28 37.25

19 19 18 18 12 20 13 18 18 21 21 16 16 15n4, 135 16 16 15n4 15n5 18 19 20, 21 18 15n4 16 16 18 18 16 231 20 20 20 18 22 19 18 18 18 11 13 21 16 120 120 11n3 17 13 14 17, 18 22 5n4 21

37.27 38.2 38.16 40-48

40.1-48.35 40.1-2 43.6 43.7 44.9ff 44.18-27 44.25 45.18-20 46.5 46.11 47 48.30-35

121 16 22 21, 111, 191, 195, 195r116, 197, 198 11n3 196 92 191, 198 197 197 198 197 214n2 214n2 196 196

6.2 7.11 7.11 8 8.4 8.9-13

8.9 8.10 8.11

8.12 8.13 8.14 9.3 9.7

Daniel 7 8.17f 8.27 9.9 9.19 10.4ff 10.16 10.17

7n3 88 Q OQ O 53 53 88 92 88

Hosea 1-3 2.2-3 4 4.1 4.10 4.11-14

4.11-12 4.11 4.12 4.13 4.14

4.15 5.8-6.6 5.13-14

206 93 143 19 142 142, 143, 144, 145, 146 142 142, 143, 143n13 142, 143 143, 144, 146 142, 143, 143n13, 144, 145 143 49n2 141

9.10 9.15 11.5 11.11 12 12.1 12.2 12.13 13.1 14.1-21 14.2 14.21

49 12, 141 139 143 142 139, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146 139, 143, 144 144, 145 142, 144, 145, 145n19 142, 144 139, 144, 145 142, 143 139 13, 85n3, 136 20 95 139 139 140 140 139 58n1 140 140 140 140

Amos 1.2 1.3 1.6 1.8 1.9 1.1 If 1.11 1.13 2.1 2.11 2.14 3.2 3.11 3.13 3.14f 3.14

240n31 238n24 45 54n2 45 45 238n24 238n24 45 87n23 54n2 47 6n1 44 54n2 54n2

3.15 4-5 4.2-3 4.7 5.4ff 5.21-25 5.25 6.8

7.1-9 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7ff 7.7 7.10-17 7.10ff 7.17 8.2

8.7 8.14 9.1 9.7 9.8 9.11-15 9.1 Iff 9.11

54n2 55 6nl 92 19 96 96 44 62n10 41, 45, 50n3, 55 53, 53n1 41n3 41, 45, 50n3, 55 53, 53n1 54 92 49n2, 70n4 64n7, 70n2 54n2 17 44 54n2 92, 114n13 47 44 45, 55 55 54

Jonah 2.3-10

97n78

Micah 1.3-4 1.5 2.6-11

2.6 2.7

2.8-10

2.11 2.12-13

2.12ff 2.13 3 3.1-4 3.Iff

240n31 149n4 27, 37n2 27, 37n2 28, 28n1, 38, 39n4 28 28, 37n2 36, 37, 37n2 37 37 36, 37 37n2 36, 39n2

3.1 3.5ff 3.5 3.9-12 3.9ff 3.10 3.11 3.12 4 4.1-5 4.8-5.5 4.9-14 4.9-10 4.9 4.10

4.11-13

4.11 4.12 4.14 5. Iff 5.1 5.3 5.4-5 5.4ff 5.4 6.2 6.6-8 6.6ff 7.Iff 10.6-7

37n2 36 24, 70n1 37n2, 162 36 233 30, 37 149 29, 39 162 29n1 29, 35, 37 29 29, 31, 32, 34, 39n4 29, 29n1, 31, 32, 32n3, 34 29, 31, 32, 34, 39, 40, 40n1 32 30 29, 34, 35, 35n1, 35n4 35n4 34n7 34n7 35, 35n1, 35n4 35n4 34n7 177 96 97 100 96

1.2-2.20

1.2-2.4 1.2-17 1.2-4

1.2 1.3 1.4

1.5-11

1.5 1.6-11 1.6 1.7 1.9 1.11 1.12-27 1.12-17

1.12-14 1.12

Nahum 3.5-7

238n24 1.13

Habakkuk 1-2

1.1-2.20 1.1-2.5 1.1-2.4 1.1

224, 225, 226, 227, 227n9, 234, 238, 239, 241, 242 242 224 224 224, 225,

1.16 1.17 2.1-20 2.1-5 2.1-4

2.1-2

226, 227, 242 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 242 225 231, 235 224, 227, 228, 229, 229, 229n11, 234, 235, 242 227 227 227, 229, 234, 235, 241 224, 227, 228, 234, 235, 242 228, 240, 241 228 228, 234 228 228 229, 238, 239 225 224, 227, 229, 230, 231, 235, 243 229 229, 229n11, 230, 230n11, 235, 236 230, 234, 235, 236, 241 238, 239 229 227, 230, 231, 243 225 224, 225, 231, 235, 241 230

2.1

2.2-20 2.2-4 2.2-3 2.2 2.4

2.5-20

2.5-6 2.5

2.6-20

2.6-17 2.6-8 2.6 2.8 2.9-11 2.10 2.12-14 2.13 2.14 2.15-17 2.16 2.17 2.18-20

2.18 2.19 2.20 3

229, 232, 243 232, 232, 243 232, 243 232, 225, 232, 235, 237, 243 224, 231, 237, 243 230, 225, 233, 237, 224, 234, 243 233, 243 234, 243 233, 238 234, 234, 243 238 233, 238, 233, 239 233, 234, 243 233 234, 232, 234, 239, 230, 233, 230, 233, 225, 239,

231, 235, 243 235,

3.1-19 3.1 3.2-19

235, 3.2 243 231, 234, 236, 241, 225, 232, 238, 232 232, 235, 243 225, 238, 234,

3.3-15 3.3-7 3.3 3.7 3.8-15 3.9 3.13 3.14 3.16-19 3.16 3.17 3.18-19 3.19

239n28, 241 224, 243 225, 226, 243 225, 239, 243 239, 240, 240n29, 241, 243 240, 244 240, 241, 244 226 239, 240 241, 244 226 226, 241 239, 241 239, 240, 241, 244 135, 239, 240 240, 240n30 239, 240 226, 244

238, Zjphamah 234, 238 238,

234, 243 238, 238 239,

1.7 2.9

234 182

Haggai 1 1.1 1.3 1.6 1.12-14 1.12 1.13 1.14

238 233, 238, 243 233 234

1.15 2.1-9 2.1 2.2-9 2.2-4 2.2

234 226,

2.3-9 2.3 2.4

120 116, 120 116 191 119 116, 119 116, 123 116, 119, 121 116 116 116, 120 118 118 116, 119, 123n16 118 118 116, 118,

2.5 2.6-9 2.6-7 2.10 2.14-19 2.15-19 2.20 2.21-23

121, 123n4 116, 118 118 191 116 191 116 116 118, 119

Zechariah 1-8

1.4-6.8 1.8 1.10 1.11 1.16 2.1-4 2.9 2.17 3 3.5 3.7 3.8 4.9 5.1-4 5.4 6.9-15 6.12-14 13.2 13.4 13.6 23.3

116, 119 123, 123n16 111 92 92 92 189 190 196 189, 234 197 92 189 197 189 198 190n8 198 189 24n1 61n4, 88 88 24

Malachi 4.5-6

66n7

Ecclesiasticus 44-50 46.1 58.10

69n2 69n2 66n7

Matthew 3.4 11.14 16.14 17.1-8

61n4 66n8 66n8 67n4

17.3-4 17.10ff

66n8 66n8

Mark 9.2-8 9.4-5

1.19-23

66n8

67n4 66n8

3.22 7.37

57n2 57n2

Romans 66n8 66n8

1.17 9.29

3.11

237n19

Hebrews

Acts

Luke 1.17 9.8

Galatians

John

237n19 152n12

10.38-39

237n19

Prophecy in the Hebrew Bible: Selected Studies from Vetus Testamentum (Brill's Readers in Biblical Studies)

Poetry in the Hebrew Bible: Selected Studies from Vetus Testamentum (Brill's Readers in Biblical Studies)

The Composition of John's Gospel: Selected Studies from Novum Testamentum (Brill's Readers in Biblical Studies)

The Composition of Luke's Gospel: Selected Studies from Novum Testamentum (Brill's Readers in Biblical Studies)

The Composition of Mark's Gospel: Selected Studies from Novum Testamentum (Brill's Readers in Biblical Studies)

Studies in Biblical Law: From the Hebrew Bible to the Dead Sea Scrolls (JSOT Supplement Series)

Parenthesis in Biblical Hebrew (Studies in Semitic Languages and Linguistics)

Enduring Exile: The Metaphorization of Exile in the Hebrew Bible (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum)

Studies in Historical Geography and Biblical Historiography: Presented to Zechariah Kallai (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum)

Corporate Responsibility in the Hebrew Bible (The Library of Hebrew Bible - Old Testament Studies)

Biblical Hebrew: Studies in Chronology and Typology (JSOT Supplement)

The Greek and Hebrew Bible: Collected Essays on the Septuagint (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum)

Studies in Josephus' Rewritten Bible

Reflection And Refraction: Studies in Biblical Historiography in Honour of A. Graeme Auld (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum)

Figurative Language in Biblical Prose Narrative: Metaphor in the Book of Samuel (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum)

Studies in the Semiotics of Biblical Law

Syntax of the Verb in Classical Hebrew Prose (The Library of Hebrew Bible Old Testament Studies)

The Bible in Ethics: The Second Sheffield Colloquium (The Library of Hebrew Bible Old Testament Studies)

The Library in Alexandria and the Bible in Greek (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum)

STUDIES IN HEBREW LITERATURE AND JEWISH CULTURE

Studies in Hebrew Language and Jewish Culture

Selected Studies in the Slavonic Pseudepigrapha

Selected Studies in the Slavonic Pseudepigrapha

Selected Studies in the Slavonic Pseudepigrapha

Museum Management (Leicester Readers in Museum Studies)

Collections Management (Leicester Readers in Museum Studies)

Prophecy, Poetry And Hosea (The Library of Hebrew Bible Old Testament Studies)

The Middle East in Bible Prophecy

Galilean Christianity (Studies in Biblical Theology 16)

Assertive Biblical Women (Contributions in Women's Studies)

Museums in the Material World (Leicester Readers in Museum Studies)

Prophecy in the Hebrew Bible: Selected Studies from Vetus Testamentum (Brill's Readers in Biblical Studies)

Poetry in the Hebrew Bible: Selected Studies from Vetus Testamentum (Brill's Readers in Biblical Studies)

The Composition of John's Gospel: Selected Studies from Novum Testamentum (Brill's Readers in Biblical Studies)

The Composition of Luke's Gospel: Selected Studies from Novum Testamentum (Brill's Readers in Biblical Studies)

The Composition of Mark's Gospel: Selected Studies from Novum Testamentum (Brill's Readers in Biblical Studies)

Studies in Biblical Law: From the Hebrew Bible to the Dead Sea Scrolls (JSOT Supplement Series)

Parenthesis in Biblical Hebrew (Studies in Semitic Languages and Linguistics)

Enduring Exile: The Metaphorization of Exile in the Hebrew Bible (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum)

Studies in Historical Geography and Biblical Historiography: Presented to Zechariah Kallai (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum)

Corporate Responsibility in the Hebrew Bible (The Library of Hebrew Bible - Old Testament Studies)

Biblical Hebrew: Studies in Chronology and Typology (JSOT Supplement)

The Greek and Hebrew Bible: Collected Essays on the Septuagint (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum)

Studies in Josephus' Rewritten Bible

Reflection And Refraction: Studies in Biblical Historiography in Honour of A. Graeme Auld (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum)

Figurative Language in Biblical Prose Narrative: Metaphor in the Book of Samuel (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum)

Studies in the Semiotics of Biblical Law

Syntax of the Verb in Classical Hebrew Prose (The Library of Hebrew Bible Old Testament Studies)

The Bible in Ethics: The Second Sheffield Colloquium (The Library of Hebrew Bible Old Testament Studies)

The Library in Alexandria and the Bible in Greek (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum)

STUDIES IN HEBREW LITERATURE AND JEWISH CULTURE

Studies in Hebrew Language and Jewish Culture

Selected Studies in the Slavonic Pseudepigrapha

Selected Studies in the Slavonic Pseudepigrapha

Selected Studies in the Slavonic Pseudepigrapha

Museum Management (Leicester Readers in Museum Studies)

Collections Management (Leicester Readers in Museum Studies)

Prophecy, Poetry And Hosea (The Library of Hebrew Bible Old Testament Studies)

The Middle East in Bible Prophecy

Galilean Christianity (Studies in Biblical Theology 16)

Assertive Biblical Women (Contributions in Women's Studies)

Museums in the Material World (Leicester Readers in Museum Studies)

Recommend Documents