New Heaven and New Earth: Prophecy and the Millennium : Essays in Honour of Anthony Gelston (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum)

NEW HEAVEN AND NEW E A R T H P R O P H E C Y AND T H E MILLENNIUM

SUPPLEMENTS τ ο

VETUS TESTAMENTUM EDITED BY T H E BOARD O F T H E QUARTERLY

H.M. BARSTAD - PHYLLIS A. BIRD - R.P. G O R D O N A. H U R V I T Z - A. VAN DER K O O I J - A. LEMAIRE R. SMEND - J . T R E B O L L E BARRERA J.C. VANDERKAM - H.G.M. WILLIAMSON

V O L U M E LXXVII

‫ י י‬6 8 ‫י >י‬

NEW HEAVEN AND NEW EARTH PROPHECY AND THE MILLENNIUM ESSAYS IN H O N O U R O F A N T H O N Y G E L S T O N

E D I T E D BY

P.J. H A R L A N D AND

C.T.R. HAYWARD

NtC

‫׳‬6 8

BRILL LEIDEN · B O S T O N · K Ö L N 1999

Library of C o n g r e s s Cataloging-in-Publication Data New heaven a n d new earth-prophecy a n d the millennium : essays in h o n o u r of A n t h o n y Gelston / edited by P.J. H a r l a n d a n d C . T . R . Hayward. p. cm. — (Supplements to Vetus T e s t a m e n t u m , ISSN 0 0 8 3 - 5 8 8 9 ; v. 77) "Publications of Anthony Gelston" : p. Includes bibliographical references a n d index. ISBN 9004108416 (cl. : alk. paper) 1. Bible—Prophecies. 2. Millennialism. I. Gelston, A. II. H a r l a n d , P.J. III. H a y w a r d , R o b e r t , 1948. IV. Series. BS410.V452 vol. 77 [BS647.2] 210.1 ' 5 — d c 2 1 99-30452 CIP Die Deutsche Bibliothek - CIP-Einheitsaufnahme N e w h e a v e n and n e w earth - prophecy and the millennium: essays in h o n o u r of A n t h o n y Gelston / ed. by Ρ J . H a r l a n d a n d C . T . R . Hayward. Leiden : Boston ; Köln : Brill, 1999 (Supplements to Vetus testamentum ; Vol. 77) ISBN 90-04-10841-6 [Vetus t e s t a m e n t u m / Supplements] Supplements to Vetus testamentum. - Leiden ; Boston ; K ö l n : Brill F r ü h e r Schriftenreihe Reihe Supplements zu: Vetus T e s t a m e n t u m ISSN 0083-5889 Vol. 77. N e w heaven a n d new earth - prophecy a n d the millennium.1999

Photograph by David Antony, Sunderland

ISSN ISBN

0083-5889 90 0 4 10841 6

© Copyright 1999 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 permisnon 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 T H E NETHERLANDS

CONTENTS Foreword

vii

Abbreviations

χ

R.W.L. M O B E R L Y ,

On

L e a r n i n g to b e a T r u e

Prophet:

the S t o r y of B a l a a m a n d his Ass C.T.R. HAYWARD,

1

!

B a l a a m s P r o p h e c i e s as I n t e r p r e t e d

by

Philo a n d the A r a m a i c T a r g u m s of t h e P e n t a t e u c h P.B. D I R K S E N , J. GIBSON,

19

T h e F u t u r e in t h e B o o k of C h r o n i c l e s

37

I K n o w that M y R e d e e m e r Liveth

M.A. V I N C E N T ,

T h e S h a p e of the Psalter: a n

53 Eschatological

Dimension?

61

R E. C L E M E N T S , R e a d i n g Isaiah

T h e W o l f Shall Live with the

Lamb:

11:6-9 T o d a y

83

H . G . M . W I L L I A M S O N , Gnats, Glosses a n d

Eternity:

Isaiah 51:6 Reconsidered P.J. H A R L A N D , Human

101

A L a n d Full of V i o l e n c e : T h e V a l u e

ßf

Life in t h e B o o k of t h e P r o p h e t Ezekiel

1 13

G. D A V I E S , T h r e e Christian C o m m e n t a t o r s on Hosea S. W E E K S , W h o s e W o r d s ? Q o h e l e t h , H o s e a

129

and

A t t r i b u t i o n in Biblical L i t e r a t u r e J.W.

ROGERSON,

151

T h e SŪcia1 B a c k g r o u n d of the B o o k

of

Malachi

171

J.K. AITKEN, Wisdom

Apocalyptic, Revelation and Early Jewish

Literature

181

A. M I L L A R D , J u d i t h , Tobit, A h i q a r a n d History J.F. H E A L E Y ,

" D e a t h is S w a l l o w e d u p i n

(1 C o r i n t h i a n s

195

Victory"

15:54): C a n a a n i t e M o t in P r o p h e c y

and

Apocalypse M. BARKER,

205 Enthronement

a n d Apotheosis: the Vision

in

Revelation 4 - 5 DJ.

217

L A N E , O f W a r s a n d R u m o u r s of Peace:

Apocalyptic

M a t e r i a l in A p h r a h a t a n d S u b h a l m a r a n L. S T U C K E N B R U C K ,

The

"Demonstration

229 on Love"

by

A p h r a h a t the Sage: a Translation with Introduction L. M Ü N K ,

T h e T h r e e J e w i s h C h i l d r e n at Berlin:

Mather's Obsession

247

Cotton 271

S.W. G I L L E Y , George Stanley Faber: N o Popery Prophecy

and 287

Appreciation of the R e v e r e n d D r . A n t h o n y Gelston

305

Publications of A n t h o n y Gelston

307

Index

311

FOREWORD T h i s c o l l e c t i o n o f e s s a y s is o f f e r e d t o T o n y G e l s t o n w i t h t h e r e s p e c t , a f f e c t i o n , a n d g r a t i t u d e of his m a n y f r i e n d s , w h o h a v e a n d b e n e f i t e d b o t h f r o m his gifts as a well as f r o m his m a n y

fine

appreciated

tutor a n d supervisor,

meticulous scholarly writings, which span

as a

p e r i o d o f s o m e f o r t y y e a r s . H e will c e l e b r a t e h i s s i x t y - f i f t h b i r t h d a y i n t h e y e a r 2 0 0 0 , a n d t h i s Festschrift

therefore represents a

birthday

t r i b u t e t o a fine s c h o l a r . T h a t s a m e y e a r , h o w e v e r , h a s b e e n

desig-

n a t e d by British, E u r o p e a n , a n d N o r t h A m e r i c a n g o v e r n m e n t s as the b e g i n n i n g of the third M i l l e n n i u m , despite protests f r o m

mathemati-

cians a n d purists that the n e w century properly begins with the year 2 0 0 1 . T h e editors of this v o l u m e h a v e b o w e d to the a p p a r e n t l y evitable: the year notwithstanding;

2 0 0 0 will c e l e b r a t e and

the

Festschrift

the new Millennium,

for T o n y

Gelston

in-

purists

should,

they

felt, in s o m e m e a s u r e s h a r e p u b l i c c o n c e r n w i t h t h e f u t u r e , t h e

new

c e n t u r y , a n d t h e u l t i m a t e d e s t i n y o f t h e p l a n e t . It s o o n b e c a m e c l e a r that the t h e m e s of the future a n d "the e n d " , which have long occupied students of the H e b r e w Bible, w e r e entirely a p p r o p r i a t e for a b o o k h o n o u r i n g T o n y Gelston, a n d for a n u m b e r of different reasons. F i r s t , T o n y ' s s c h o l a r l y w o r k is p e r h a p s b e s t k n o w n f o r its s c r u p u l o u s a c c u r a c y a n d a t t e n t i o n t o d e t a i l . S u c h a c c u r a c y i n a n d o f itself is t h e m a r k o f t h e t r u e s c h o l a r d o w n t h e a g e s . It is o f s o m e

partie-

u l a r i n t e r e s t f o r t h i s v o l u m e , h o w e v e r , s i n c e i n y e a r s g o n e b y it w a s often the h a l l m a r k of those w h o s e a r c h e d the Bible for detailed information

about

God's plan

woe. A n u m b e r

for the future of the world, for weal

of t h e essays in this collection r e m i n d

the

or

reader

that b o t h ancient a n d early m o d e r n interpreters of the H e b r e w

Bible

h a v e f o u n d t h e r e i n a c o d e w h i c h (so t h e y u n d e r s t o o d ) m i g h t b e a c c u rately d e c i p h e r e d to yield h a r d facts a b o u t the f u t u r e of the cosmos. T h i s is a m a t t e r o f e n d u r i n g s i g n i f i c a n c e t o u c h e d u p o n i n t h e e s s a y s by G r a h a m Davies, David Lane, Loren Stuckenbruck, Linda and

finally

Münk,

by S h e r i d a n Gilley, w h o offers a serious yet gently h u m o r -

o u s critique of this old, yet s e e m i n g l y e v e r n e w t e n d e n c y o n t h e p a r t of certain exegetes to

find

the future written d o w n

d e t a i l s in t h e p a g e s of t h e H e b r e w

to the

smallest

Scriptures.

S e c o n d l y , precise k n o w l e d g e of the e x a c t w o r d s of the Biblical text is a p r e r e q u i s i t e

for those w h o

would

e l u c i d a t e its m e s s a g e

about

the future a n d the end. T e x t u a l criticism of the H e b r e w

Bible

has

ever b e e n o n e of T o n y

right

that

it s h o u l d

Gelston's enthusiasms.

be represented

It is o n l y

h e r e with a n essay by H u g h

Williamson,

as well as f e a t u r i n g in c o n t r i b u t i o n s f r o m J o h n H e a l e y , P e t e r H a r l a n d , a n d J o h n R o g e r s o n , all o f w h o m s e e k i n a d d i t i o n t o e l u c i d a t e a s p e c t s of hopes for the future expressed by the H e b r e w p r o p h e t s Isaiah

(so H u g h

Williamson),

Hosea

(John

Deutero-

Healey), Ezekiel

(Peter

Harland), a n d M a l a c h i ( J o h n Rogerson), a n d thereby pay tribute to T o n y G e l s t o n , s l o n g - s t a n d i n g interest in t h e s t u d y of p r o p h e c y in g e n eral a n d t h e " w r i t i n g p r o p h e t s " in p a r t i c u l a r . R o n a l d C l e m e n t s c o n tinues the t h e m e of p r o p h e t i c c o n c e r n for the f u t u r e with a n essay o n First Isaiah's oracles w h i c h a d d r e s s e s t h e m o d e r n p r e - o c c u p a t i o n with e c o l o g y : h e s t r i k e s a c o n t e m p o r a r y n o t e w h i c h is t a k e n u p i n

other

essays, a n d to w h i c h w e shall r e t u r n at t h e e n d of this i n t r o d u c t i o n . L e s t it b e t h o u g h t , h o w e v e r , t h a t c o n c e r n f o r t h e f u t u r e , o r i n d e e d T o n y G e l s t o n ' s scholarly e n d e a v o u r s , w e r e restricted to the p r o p h e t i c l i t e r a t u r e , t r e a t m e n t s of o u r t h e m e in o t h e r w r i t i n g s of t h e

Hebrew

Bible a r e n o t o v e r l o o k e d in this b o o k . T h u s W a l t e r M o b e r l y ' s

essay

takes us to the P e n t a t e u c h , a n d analyses the c h a r a c t e r of B a l a a m he c a m e on

the

to predict Israel's destiny; Piet Dirksen provides a n Chronicler's

expounds Job's Vincent

hopes

famous

asks w h e t h e r

eschatological

for the

utterance the

present

f u t u r e of Israel; J o h n

about form

his ' r e d e e m e r ' ; of the

Gibson

and

Mark

Psalter betrays

interest o n the part of the redactors.

as

essay

an

Since some

of

t h e m o s t significant writings in t h e H e b r e w Bible w h i c h relate to the f u t u r e a r e t r a n s m i t t e d to us u n d e r t h e p e n - n a m e s of g r e a t of the past, the p r o b l e m s e n t : it is a d d r e s s e d

of p s e u d o n y m o u s

worthies

a u t h o r s h i p is e v e r

h e r e in a challenging essay by Stuart

pre-

Weeks.

M a r g a r e t Barker brings f o r w a r d the discussion of the future into the period

of the

New

Testament,

exploring

the interpretation

Bible a s s u m e d by the a u t h o r of the J o h a n n i n e

as o n e of a relatively small b a n d

of

enthusiasts w h o h a v e devoted themselves to the study of the version of t h e Bible a n d Syriac ecclesiastical literature. his i m p r e s s i v e

contributions

the

Apocalypse.

Finally, f r o m the b e g i n n i n g of his scholarly c a r e e r , T o n y h a s b e e n well k n o w n

of

to this a r e a of r e s e a r c h

D a v i d L a n e a n d L o r e n S t u c k e n b r u c k , b o t h of w h o m

Gelston English Syriac

Celebrating

a r e essays

by

treat of post-

biblical Syriac writers a n d their h o p e s for f u t u r e times arising f r o m their studies of the Scriptures. T o Tony

underline the importance

Gelston g r a n t e d to studies of post-biblical

t h e m e s , his

which learn-

i n g in t h e W i s d o m l i t e r a t u r e , t h e A r a m a i c T a r g u m , a n d t h e so-called A p o c r y p h a is c e l e b r a t e d f u r t h e r in t h e e s s a y s b y J a m e s A i t k e n , R o b e r t H a y w a r d , a n d A l a n M i l l a r d . N o t least d o these essays b e a r to T o n y ' s w i d e r a n g e of interests a n d a c a d e m i c

witness

expertise.

It h a s a l r e a d y b e e n s u g g e s t e d t h a t s o m e o f t h e e s s a y s i n t h i s b o o k address topics which exercise the thoughts of m o d e r n m e n a n d who

rarely,

if e v e r , r e a d

the

Bible. T h r e e

examples

women

will h a v e

to

s u f f i c e . T h e e s s a y o f R o n a l d C l e m e n t s s h o u l d c h a l l e n g e e c o l o g i s t s (a p o w e r f u l g r o u p in m o d e r n W e s t e r n society) to c o n s i d e r t h e

Hebrew

Bible seriously as they p l a n

political

for the future, w h a t e v e r their

or religious convictions. J o h n

R o g e r s o n ' s essay, h o w e v e r , speaks

the professional scholar, stressing the value

of the relatively

discipline of sociology in s t u d y of t h e Bible, a v a l u e w h i c h to increase with the c o m i n g century.

to

'new' is s u r e

Finally, L i n d a M u n k ' s

paper

is a t i m e l y r e m i n d e r t h a t t h e H e b r e w B i b l e r e m a i n s w h a t it a l w a y s has been: the sacred Scripture of the J e w i s h people, w h o s e use C h r i s t i a n s d e m a n d s respect a n d r e v e r e n c e as well as

by

responsibility.

T h e s e , a n d o t h e r w e i g h t y m a t t e r s a d d r e s s e d in this b o o k , r e a c h

out

to a w o r l d b e y o n d the a c a d e m y , a n d t h e r e b y serve also to celebrate Tony and

G e l s t o n ' s life a s a n A n g l i c a n p r i e s t - s c h o l a r , learning, worship

and

everyday

life m a k e

up

for w h o m one

study

inseparable

whole.

T h e r e are a n u m b e r of people w h o m

the editors wish to thank for

their assistance in the p r o d u c t i o n of this v o l u m e . W e are grateful to Professor Linda M ü n k for the advice which she gave w h e n we were planning

the book.

Staff at the

Cambridge

University

Computing

S e r v i c e g a v e v a l u a b l e assistance w i t h c o n v e r t i n g m a t e r i a l o n disk, a n d C a m b r i d g e University Library a n d the Libraries of the Faculties Divinity and

Oriental

Languages

provided

ideal

environments

of for

c h e c k i n g r e f e r e n c e s e t c . W e s h o u l d like t o t h a n k t h o s e i n t h e D e p a r t ment

of T h e o l o g y

at the

University

of D u r h a m

who

helped

with

t y p i n g . A b o v e all w e a r e g r a t e f u l t o Brill f o r p u b l i s h i n g t h i s b o o k .

Peter

Harland

Cambridge

Robert Durham

Hayward

ABBREVIATIONS

AJVET

J . B . P r i t c h a r d , (ed.),

Old Testament, ( 3 r d AOAT

Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the

edition, Princeton,

Alter Orient u n d Alten

1969)

Testament

ATD

D a s Alte T e s t a m e n t

AV

Authorised

Deutsch

BASOR

Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research

BCAT

Biblischer C o m m e n t a r ü b e r das Alte

BCE

Before the C o m m o n

BDB

F. B r o w n , S . R . D r i v e r a n d C . A . Briggs,

Version Testament

Era

Lexicon of the Old Testament ( O x f o r d ,

A Hebrew and English

1906)

BHS

Biblica H e b r a i c a

Stuttgartensia

Bib BN

Biblica Biblische Notizen

BZAW

Beihefte z u r Zeitschrift f ü r die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

CBQ

Catholic Biblical Quarterly

CD

Damascus Document from

CE

Common

CSCO

Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum

DJD DSD

Discoveries in the Judean Desert Dead Sea Discoveries

ET

English

ET ETS

Expository Times Ephemerides theologicae lovanienses

FOTL

T h e F o r m s of O l d T e s t a m e n t

Literature

FTP

Fragment

to

FTV

Fragment Targum

GK

Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar as Edited and Enlarged by the Late E. Kautzsch ( 2 n d e d i t i o n , O x f o r d , 1 9 1 0 )

GNB

Good News

Çhimran

Era Orientalium

Translation

Targum

nationale Héb.

according

Ms.

Paris

Bibliothèque

110 a c c o r d i n g to M s . V a t i c a n E b r .

440

Bible

HAL

Hebräisches u n d Aramäisches Lexikon z u m Alten T e s t a m e n t

HAT

Handbuch

z u m Alten

Testament

HTR

Harvard Theological Review

ICC

International Critical

Commentary

J AOS

Journal of the American Oriental Society

JB

Jerusalem

JBL JEA

Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of Egyptian Archaeology

Bible

ABBREVIATIONS

JJS JM

Journal

of Jewish

XI

Studies

P. J o u ö n a n d T . M u r a o k a , A Grammar (Rome,

of Biblical

Hebrew

1991)

JPS

Jewish Publication

Society

JSJ JS0T

Journal for the Study of Judaism

JSOTSS

J o u r n a l for the Study of the O l d T e s t a m e n t

Journal for the Study of the Old

Testament Supplement

Series

JSP

Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha

JSPSS

J o u r n a l for the Study of the P s e u d e p i g r a p h a

JSS JTS

Journal

of Semitic Studies

Journal

of Theological

KTU

Keilalphabetischen

Supplement

Series

Studies ( N e w Series) Texte

(Neukirchen-Vluyn, LXX

Septuagint

MT

Masoretic

aus

M.

Dietrich

(ed.),

1996)

Text

NEB

N e w English

NIV

N e w International

Bible Version

NRSV

N e w Revised Standard

NTS 0B0 OCA 0CP Or

New Testament

0SB

Oriental Studies

OT

Old

pj

Pseudo-Jonathan

RB

Revue

Version

Studies

Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis Onentalia Christiana Analecta Orientalia Christiana Periodica Orientalia Bulletin

Testament

Biblique

REB

Revised English

RH

Revue Historique Revue de Qumran Recherches de Science Religieuse

Rd RSR

Ugarit,

Bible

RSV

Revised S t a n d a r d Version (2nd edition, L o n d o n ,

RThPH

Revue de Theologie et de Philosophie

SBL

Society of Biblical

SBLDS

Society of Biblical L i t e r a t u r e Dissertation

SBS

Stuttgarter

SJ0T

Scandinavian Journal

SJT

Scottish Journal

Literature

Bibelstudien

of the Old

of Theology

Testament

Series

1971)

ST

Studia Theologica

SVT

S u p p l e m e n t s t o Vetus

TB

Tyndale

Testamentum

Bulletin

TJ

T a r g u m J o n a t h a n of the

TN

Targum

Neofiti

TO

Targum

Onqelos

TWAT

GJ.

Wörterbuch

zum Alten

Testament

(Stuttgart

1970—)

TDOT

Theological

Dictionary

of the Old Testament

(Grand

Botterweck

and

H.

Prophets

Ringgren,

(eds.),

Theologisches

Rapids,

1974-)

VT

Vetus

Testamentum

WMANT

Wissenschaftliche M o n o g r a p h i e n

WUNT

Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen z u m N e u e n

ZA ZAW

Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche

z u m Alten u n d

Neuen

Testament

Zeitschrift für

Assyriologie Wissenschaft

Testament

O N L E A R N I N G T O BE A T R U E P R O P H E T : T H E S T O R Y O F BALAAM A N D H I S ASS BY R.YV.L.

MOBERLY

Durham

I t is w i t h a s e n s e o f p l e a s u r e a n d g r a t i t u d e t h a t I w r i t e t h i s e s s a y i n h o n o u r of T o n y Gelston. W h e n I w a s a p p o i n t e d at D u r h a m in

1985,

T o n y w a s a m o d e l of kindness a n d t h o u g h t f u l n e s s in h e l p i n g m e

as

a n o v i c e s c h o l a r to settle in a n d l e a r n t h e ropes. A n d w h e n I s h o w e d him

m y early research writings I could be confident that,

the

other

deficiencies

of c o n t e n t

might

be,

my

whatever

discussion

of

the

H e b r e w language of the O l d T e s t a m e n t would not be inaccurate it s u r v i v e d h i s m e t i c u l o u s

if

scrutiny.

A p r i m e r e a s o n for c h o o s i n g the topic of this essay for this

Festschrift

is t h a t t h e B a l a a m s t o r y o f N u m b e r s 2 2 - 2 4 i n g e n e r a l , a n d t h e l o g i c of t h e n a r r a t i v e d y n a m i c s of N u m b e r s 2 2 in p a r t i c u l a r , w a s t h e j e c t of o u r D u r h a m February in

our

postgraduate

s e m i n a r in O l d

1993. S o m e of t h e c o n t e n t o f this essay w a s s k e t c h e d

discussion,

to

which

Tony

was

a

sub-

Testament on

16 out

significant contributor.

h o p e , t h e r e f o r e , that in the c o n t e x t of h o n o u r i n g T o n y as a

scholar,

this essay m a y also s t a n d as a m e m o r i a l to o u r m a n y e n j o y a b l e fruitful s e m i n a r d i s c u s s i o n s in St. C h a d ' s C o l l e g e a n d in A b b e y

I

and

House.

T h e s t o r y o f B a l a a m a n d h i s a s s is o n e o f t h e w e l l k n o w n s t o r i e s o f the

Old

Testament.

B u t it is n o t ,

I think, one

of the

best

under-

s t o o d . I w o u l d like in this e s s a y to revisit this f a m o u s s t o r y a n d

sug-

g e s t t h a t t h e r e a r e d i m e n s i o n s o f its m e a n i n g w h i c h a r e o f t e n m i s s e d , yet w h i c h m a k e g o o d sense n o t o n l y in r e l a t i o n to t h e specific details of t h e H e b r e w text b u t also in r e l a t i o n to a w i d e r H e b r e w tion of the p h e n o m e n o n tion

and

Christian

appropriation faiths. As

contemporary

faith

of p r o p h e c y of that

such that

w a y s t h a n is s o m e t i m e s

the

and

Hebrew

text

is r o o t e d supposed.

may in

in r e l a t i o n t o t h e conception

inform

scripture

and in

conceprecep-

in J e w i s h engage

more

and

with

a

interesting

The

overall story of B a l a a m in N u m b e r s

contained

unit

within

the

book

2 2 2 4 ‫ ־‬s t a n d s as a self-

of N u m b e r s .

The

summoning

of

B a l a a m a n d h i s j o u r n e y p r i o r t o h i s e n c o u n t e r w i t h B a l a k ( 2 2 : 1 —35) is a n a t u r a l s u b d i v i s i o n w i t h i n t h e l a r g e r s t o r y , a n d t h i s w i l l b e focus

here.

Although

there

are

many

questions

which

our

might

a d d r e s s e d as p r e l i m i n a r i e s to a n e x p o s i t i o n of t h e text, in this s e n t e s s a y I will c o n c e n t r a t e solely u p o n a n a n a l y t i c a l

exposition.

T h e p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s of t h e story a r e deftly set o u t in t h e sentences

(Num.

of the J o r d a n

22:1

6). T h e

people

of Israel are

in t h e g e n e r a l r e g i o n o f M o a b .

k n o w s of o t h e r peoples east of the J o r d a n

opening

encamped

Balak, king of

whom

be pre-

east

Moab,

Israel has

already

d e f e a t e d a n d d i s p o s s e s s e d , a n d is f e a r f u l l e s t a s i m i l a r f a t e b e f a l l h i m self a n d his p e o p l e . H e t h e r e f o r e s u m m o n s a s s i s t a n c e in t h e f o r m Balaam,

the power

of whose curse m a y

enable

Balak to

overcome

the otherwise s u p e r i o r n u m b e r s a n d strength of Israel; for and

curses p r o n o u n c e d

by

Balaam

are,

in

of

Balak's view,

blessings definitive

a n d determinative. In terms of the narrator's overall perspective

and

p u r p o s e , Balak foolishly supposes B a l a a m to possess the kind of p o w e r of s p e e c h w h i c h t h e n a r r a t o r k n o w s ( a n d as B a l a k will d i s c o v e r h a r d way) belongs only to S e n i o r officials

2

God.

travel on

Balak's behalf, to carry out the

sary negotiations to secure B a l a a m ' s assistance. B a l a a m one

who

speaks

for G o d

the

1

should,

in

the

Old

neces-

responds

Testament's

as

view

of

things, r e s p o n d . H e says that h e m u s t r e s p o n d as directed b y G o d

-

a n d so, implicitly, d o e s n o t d e c i d e in t e r m s of his o w n priorities

and

interests insofar as these

also

speaks of G o d

might

differ f r o m

with the proper name,

those

of G o d .

He

Y H Y V H , as k n o w n b y

a n d characteristic of true s p o k e s m e n for G o d (22:8,13; even the

narrator

God or

uses the generic

speaks to Balaam

giving of vocation,

know each

other.

3

term,

'God',

in familiar terms but

When

a

dialogue

Balaam

22:9,10,12). t h i s is n o

between

those

Israel though

That

night

first

meeting

who

already

e x p l a i n s t h e s i t u a t i o n in

response

1 For some of the necessary presuppositions of p r o n o u n c e m e n t s of blessing a n d curse their d e p e n d e n c e not on word magic but on appropriate a n d recognised linguistic a n d social conventions - see A.C. Thiselton, " T h e Supposed Power of W o r d s in the Biblical Writings", JTS 25 (1974), pp. 2 8 3 - 9 9 (with special reference to Balak a n d Balaam, p. 296). 2 'Elders', ‫ זקנים‬v. 7; 'princes', ‫שרים‬, w . 8, 13, 14, 15; 'servants', ‫ ע ב ד י ם‬, v. 18 (with variants in the Versions); and, on the lips of God, simply "the men", ‫האנטם‬, w . 20, 35. T h e variations in terminology seem natural in context. ‫ג‬ T h e rhetorical logic of God's opening question, which seeks to engage Balaam,

t o G o d ' s q u e s t i o n , G o d ' s d i r e c t i v e is c r i s p a n d c l e a r . I n a n negative (‫לא‬ officials; h e

rather is n o t

than ‫)אל‬, Balaam to

curse

the

emphatic

is n o t t o a c c o m p a n y

people

"for

they

are

Balak's

blessed"

‫)כריך הוא‬. So next day, Balaam

dismisses Balak's officials, a n d

r e t u r n to their m a s t e r to report

their failure ( N u m .

22:7-14).

W i t h i n this c o n t e x t , o n e p o i n t of detail deserves f u r t h e r The

officials b r i n g with t h e m

meaning

of which

is d i s p u t e d .

pretation, predominant as the V u l g a t e ,

5

'divinations' ( Probably

in m o d e r n

the

2

2

:

most

comment.

7,‫)קסמים‬,t h e

precise

common

translations,4 a n d

is t h a t o f ' f e e s ' f o r d i v i n a t i o n .

(‫כי‬ they

inter-

at least as

Such

old

a meaning

is

p e r f e c t l y p l a u s i b l e , b e c a u s e p a y m e n t o f B a l a a m is e x p l i c i t l y a n

issue

in t h e s e c o n d e m b a s s y , at least as B a l a a m , n o d o u b t c o r r e c t l y ,

inter-

prêts Balak's offer (22:17-18); such p a y m e n t m a y also be intrinsically likely in t h e s i t u a t i o n . T h e has a c o m m o n w o r d for 'fee' - ‫ט כ ר‬

Hebrew

considered

language,

however,

w h i c h o n e might expect to be

used h e r e w e r e that the i n t e n d e d m e a n i n g . 6 Also, the r e g u l a r terms for ' m o n e y '

Hebrew

(‫כסף‬, ‫זהב‬, ‫ )שכר‬are grammatically singular

w h o s e p l u r a l is u n c o m m o n ;

so the plural f o r m of ‫ק ס מ י ם‬

forms

suggests

a

plurality of objects which are not readily c o m p r e h e n d e d by a generic singular. M o r e o v e r , the fact that p a y m e n t

is a n i s s u e i n t h e

second

e m b a s s y n e e d n o t i m p l y t h a t it is a n i s s u e i n t h e first e m b a s s y :

Balak's

h o m a g e to B a l a a m ' s s u p p o s e d p o w e r s could b e considered by as r e a s o n for B a l a a m to c o m e . Finally, w h e n

Balak m a k e s the offer

w h i c h B a l a a m i n t e r p r e t s in t e r m s o f m o n e y , t h e e n v o y s d o n o t the

money

with

them,

f o r t h e o f f e r is o f p a y m e n t

d o n e (a c r u c i a l p o i n t i n t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e M o r e l i k e l y , t h e r e f o r e , is t h a t ‫ק ס מ י ם‬

Balak

bring

after the j o b

is

story).

m e a n s s o m e t h i n g intrinsic

t h e p r a c t i c e o f d i v i n i n g , i.e. e i t h e r p e o p l e w h o t h e m s e l v e s a r e e r s ( 7 , ( ‫ ק ס ם‬o r o b j e c t s w h e r e w i t h d i v i n a t i o n ( ‫ ) ק ס ם‬is c a r r i e d o u t .

to

divinThe

is similar to that of G o d ' s question to A d a m in Genesis 3:9, a point of similarity noted (in this latter context) by Rashi, a m o n g others (M. R o s e n b a u m & A.M. S i l b e r m a n n (eds.), The Pentateuch with the Commentary of Rashi: Genesis (Jerusalem, 5733/1973), p. 14). 4 For example, R S V , N R S V , NEB, REB, J B . 5 Habentes dwinationis pretium in manibus. L X X τα μαντεία closely follows the Hebrew, but in a way that specifies objects rather than people. 6 T h e verbal form ‫ ט כ ר‬is used with reference to Balaam in Deut. 23:5. This is fully explicable in terms of the fact that it is Balak's second offer, which Balaam interprets in terms of money, which leads to Balaam's acceding to Balak's request. It supports the contention that "OÖ would be the appropriate term in v. 7, if fees for hiring were the issue. 7 T h i s is the u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the M T in the New J P S T r a n s l a t i o n : " T h e

former

would

presumably

require

a

small

repointing

of the

( ‫ ; ) ק ס מ י ם‬h o w e v e r , it m a k e s n o s e n s e o f ‫ ב י ד ם‬, " i n t h e i r h a n d s " , in o t h e r c o m p a r a b l e

which

H e b r e w usage implies s o m e t h i n g portable 8

‫י‬

is n e v e r a n e q u i v a l e n t o f " i n t h e i r m i d s t " ( . ( ‫ ב ת כ ם‬T h u s ‫ק ס ם ם‬ ably m e a n s "tools of divination", a n d depicted

in

Ezekiel's

‫ ת ר פ י ם‬, liver (Ezek. really w a n t

vignette

21:26-28

of the [ET

and prob-

envisages the kinds of object king

of Babylon,

21-23]). Whether

B a l a k t h i n k s is a p p r o p r i a t e .

i.e.

arrows,

Balaam

o r n e e d s u c h o b j e c t s is b e s i d e t h e p o i n t ,

is t h a t t h i s is w h a t

text

9

for the

Balak's eager

would point provi-

s i o n o f t o o l s o f d i v i n a t i o n is p a r t o f t h e w i d e r c o n t r a s t i n t h e

nar-

rative between the u n c o m p r e h e n d i n g M o a b i t e view of h o w the divine realm

is a c c e s s e d a n d

Israel a n d

the dynamics

as practised

gorically p r o n o u n c e s

by

the

Balaam10

of p r o p h e c y

as u n d e r s t o o d

(who, later in

futility of d i v i n a t i o n

the story,

against

Israel,

by

cateNum.

23:23)."

elders . . . , versed in divination, set out". It is adopted by J . Milgrom, who follows a suggestion of Ehrlich that Balaam's "colleagues were present for the purpose of h o n o u r i n g h i m " {The J PS Torah Commentaiy: Numbers/Bamidbar (Philadelphia & New York, 5 7 5 0 / 1 9 9 0 ) , pp. 187, 319). 8 For the carrying of money or an offering • ‫ ב י ד‬, see G e n . 43:15, J d g . 16:18, J e r . 41:5; for other portable objects • ‫ ב ־ י‬, see G e n . 35:4, Exod. 5:21. Sometimes • ‫ב ־ ד‬ refers to h u m a n instrumentality, 1 Kgs. 10:29, 2 C h r o n . 24:13. T h e other regular idiomatic use of ‫ ב־דם‬is with reference to the giving of enemies by G o d into Israel's hands, J o s h . 21:44, J d g . 7:2, Neh. 9:24. T h e one possible exception is 1 Sam. 21:14 ( E T 13), but here the most natural sense is that David acted madly "in their h a n d s " in putting himself at the mercy of their physical power, i.e. an extension of the usage of Israel's enemies being given "into their hands". !l T h u s Milgrom's objection for this reason to •"•Dp as divinatory objects misses the irony of the text (1990, p. 187). 10 Neither N u m . 22 24, nor the O l d T e s t a m e n t more generally, ever offers a definition or account of •Dp 'divination', whose m e a n i n g must be inferred from its particular context. Here, Balak's ascription of power to Balaam, together with his provision of divinatory tools, suggests a view of h u m a n ability in some way to be in control of the spiritual realm, which lacks both the moral accountability a n d the sense of contingency of h u m a n life before divine transcendence which generally characterise O l d T e s t a m e n t prophecy (which I d o not equate with prophecy as a p h e n o m e n o n of Israelite history). O f course, a clear general distinction between divination and prophecy is not incompatible with recognition that often in practice the distinction may b e c o m e m o r e or less blurred. Both the O l d Testament and subsequent Jewish a n d Christian faiths provide plenty of evidence for such blurrings. " T h e precise sense of Balaam's words in 23:23, ‫ בישראל‬cop ‫ ולא‬is open to debate. T h e futility of divination, rather than its non-occurrence - which might be better expressed by ‫ אין‬rather than ‫ ל א‬- is probably the p r i m e thrust. It is unclear whether the preposition ‫ ב‬means 'within' or 'against', but both senses are appropriate: the latter in the immediate context of N u m . 2 2 - 2 4 , the former as a general axiom of O l d T e s t a m e n t prophecy.

T h u s f a r B a l a a m is a m o d e l ' p r o p h e t ' , 1 2 f o r h e is a c c o u n t a b l e

and

r e s p o n s i v e t o G o d , f a i t h f u l l y s p e a k i n g G o d ' s w o r d s . If t h a t w e r e it c o u l d

be

the

Balak's desire for reasons

end

that

both

refusal to c o m e

of the

Balaam

simple is n o t

story,

at

should

and

curse

complex.

a genuine

least

this p a r t i c u l a r

Israel. Balak

refusal but

I t is n o t ,

thinks

all,

story

of

however,

that

Balaam's

a negotiating

stance;

t h e r e a l m e a n i n g o f B a l a a m ' s w o r d s is n o t ' n o ' b u t " y o u m u s t o f f e r m e m o r e " . S o Balak acts accordingly with a m o r e prestigious e m b a s s y a n d a n o f f e r t h a t , h e s u p p o s e s , o n e c o u l d h a r d l y r e f u s e , i.e. y o u r price, as l o n g as y o u d o w h a t

I ask" (Num.

22:15

"name

17).

T h i s p r o v i d e s t h e first t u r n i n g p o i n t i n t h e s t o r y . H o w w i l l B a l a a m respond?

111 t h e t e r m s o f t h e s t o r y B a l a k s e e s B a l a a m

as a n

astute

negotiator. O n e might, however, stand back for a m o m e n t a n d

recast

t h e issue in t e r m s r e l a t e d to B a l a a m ' s role as o n e w h o s p e a k s God

and

scripture faiths a

for G o d ,

i.e. a s a p r o p h e t .

parts highlighted

and

In

various

parts

affirmed by Jewish

the responsibility to speak a n d act for G o d

morally

demanding

vocation,

whose

of

and

with

Hebrew Christian

is c o n s t r u e d

full d i m e n s i o n s

may

as

some-

t i m e s b e e n g e n d e r e d b y a n a c t o f d i v i n e t e s t i n g . 1 3 T h a t is, t h e p e r s o n

12

In classic H e b r e w parlance the term for ' p r o p h e t ' is ‫נביא‬. An alternative term, ‫'( ד א ה‬seer') might well be appropriate to the context of the Balaam story. For 'seeing' is one of the story's prime thematic concerns, a n d not only is the verb ‫ד א ה‬ used repeatedly, particularly in the ass episode, but the related root ‫ ח ז ה‬and the idiom of "having eyes o p e n e d " introduce Balaam's two climactic oracles (24:4,16). Within N u m . 22 24 itself, ‫ ד א ה‬would seem a natural term for Balaam. H o w e v e r , the interesting terminological note in 1 S a m u e l 9:9 indicates that although p o p u l a r parlance once preferred ‫ ד א ה‬when speaking of 'prophets' the standard H e b r e w term has b e c o m e ‫נב״א‬. Because N u m . 22 24 depicts Balaam for the most part in categories familiar from H e b r e w prophecy elsewhere, to call him a 'seer' rather than a 'prophet' would, I suggest, distract from, more than illuminate, the working assumptions of the Balaam narrative. T h e wide-ranging generic term ' p r o p h e t ' (‫ )נב״א‬is the least misleading, as long as it is used with appropriate nuance. 13 In this context it is interesting to note that the portrayal of J o s e p h in Genesis, whose possible linkages with wisdom literature have often been discussed, shows striking similarities to concerns of prophetic literature. T o be sure, J o s e p h ' s vocation is to be a "civil servant" rather than a specifically religious figure (‫ב״א‬: or whatever), but at the climactic encounter with the p h a r a o h his speech is similar to that of a prophet (Gen. 41:25ff.). H e definitively interprets the mind of G o d with a message as d e m a n d i n g of practical response (and not just discussion) as any prophetic call to Israel to turn to G o d (‫ ;)טוב‬a n d the positive response to J o s e p h ' s message averts disaster (‫)דעה‬. J o s e p h himself is p r e p a r e d for this vocation through his resisting of temptation and enduring of malice a n d disappointment (Gen. 39,40). T h e psalmist's interpretation of Joseph's story in terms of a divine vocation which involves hard testing (Ps. 105:16—22, esp. 18 19) makes explicit what is consistently implicit in the Genesis narratives.

a c c o u n t a b l e to G o d

finds

h i m s e l f 1 4 in a situation -

a situation initiated by G o d -

in divine

in w h i c h costly d e m a n d s

terms,

or difficul-

ties c o n f r o n t h i m , a n d in w h i c h h e m u s t m a k e a r e n e w e d , a n d

more

s e a r c h i n g , affirmative r e s p o n s e to his v o c a t i o n . In t e r m s of o u r story, what

Balak i n t e n d s as

by God How

financial

negotiation

could

as a test of t h e integrity of B a l a a m ' s then

should

one

understand

also b e

intended

vocation.

Balaam's

response

to

Balak's

r e n e w e d e m b a s s y ? T h e w o r d i n g o f v . 1 8 is i m p e c c a b l y c o r r e c t : dience

to

God

inducement v.

is c o m p l e t e l y

to gain.

Thus

non-negotiable,

should

a

true

no

matter

prophet

obe-

what

speak.

the

Then

in

19, B a l a a m p r o p o s e s t o r e p e a t his n o c t u r n a l e n c o u n t e r w i t h

will o f G o d .

At

first

sight, this m a y

seem

unproblematic,

f o r it is

a p p a r e n t l y a repetition of the g o o d practice displayed earlier,

seek-

i n g G o d ' s will r a t h e r t h a n f o l l o w i n g his o w n p r e f e r e n c e s . B u t this c o n t e x t t h e r e are factors w h i c h a r o u s e suspicion as to

the

within

Balaam's

m o t i v e s . F i r s t a n d f o r e m o s t is t h e f a c t t h a t B a l a a m d o e s n o t

simply

dismiss t h e m e n . If t h e w o r d s of a c c o u n t a b i l i t y to G o d in v. 18 a r e g e n u i n e , t h e n they should suffice, for B a l a a m

already knows

God's

m i n d with regard to Balak's request a n d he could dismiss the without

more

ado. In particular,

the reason given for G o d ' s

o u s r e f u s a l t o l e t B a l a a m g o w i t h t h e i n i t i a l e m b a s s y is n o t a ticular issue of t i m e

or circumstance,

but a fundamental principle -

which

might

" t h e y a r e b l e s s e d " (v.

readily

men previpar-

change,

12).

W h a t e v e r the precise n a t u r e of B a l a a m ' s ability to g r a s p this p r i n ciple at this stage in the story (he e n u n c i a t e s the principle of

God's

blessing of Israel with strong, a n d increasing, e m p h a s i s as t h e of his o r acl es to B a l a k w h e n it r e m a i n s

the

kind

h e gets to that point, 2 3 : 7 - 8 ,

of a x i o m

that

a prophet

ought

to be

basis

1820‫)־‬, able

to

recognise as such. M o r e o v e r , r e s p o n s e to such a principle shares t h e logic of r e s p o n s e

to divine c o m m a n d m e n t s

and prohibitions

gener-

a l l y ( s o m e t h i n g w h i c h i n o t h e r c o n t e x t s is o f t e n h a n d l e d i n t e r m s conscience).

If s u c h

rect response. T h e sometimes

14

be

is t h e w i l l o f G o d , recognition

problematic,

and

that what that

then

obedience

of

is t h e

cor-

c o u n t s as o b e d i e n c e

may

sometimes

divine

command-

T h e use of the masculine p r o n o u n is to conform with the fact that the majority of prophets in H e b r e w scripture are m e n , a n d that in those stories where w o m e n are prophets (Deborah, Huldah) the dynamics of testing are not present. It is not intended to discount or preclude recognition that within the contexts of postbiblical faith the dynamics of prophetic vocation a n d testing may be as applicable to w o m e n as to m e n .

m e n t s m a y p o i n t in conflicting directions, m a k e s n o difference here. F o r offers of public h o n o u r factors that m a k e

and

problematic

financial

what

gain are not the kind

counts as obedience.15

of

Rather,

they specify the cost of w h a t such o b e d i e n c e m i g h t entail. T h e y

ere-

a t e a p r o b l e m n o t f o r t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g b u t f o r t h e will a n d f o r t h e imagination w h i c h fuels the

will.

T h u s the fact that B a l a a m goes again to consult G o d suggests that h e d o e s n o t m e a n w h a t h e s a y s i n v . 18. 111 o t h e r w o r d s , B a l a a m is a c c e d i n g t o B a l a k ' s c o n s t r u a l o f h i s e a r l i e r r e f u s a l , t h a t it w a s n o t g e n u i n e refusal b u t a negotiating ploy. H e n o w w a n t s to c o m e the envoys, because he wants G o d

a

with

B a l a k ' s o f f e r is o n e t h a t h e ' c a n n o t ' r e f u s e .

So

to speak a g a i n a n d say s o m e t h i n g more,16 so that

he

m a y h a v e the o p p o r t u n i t y to a c c e d e to Balak's invitation. T h e

lan-

g u a g e o f r e l i g i o u s v o c a t i o n , w h i c h is p r e s e r v e d u n c h a n g e d , is b e c o m ing a tool of self-interested

financial

n e g o t i a t i o n . I t is b e c o m i n g ,

a w o r d , corrupt; or, in the terminology of ancient J e w i s h a n d interpretation Balaam's

of the story, B a l a a m

acceptance

is s u c c u m b i n g t o

in

Christian

greed.1'

h e r e of B a l a k ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g of his

earlier

r e f u s a l d o e s o f c o u r s e r a i s e t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t t h a t e a r l i e r r e f u s a l is

15 Similarly, for example, if adultery is wrong, it remains w r o n g however great the material inducement. T h e 1993 P a r a m o u n t film Indecent Proposal, starring Robert Redford, D e m i M o o r e and W o o d y Harrelson, is an interesting recent exploration of this issue; although, characteristically of the time a n d place of the film, the nature a n d significance of 'adultery' (a term not used) is redefined in individualistic a n d personalist terms with diminished moral content a n d no familial or social content. 16 T h e H e b r e w idiom of ‫ י ס ף‬with ‫ ד ב ר‬indicates not simply that G o d will speak again but that G o d will say something more than was said previously. For the general idiomatic usage of ‫ ט ו ב‬a n d ‫ ״סף‬to express the adverbial sense of 'again', see J o ü o n / M u r a o k a # 1 7 7 b,c. T h e y observe that "‫ ״סף‬expresses c o n t i n u a t i o n . . . or augmentation". In the context of N u m . 22:19, for G o d to continue is for G o d to a u g m e n t what has already been said. In a pentateuchal context there are strong resonances with the Mosaic prohibition on " a d d i n g to (‫יסף‬, Hiph) the word which I a m c o m m a n d i n g y o u " (Deut. 4:2). In the deuteronomic context, the point of the prohibition on adding (or subtracting) seems to be a moral one about not seeking expedients to avoid the cost of obedience, rather than a quantitative point that all possibly desirable laws are contained within D e u t e r o n o m y , which would make n o practical sense. Balaam's desire that G o d should say something m o r e seems a good narrative example of the kind of evasiveness with regard to the d e m a n d s of obedience which D e u t e r o n o m y 4:2 envisages. 17 In the interpretation incorporated in the New T e s t a m e n t , the keyword for Balaam's failing is μισθός, 'profit' ( J u d e 11; 2 Pet. 2:15 is fuller, μισθόν α δ ι κ ί α ς ήγάπησεν, "he set his heart on profit gained wrongly"). In St. Augustine's interpretation, the keyword is cupiditas (Quaest. in Hept: Num., X L V I I I ; for example, "se victum cupiditate monstravit").

also to b e

understood

thus by

the

reader.

Such

a suspicion,

once

raised, c a n n o t easily b e c o n f i r m e d o r r e b u t t e d , f o r t h e text of w . 7 1 4 is o p e n t o e i t h e r c o n s t r u a l . M y j u d g e m e n t

of the story as a

whole,

h o w e v e r , is t h a t t h e r e a d e r s h o u l d r e s i s t a n y f a c i l e o r m o r a l i s t i c dency have

to a s s u m e been

that

a person who

s o (a m o r a l i s t i c

becomes

tendency

corrupt

is a w e a k n e s s

must

ten-

always

in m u c h

tradi-

tional J e w i s h a n d C h r i s t i a n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e story).18 R a t h e r ,

the

t e x t is p o r t r a y i n g t h e m o r e c o m p l e x s i t u a t i o n o f t h e p e r s o n w h o g e n u i n e l y a p r o p h e t (in t h a t h e k n o w s a n d c a n p r a c t i s e t h e sibilities o f s u c h serious Balaam,

divine

but

who

because

yet

may

go

o f its g e n u i n e

astray. W h e n allure,

construal

direct

and

temptation. of B a l a a m

as s u c c u m b i n g

to

temptation

rect, G o d ' s initial r e s p o n s e in v. 2 0 m a y s e e m p u z z l i n g . W h y God

a

confronts

h e w a v e r s f r o m his initial f a i t h f u l n e s s to his v o c a t i o n

s u c c u m b s to If the

a vocation)

test, serious

is

respon-

Balaam

to go with

the

envoys? W o u l d

one

not

is

should rather

e x p e c t r e f e r e n c e to G o d ' s a n g e r , of t h e k i n d specified in v. 2 2 , t h a t divine a n g e r w o u l d b e a c c o m p a n i e d at least b y a p r o h i b i t i o n going a n d possibly also by s o m e act of j u d g e m e n t ?

But the

cor-

and on

puzzle

18 So, for example, Rashi, characteristic of p r e d o m i n a n t Jewish tradition, sees Balaam negatively from the outset. Already in v. 9 Balaam is seeking to get round G o d , whose knowledge he mistakenly infers is limited; a n d in v. 11 Balaam wants to drive out Israel not just "from the land 1 ' but "from the world", thereby showing h a t r e d of Israel even greater t h a n that of Balak ( R . R o s e n b a u m & A . M . Silbermann (eds.), The Pentateuch with the Commentary of Rashi: Numbers (Jerusalem, 5 7 3 3 / 1 9 7 3 ) , p. 108). For convenient introductions to traditional Jewish interpretation of the Balaam story, see Milgrom (1990), pp. 185ff; and, more fully, G. Vermes, Scripture and Tradition in Judaism (2nd ed., Leiden, 1973), c h a p t e r 6. A characteristic Christian voice is that of Charles Simeon: " W h o that had heard all the fine speeches which he m a d e respecting his determination to adhere to the will of G o d . . . . would not have conceived him to be a pious character? Yet from beginning to the end his c o n d u c t was a continued course of horrible impiety" ("Sermon 170", Horae Homileticae, vol. 2 (London, 1832), pp. 132f.). T h e classic c o m m e n t a t o r s of course read the story of N u m . 2 2 2 4 ‫ ־‬in the light of the negative references to Balaam in N u m . 31:8,16. M o d e r n c o m m e n t a t o r s have properly insisted that the story of N u m . 22 24 be interpreted in its own right; a n d that if N u m . 31:16 does presuppose a substantive Balaam tradition, then it is a tradition other than that in N u m . 2 2 - 2 4 . Nonetheless, the logic of rereading a text, a n d finding it to have a significance other than that which one m a y have initially supposed in terms of its prima facie meaning, is clearly implicit within N u m . 22:1521‫־‬. So the move of the classic c o m m e n t a t o r s is not without warrant within the biblical text. A clear recent restatement of the logic of the classic position is offered by G o r d o n W e n h a m , w h o argues that, in the light of N u m b e r s 31, "the deeds of Balaam which m a n y c o m m e n t a t o r s construe so positively might have a more sinister m e a n i n g . . ." (Numbers (Leicester, 1981), pp. 167f.).

‫־‬

is c l a r i f i e d b y t h e w i d e r c o n t e x t o f t h e n a r r a t i v e ( a n d it m i g h t be eased

through

consideration

of other

Old

Testament

o f d i v i n e t e s t i n g , in w h i c h e x t e n d e d p r o b i n g is

also

portrayals

common).19

First, t h e w h o l e e p i s o d e with t h e ass w h i c h follows ( w . 2 2 3 5 ‫) ־‬ with the same divine c o m m a n d (v. 3 5 a ) w i t h w h i c h G o d 20

to g o b u t say only w h a t

ends

God

says

responds to B a l a a m ' s nocturnal e n q u i r y

in

A t the very p o i n t of B a l a a m ' s submissiveness to G o d ,

where

B a l a a m o f f e r s t o t u r n b a c k ( ‫ ט ו ב‬, v. 34), G o d d o e s n o t , as o n e

might

v. 20.

p e r h a p s h a v e e x p e c t e d , say " g o b a c k " (‫ )טוב‬b u t r a t h e r " g o o n " This must

mean

that whatever

t h e a n g e l i c a d v e r s a r y t o B a l a a m in w . 2 2

court,

opposed

some

way

to

Balaam

represent

clear in c h a p t e r s Secondly,

going

God's

to

will

(the

direct

Balaam's

nature

going

tout

of which

must

will

in

become

23-24).

when

t h e d i v i n e a n g e r is s p e c i f i e d a n d

might expect

action

and

3 5 , G o d is n o t s i m p l y ,

Balak.

represented

t h e e p i s o d e w i t h t h e ass, t h e a n g e r takes a n u n u s u a l a n d form. O n e

(‫)לך‬.

the n a t u r e of the divine anger

against

the

that divine anger would o f f e n d e r , in s o m e

such

in

surprising

take the form form

as

of

afflicting

w i t h d i s e a s e , b l i n d i n g t h e e y e s , o r e v e n s t r i k i n g d e a d (all a c t i o n s d i v i n e j u d g e m e n t a t t e s t e d e l s e w h e r e in t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t ) . In e v e r s u c h f o r m it w o u l d b e i m m e d i a t e afflicted, in this case

Balaam.

what-

a n d inescapable for the

Yet the angel with

the sword

like this, f o r t h e a n g e l c a n b e , initially a t least, a v o i d e d .

one

is

not

Instead

t h e a n g e l c o m i n g t o a n d a t B a l a a m , t h e a n g e l is a s t a t i o n a r y

t h i s m i g h t s i g n i f y is a m a t t e r

which

the

will r e t u r n .

At

present,

important

point

is t h e

prising a n d complex form which the divine anger with Balaam in w .

of

object

which can be circumvented. W h a t we

of

to sur-

takes

22-35.

In the light of these t w o factors in w .

2 2 3 5 ‫ ־‬, both of which

indi-

c a t e s u b t l e t y a n d c o m p l e x i t y i n G o d ' s a n g e r w i t h B a l a a m , it b e c o m e s appropriate

to

find

some

similar complexity

in G o d ' s

initial

words

i n v . 2 0 . T h a t is, G o d ' s w o r d s a r e n o t j u s t t o b e t a k e n a t f a c e v a l u e as s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d p e r m i s s i o n to go, a n y m o r e t h a n B a l a a m ' s s o u n d i n g w o r d s in w .

1819

‫־‬

pious-

are to b e taken at their face value

expressing o b e d i e n c e to G o d (and just as Balak did not take

Balaam's

19 See, for example, D e u t e r o n o m y 8 : 2 - 3 with its pivotal construal of Israel's 40 years in the desert, which arose through unfaithfulness, as a d e m a n d i n g and positive time of divine teaching through testing. 20 T h e minor verbal differences between v. 20b a n d v. 35a make no difference to the m e a n i n g of each divine c o m m a n d , whose sense is identical.

as

initial w o r d s he wants

at their face value). G o d

to hear,

t h i n k it w i l l m e a n

but

21

it w i l l n o t

-

and

tells B a l a a m

mean

t h i s is m a d e

the very

for B a l a a m

what

terms,

God's

God's

response

words

20

to the p r o p h e t ' s

to seek to teach h i m a What

in v.

are

ironic.

In

seeking to c o r r u p t

terms,

his v o c a t i o n

t h i s l e s s o n i n v o l v e s is t h e s u b j e c t o f t h e e p i s o d e w h i c h

and

a proverbially dull a n i m a l -

expensive prophet

can

see less

a n d its p a t t e r n e d s t r u c t u r e -

o f its s p e c i f i c m e a n i n g ,

a

folqual-

the

meaning

specified t h r o u g h conventions characteristic of H e b r e w

than three-

fold e n c o u n t e r with the angel, the t w o b a l a n c i n g dialogues appreciation

should

which

' a d v e r s a r y ' (‫שטן‬, v. 22). T h e

in t h e story of S o l o m o n text

of divine

raises u p 'adversary'

anger

in

with

1 Kings.

( 1 1 : 1 4 , 2 3,‫)שטן‬t o

Here, for

Hadad

Solomon.

specifically in the

con-

u n f a i t h f u l n e s s (11:9),

God

and

Rezon,

Neither

each to be

of t h e m

an

defeat

or

d i s p l a c e S o l o m o n , b u t e a c h is s e e n t o b e a n o b s t a c l e a n d i r r i t a n t Solomon,

and

indeed

to Israel

as

m o s t i l l u m i n a t i n g p a r a l l e l t o t h i s is

Solomon

two particular people,

is

narrative.

F i r s t , a t t h e o u t s e t t h e a n g e l is s a i d t o s t a n d i n B a l a a m ' s w a y an

is

lesson.

the highly esteemed

enhance

the

rhetor-

substantive

lows. R e c o g n i t i o n of the episode's c r a f t e d a n d dryly h u m o r o u s ity -

may

clear to the reader by

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f G o d ' s a t t i t u d e a s o n e o f a n g e r in v. 2 2 . I n ical

thing

he

(11:25),

thereby

removing

the

to

pre-

c e d i n g divinely b e s t o w e d rest w h i c h w a s c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y t h e a b s e n c e o f s u c h h o s t i l e i r r i t a n t ( 5 : 1 8,‫ [שטן‬E T 5 : 1 4 ] ) . I n s i g n i f i c a n t

respects,

a s H a d a d a n d R e z o n a r e t o S o l o m o n , s o is t h e a n g e l w i t h t h e s w o r d to Balaam: a

figure

w h o opposes, d a n g e r o u s yet without instant

o v e r w h e l m i n g i m p l e m e n t a t i o n of that danger, a

figure

whose

or

oppos-

i n g p r e s e n c e symbolises divine d i s f a v o u r w i t h the failure in faithfuln e s s o f s o m e o n e w h o o n c e d i d , a n d still s h o u l d , k n o w

better.

S e c o n d l y , t h e r e is t h e s e q u e n c e o f t h r e e f o l d c o n f r o n t a t i o n w i t h t h e angel ( w . 2327‫)־‬. T h e fact that the angel has a d r a w n sword t h a t e n c o u n t e r w i t h t h e a n g e l will b e d e a d l y . S o w h e n the

angel,

she22

naturally

takes

appropriate

evasive

means

t h e ass sees

action,

going

21 This general point - that the divine permission is morally charged a n d complex - is well represented in traditional Jewish interpretation, which Milgrom summarises thus: " T h e rabbis . . . see in this tale the source of the doctrine of h u m a n responsibility and free will: 'From this you learn that a m a n is led in the way he desires to go' [Mak. 10b, N u m . R . 20:18]; 'If one comes to defile himself, he is given an opening", that is, he is given the opportunity [Shab. 104a, Y o m a 3 8 b ] ' " , (1990, p. 189). An obvious scriptural analogue would be Psalm 106:15, " H e gave them what they asked for, a n d sent a wasting disease a m o n g them". 22 T h e H e b r e w n o u n , a n d related verbs, are all feminine.

a r o u n d the angel r a t h e r as o n e m i g h t g o a r o u n d a n y t h i n g hostile dangerous detour

which

irritates

is b l o c k i n g t h e w a y

Balaam,

who

in w h i c h

expresses

one

is g o i n g .

his irritation

by

or

This

hitting

the

ass in s u c h a w a y as to r e d i r e c t h e r . U n f o r t u n a t e l y f o r t h e ass,

the

a n g e l r e a p p e a r s , this t i m e in a n a r r o w e r p l a c e w h e r e g o i n g

around

is m o r e d i f f i c u l t . D e t o u r is o n l y p o s s i b l e b y s q u e e z i n g t h r o u g h a

nar-

r o w g a p w h i c h involves pressing against a wall. T h i s d e t o u r not only irritates B a l a a m b u t also h u r t s h i m , a n d his ass. T h e

angel

then

reappears

again h e takes this out

a third

time, in s u c h

a

on

narrow

p l a c e t h a t e v a s i v e a c t i o n is n o l o n g e r p o s s i b l e . S o t h e a s s d o e s

the

o n l y t h i n g s h e c a n , c e a s i n g to m o v e a n d a d o p t i n g a p o s t u r e in w h i c h she

no

longer

can

move.

positively angry, a n d The pearing

hits t h e ass

ass's a t t e m p t s in

an

ever

Balaam

to avoid more

is n o w

not

merely

irritated

accordingly.

a deadly

compelling

danger

way

which

evoke

keeps

solely

reap-

incompre-

hension, anger a n d violence o n the part of the prophet. T h e is s e t f o r t w o d i a l o g u e s w h i c h

r e v e a l all -

enables the truth

of the situation

first

to b e

Balaam's expressed

a n d then to be grasped (22:28-30,31 The

ass's

first

question

scene

f o r e a c h d i a l o g u e is i n i -

tiated by a divine a c t i o n ( o p e n i n g the ass's m o u t h , o p e n i n g eyes) w h i c h

but

35‫)־‬.

is a p r o t e s t

at

the

injustice of

Balaam's

r e p e a t e d h i t t i n g his ass. T h e " w h a t h a v e I d o n e ? " m e a n s " w h a t I done and

to deserve this?" T h e

so s h o u l d

t h i s is n o t

be

thanked

the case.

ass h a s t h r i c e s a v e d h e r m a s t e r ' s life,

rather

Because

have

he

than

maltreated.

has seen

But

to

Balaam

nothing of w h a t

the

ass

has seen, h e sees the ass's b e h a v i o u r n o t as saving h i m b u t as h u m i l iating h i m , m a k i n g h i m look foolish.23 T o sion, h e ironically threatens

t h e ass w i t h

crown

his

s w o r d f r o m w h i c h she was trying to save t h e m . T h e thus underlines iour of the The

the

unjust, because

ignorant

and

first

deadly

exchange

mistaken,

behav-

prophet.

ass's s e c o n d q u e s t i o n p i n p o i n t s t h e failure of t h e p r o p h e t

t h e v e r y a r e a in w h i c h and

incomprehen-

the very fate of a

u n d e r s t a n d i n g w h a t is g o i n g o n , e s p e c i a l l y i n r e l a t i o n t o

Specifically,

how

can

in

h e s h o u l d e x c e l : d i s c e r n m e n t , t h a t is s e e i n g

the

man

who

cannot

interpret

the

God.

obvious

a c t i o n s o f his ass i n t e r p r e t t h e m o r e difficult a c t i o n s of G o d ? 2 4

The

23 A c o m p a r a b l e sense of the verb ‫ ה ת ע ל ל‬is found with reference to Y H W H ' s humiliation of Egypt (Exod. 10:2, 1 Sam. 6:6). 24 T h e implicit logic is similar to what in subsequent rabbinic interpretation would be called Qal wahomer, which is that what applies in a less important case applies also in a more important case.

ass p o i n t s Balaam

to

the

has had

wholly

unprecedented

t h e ass a n d

ridden

on

nature

of her

behaviour.

h e r for as l o n g as h e

r e m e m b e r with n o b r e a k u p to the present time (‫ע ר ה״ום הזה‬ a n d s o h i s f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h h e r p a t t e r n s o f b e h a v i o u r is a s a s it c o u l d

possibly be. So w h e n

h e is a s k e d w h e t h e r

can

‫)מעורך‬,

extensive

there

is

any

p r e c e d e n t w h a t e v e r f o r h e r p r e s e n t b e h a v i o u r ( t h e H e b r e w is e m p h a t i c , ‫הסכנתי‬

‫ההסכן‬,

he knows

"have

full well

I ever been that

the

in t h e h a b i t

answer

is n e g a t i v e

The

p o i n t is t h a t u n u s u a l b e h a v i o u r

tion

and

repeated

signified to h i m

that

twice

in

more

even

should

all w a s the

of behaving and

thus?"),

has to say

have caught

so.

his

atten-

n o t well, particularly

when

f a c e of his i m m e d i a t e

and

pain-

inflicting expression of displeasure. S u c h u n u s u a l b e h a v i o u r w a s obvio u s b o t h t o s e e a n d i n t e r p r e t i n t e r m s o f its g e n e r a l t e n o r must

be

wrong".

Balaam's

failure

to

carry

out

even

"something the

simplest

e x e r c i s e o f d i s c e r n m e n t is m a n i f e s t . 2 5 H i s g r e e d h a s m a d e h i m and

foolish.

blind

26

But n o w t h a t the ass h a s p o i n t e d o u t his inability to see t h e

obvi-

ous implications of her behaviour, there remains a further necessary s t e p . I t is o n e t h i n g t o i n f e r f r o m t h e a n i m a l ' s v i s i b l e b e h a v i o u r a l l is n o t w e l l , it is a n o t h e r of this b e h a v i o u r .

The

to see the specific cause

ass, h a v i n g t a u g h t

Balaam

his lesson, n o w gives w a y to t h e a n g e l to c o m p l e t e When

YHWH

opens

and

the

that

meaning

first

part

of

it.

B a l a a m ' s e y e s , h e is a b l e t o s e e w h a t

was

in f r o n t of his eyes, w h i c h t h e ass c o u l d a l r e a d y see, t h e a n g e l

stand-

i n g b e f o r e h i m in his w a y with a d r a w n , a n d so d e a d l y , s w o r d

(what

Balaam

s e e s , v . 3 1 a , is d e p i c t e d

v. 23a). B a l a a m tion; t h o u g h

identically with w h a t

t h e ass

r e s p o n d s in c o r r e c t m a n n e r , with r e v e r e n t

whether

t h i s a c t i o n is o t h e r t h a n

sees,

prostra-

that of a guilty

per-

s o n w h o r e c o g n i s e s t h a t h e is c a u g h t b y t h e p r o p e r a u t h o r i t y is n o t s p e c i f i e d . I n a n y c a s e , w h a t m a t t e r s is t h e d i a l o g u e , w h i c h g i v e s c o n t e n t to, a n d b r i n g s o u t t h e m e a n i n g of, t h e

25

encounter.

M i l g r o m ' s c o m m e n t , d r a w i n g o n an article by R. L a r g e m e n t , that "as a Mesopotamian diviner, Balaam should have recognised that his animal's bizarre actions may have held a divine p o r t e n t " (1990, p. 190), while consistent with his own larger interpretation of Balaam as a diviner, misses the primary point of the ass's words which are about the discernment of something that is accessible to anyone. 26 Calvin's c o m m e n t s are characteristically apt: " T o the great disgrace of the prophet, the glory of the angel was first of all apparent to the ass . . . W h e n c e c a m e this blindness, but from the avarice by which he h a d been so stupefied, that he preferred filthy lucre to the holy calling of G o d ? " (cited in C.F. Keil & F. Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament: I: The Pentateuch (reprinted, G r a n d Rapids, 1980), Pt. 3, pp. 169fi).

by the

ass,

B a l a a m ' s blindness a n d injustice, a n d interprets the m e a n i n g of

The

angel draws

her

unprecedented 'adversary' about

to

together

behaviour Balaam,

the journey

the two complaints voiced

(w.

32

because

33). T h e there

he was making.2‫׳‬

was

angel

had

something

The angel

come

as

an

unacceptable

underlines

that

the

ass's actions w e r e n o t only a p p r o p r i a t e b u t w e r e for B a l a a m ' s benefit, f o r it is o n l y h e , n o t t h e a s s ( w h e t h e r o r n o t

t h e ass realised

w h o s e l i f e is i n p e r i l , f o r t h e d i v i n e j u d g e m e n t h a v e left t h e ass u n s c a t h e d .

The angel

would,

this),

significantly,

d o e s n o t spell o u t

the

pre-

e i s e r e a s o n w h y B a l a a m ' s c o u r s e is u n a c c e p t a b l e , f o r i n c o n t e x t

the

r e a s o n is o b v i o u s a s s o o n a s t h e c h a l l e n g e is m a d e : B a l a a m is a l l o w i n g his p r o p h e t i c v o c a t i o n to b e c o r r u p t e d b y g r e e d , a g r e e d

which

has m a d e h i m blind to the p r e s e n c e of the G o d in w h o s e n a m e

he

speaks. T h e s e w o r d s o f t h e a n g e l , t o w h i c h w e will r e t u r n , a c h i e v e purpose.28 T h e y touch

B a l a a m ' s h e a r t , t h e y b r i n g h i m to his

(or, in t r a d i t i o n a l e v a n g e l i c a l t e r m i n o l o g y ,

their senses

t h e y c o n v i c t h i m o f sin).

B a l a a m ' s r e s p o n s e (v. 3 4 ) is o n e o f t r u e t u r n i n g t o G o d (i.e. h e r e p e n t s , 29

.(‫טוב‬

First, h e u n c o n d i t i o n a l l y a c k n o w l e d g e s his w r o n g d o i n g : "I

sinned"

(‫)חטאתי‬.

Secondly,

inability

to see w h a t

he

he

should

acknowledges have

his

have

uncomprehending

seen.30 Thirdly,

he

expresses

27

T h e precise m e a n i n g of the verb ‫( י ר ט‬v. 32) is difficult to determine, a n d there is the related question of w h e t h e r ‫ י ר ט ה ד ר ך‬is the correct text. BHS, with some support from the Versions, proposes e m e n d i n g the text to ‫ י ר ע ד ר כ ך‬, "your way is wrong". However, to introduce such unproblematic H e b r e w here is surely to offend against the basic text-critical principle of lectio difficilior potior. The M T is intelligible as saying something about the actual route which Balaam is following, that route in which the angel has stood (cf. the repeated prior use of ‫ ה ד ר ך‬a n d ‫ ב ד ר ך‬, w . 22, 23, 31). By older c o m m e n t a t o r s ‫" י ר ט‬is alternately rendered 'twisted' (Ibn Ezra, R a m b a n , Ábravane1) or 'blocked' (Mid. Lek. Τ ο ν , Meyuhas), interpreting ‫ ד ר ך‬as ' r o a d ' " (Milgrom (1990), p. 320, n. 77), while m o d e r n scholars regularly appeal to a n Arabic root which has the sense of 'throw', "cast headlong". T h u s ‫י ר ט ה ד ר ך‬ probably means "the way is p r e c i p i t a t e / h e a d l o n g " . T h i s would be an idiom similar to the m o d e r n idiom of a "slippery slope", a n d it makes good sense of M T . 2

" R e c e n t c o m m e n t a t o r s regularly see the ass episode solely as satirizing or vilifying Balaam. So, for example, J o h n V a n Seters says that "the talking ass story is the final degradation of the faithful p r o p h e t into a buffoon w h o must be instructed by his own h u m b l e donkey" ("From Faithful P r o p h e t to Villain: Observations on the Tradition History of the Balaam Story" in E.E. C a r p e n t e r (ed.), A Biblical Itineraiy: In Search of Method, Form and Content: Essays in Honor of George W. Coats J S O T S 240 (Sheffield, 1997), pp. 126 132, quotation p. 132). Such a j u d g e m e n t is exegetically superficial in terms of the actual content of the story, where the h u m b l i n g of Balaam is not a n e n d in itself but has a didactic a n d restorative purpose. 2 ‫ יי‬Traditional interpreters, w h o see Balaam as consistently perverted, construe this repentance as superficial a n d / o r m o m e n t a r y . 30 T h e first ‫ כ י‬in Balaam's words is generally taken as causative, i.e. "I have

w i l l i n g n e s s t o a b a n d o n t h e e n t e r p r i s e t h a t is c a u s i n g o f f e n c e ; h e w i l l relinquish the hoped-for h o n o u r a n d Now,

however, because

c o r r u p t i n g his vocation, tinue

to

go

undertaken

with

Balaam

wealth.

has turned from that which

the angel says t h a t

Balak's

envoys.

What

he should indeed

was

a

deadly

error

was conwhen

i n g r e e d b e c o m e s a f r u i t f u l c o u r s e t o p u r s u e if d o n e

o b e d i e n c e t o G o d (v. 3 5 ) . T h e r e a s o n f o r G o d ' s d i r e c t i o n t o

in

Balaam

to c o n t i n u e b e c o m e s a b u n d a n t l y clear as t h e story c o n t i n u e s in c h a p ters 2324‫־־‬, a n d

has

already

been

hinted

at in

Balak's initial

sum-

m o n s to B a l a a m : B a l a a m ' s ability to bless as well as curse. S o B a l a a m ' s prophetic

responsibility

to

speak

the

message

of G o d

is

repeated,

n o w w i t h t h e p r o s p e c t t h a t h e will g e n u i n e l y fulfil his m a n d a t e , t h o u g h it w i l l n o t b e w h a t

Balak wants or

As the story unfolds, thrice an unseeing a n d obstinate Balak o n a seeing B a l a a m , just as B a l a a m Balaam

urges Thrice

on

Israel,

each

angry

B a l a k loses his t e m p e r

and

dismisses B a l a a m , w a r n i n g h i m to leave quickly, a n d telling h i m

that

and

the G o d to

blessing

h a d u r g e d o n h i s ass.

31

Finally, a n

length

pronounces

even

expects.

emphasis.

of Israel has d e p r i v e d

receive.

Balaam

simply

him

replies

blessing with

o f all h e c o u l d

that

obedience

to

have God

greater

expected is

more

sinned for (‫ )כי‬I did not know . . .". Although this makes sense, the sense m a y be better if ‫ כ י‬is taken as asseverative, a n d the preceding ‫ ח ט א ת י‬is taken as a n indep e n d e n t exclamation; i.e. "I have sinned. T r u l y (‫ )כי‬I did not know that it was you . . .". T h e massoretic punctuation of ‫ ח ט א ת י‬with pausal zaqef qaton also suggests a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the word as an exclamation distinct f r o m the words which follow. Directly c o m p a r a b l e in terms of context a n d text (and punctuation) is Saul's confession to Samuel in 1 S a m . 15:24, w h e r e also I suggest that the first ‫ כ י‬is asseverative, a n d only the second ‫ כ י‬is causative; i.e. "I have sinned. T r u l y (‫ )כי‬I have transgressed the c o m m a n d m e n t of YHYVH a n d your words because (‫ )כי‬I feared the people . . .". A good preliminary guide to the complexities of asseverative ‫ כ״‬is J o ü o n / M u r a o k a # 1 6 4 b , 165b,e. 31 Credit for recognising the linkage between the ass episode a n d the wider structure of the story belongs, at least in recent times, I believe, to two Jewish scholars with a strong feel for H e b r e w narrative: D. D a u b e , Ancient Hebrew Fables (Oxford, 1973), pp. 1 4 - 1 6 , a n d R. Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative (London & Sydney, 1981), pp. 104-107. T h e point, so obvious once seen, has been missed by m a n y m o d e r n c o m m e n t a t o r s w h o have usually assumed the non-integral nature of the ass episode a n d have sometimes been so prepossessed with questions of traditionhistory a n d composition (usually ascribing two oracles each to J a n d E), that the actual p a t t e r n of three plus one, a n d the correlation with the ass episode, has r e m a i n e d effectively unnoticed; thus s t a n d a r d c o m m e n t a r i e s such as G.B. G r a y , Numbers (Edinburgh, 1903), pp. 307ff.; M . N o t h , Numbers (London, 1968; E T of G e r m a n of 1966), pp. 17Iff.; P J . Budd, Numbers (Waco, 1984), pp. 248ff.; E.W. Davies, Numbers (London, 1995), pp. 236ff.

important

than

unlimited

riches

13). 3 2

(24:10

Before

offers unsolicited oracles: a long oracle, w h i c h rious

departing

c l i m a x e s in a

victo-

l e a d e r f o r I s r a e l w h o w i l l d e f e a t m a n y , M o a b first o f all ( 2 4 : 1 7 b ) ,

a n d s o m e brief visions of glory a n d to Israel to discern To

disaster for other peoples

the kind of visions a p p r o p r i a t e G o d ' s will as B a l a a m

conclude,

story

it m a y

and

to

reflect

opposition

to

Balaam

be

the

has

near

learned

has.

helpful briefly to

further on -

to o n e w h o

the

peculiar

potentially

stand

back

nature

deadly

from

of the

adversary

the

angel's

who

can

initially b e c i r c u m v e n t e d (for h e o n l y takes his s t a n d w i t h i n t h e that

Balaam

is t a k i n g ) ,

inescapable. W h a t divine

but with

whom

an

encounter

is

road

ultimately

is t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h i s p a r t i c u l a r e x p r e s s i o n

(or w o m a n ) w h o b e g i n s to h a v e h e a l t h p r o b l e m s . W h e r e had

wanted, toms

of

anger?

A n analogy m a y p e r h a p s p r o v e helpful.33 C o n s i d e r an active

he

he

been

able

to

push

his

body

to

do

more

or

less w h a t

his b o d y starts t o f u n c t i o n d i f f e r e n t l y a n d to d i s p l a y

that

it h a d

never

displayed

before

-

man

previously

breathlessness,

he

sympvertigo,

s h a r p p a i n s , o r w h a t e v e r . T h e m a n k n o w s h i s b o d y a n d its p r e v i o u s capabilities, so h o w s h o u l d h e i n t e r p r e t toms? H e

these u n p r e c e d e n t e d

m i g h t decide (no d o u b t with a p p r o p r i a t e

medical

that his bodily s y m p t o m s a r e w a r n i n g signs of potentially

sympadvice)

dangerous

overload and that he can no longer d o what he did before, a n d h e b e g i n s to m o d i f y his activities so t h a t his b o d y r e t u r n s to

But h e m i g h t decide to ignore the bodily s y m p t o m s , dismissing as a m e r e passing irritant of n o real significance. S u p p o s e

so

normal. them

h e is i n

32 T h e tone of Balaam's words in 24:12,13 is elusive. For Balaam can easily sound complacent, as though his grasp of the basic moral a n d spiritual principle was consistent, w h e n in fact it h a d not been. H e is economical with the truth in omitting any reference to what h a d h a p p e n e d to him en route. Perhaps the narrator was content with the simple statement of a basic principle through a sense of what is dramatically appropriate at this m o m e n t of d e p a r t u r e (for if Balaam was going to explain to Balak what he h a d learned en route, the beginning of their e n c o u n t e r would have been the time for it, yet in that context also he simply reiterates the basic prophetic principle, 22:38). However, the way Balaam extends his earlier "I c a n n o t go beyond the word of Y H W H " (24:13a, cf. 22:18b) with "to d o anything, good or bad, of my own will" (‫ ) ל ע ט ו ת ט ו ב ה או ר ע ה מלבי‬m a y suggest at least to the reader, even if not to Balak, that Balaam h a d h a d to learn a h a r d way that a n obedient renunciation of self-will m a y be unexpectedly d e m a n d i n g . 33 M y analogy has obvious resonances with the famous designation, ascribed to St. Francis of Assisi, of one's body as "Brother Ass". T h e analogy is intended, however, as a genuine analogy a n d not a covert allegory - even though in some contexts the distinction between analogy a n d allegory m a y b e c o m e blurred.

the

middle

of an

important

project,

which

needs

his full

gies. S o h e m a k e s t h e l a t t e r d e c i s i o n , a n d c o n t i n u e s to p u s h

enerhimself

as previously. A f t e r a while, the s y m p t o m s recur, in m o r e a c u t e p r o l o n g e d f o r m . H e faces the s a m e choice as before. His p r o j e c t is still h i s symptoms

and

attack and drops The

first

priority, a n d

pushes on. A

so h e c o n t i n u e s

and

important

to ignore

few days later he has a m a j o r

the heart

dead.

analogy suggests a possible situation w h e r e there are

warn-

i n g signals w h i c h , w h i l e c l e a r o n o n e level, a r e s u c h t h a t t h e y b e m i s u n d e r s t o o d a n d i g n o r e d if t h e i r o b v i o u s

prima facie

can

significance

c o n f l i c t s w i t h o t h e r p r i o r i t i e s . W h a t is n e e d e d i n s u c h a s i t u a t i o n is careful d i s c e r n m e n t to

find

o u t w h a t the s y m p t o m s signify. O n

o n e h a n d , o n e m u s t attend to the precise n a t u r e of the On

the o t h e r h a n d , o n e needs a w i d e r k n o w l e d g e of the b o d y

health such that the symptoms can be

rightly

So too, I suggest, B a l a a m ' s p r e d i c a m e n t not only attention knowledge,

the

symptoms. and

understood.

with the angel

requires

to the ass's u n u s u a l b e h a v i o u r b u t also a

a f r a m e of reference, rightly to locate

and

wider

understand

that b e h a v i o u r . W i t h i n the context of the story that f r a m e of refere n c e is n o t s o m e f o r m o f a n c i e n t Testament

prophecy.

c u m b s to temptation

The

story

Israelite zoology b u t r a t h e r

is a s t o r y o f a p r o p h e t

Old

who

sue-

b y c o r r u p t i n g his p r o p h e t i c v o c a t i o n

through

a m b i t i o u s g r e e d . B a l a a m ' s p r o b l e m is a t h e a r t a m o r a l a n d

spiritual

failure. G o d ' s anger, a n d

the adversarial a p p e a r a n c e

of the

angel,

to that failure, to be u n d e r s t o o d

in t h e

moral

Specifically, the angel with the d e a d l y s w o r d represents the

moral

are the counterpart

a n d spiritual categories of p r o p h e c y .

and

spiritual

responsiveness

of G o d

to

Balaam's

self-seeking,

with

all t h e t w o - e d g e d n a t u r e o f d i v i n e e n c o u n t e r , w h o s e o u t c o m e is n o t determinable apart f r o m the h u m a n response to that encounter.

On

t h e o n e h a n d , t h e a n g e l m e a n s d e a t h if B a l a a m p e r s i s t s i n t h e

way

h e is g o i n g , f o r t h e c o r r u p t i o n o f p r o p h e t i c v o c a t i o n is a c o u r s e t h a t leads

is

not

i n s t a n t a n d o b v i o u s , for t h e a n g e l m a y initially b e c i r c u m v e n t e d

and

the

to d e a t h .

The

deadly

angel does not pursue

nature Balaam.

a l w a y s in the v e r y w a y in w h i c h possibility of d e t o u r i n g while

of Balaam's However,

Balaam

corrupting

the

angel

is g o i n g , a n d

still r e m a i n i n g

on

course

reappears the is

initial

progrès-

s i v e l y r e m o v e d . U l t i m a t e l y , t h e r e is n o a v o i d i n g d e a t h o n t h a t

par-

t i c u l a r r o a d - t h o u g h d e a t h w o u l d o n l y s t r i k e t h e o n e w h o is c h o o s i n g to go that way, a n d the innocent animal would r e m a i n

unscathed.

O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e r e is t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f r e p e n t a n c e a n d a t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of B a l a a m ' s

mission, a possibility initiated

by actions

of

d i v i n e m e r c y ( o p e n i n g t h e ass's m o u t h , o p e n i n g B a l a a m ' s eyes). T h i s m e r c y h u m b l e s B a l a a m b y c o n f r o n t i n g h i m w i t h his u t t e r t e n c e a n d s h o w i n g h i m h o w close to disaster his q u e s t h a d

incompebrought

h i m . But this m e r c y also t e a c h e s h i m t h e necessary lesson w h e n acknowledges prophet should

his sin, a n d speak.

so e n a b l e s

him

to go

and

speak

as

he a

BALAAM'S PROPHECIES AS INTERPRETED BY PHILO AND T H E ARAMAIC TARGUMS OF T H E PENTATEUCH BY C.T.R.

HAYWARD Durham

Discussing Philo's eschatological views, P e d e r B o r g e n has a r g u e d a

future

universal

dominion

kingly role of M o s e s

of the

as p r o m u l g a t o r

Hebrews,

bound

up

that

with

of G o d ' s cosmic law given

the to

t h e J e w s a t S i n a i , is f u n d a m e n t a l t o t h e s a g e ' s t h i n k i n g . P h i l o b e l i e v e d that the J e w i s h people w o u l d eventually realize their divinely p r o m i s e d destiny t h r o u g h the agency of a ' m a n ' , a c o m m a n d e r of the a r m y w h o w o u l d a p p e a r as w o r l d e m p e r o r . imbued

with

true prophecy,

had

foretold

Hebrew

Balaam, a Gentile

the

advent

of the

seer 'man'

a n d t h e f u t u r e e a t i n g u p of Israel's e n e m i e s : in short, Philo h a d

dis-

c e r n e d the ultimate goal of Israel's existence as the subjection of the h u m a n r a c e to G o d ' s universal law, the law w h i c h H e gave to Moses.1 This

essay a t t e m p t s

to show

that

Borgen's

thesis

finds

support

o n l y in P h i l o ' s o w n w r i t i n g s , b u t also in t r a d i t i o n a l J e w i s h of the B a l a a m as imperial suggest that

oracles.

of the

I t w i l l n o t e h o w a p t is B o r g e n ' s

'man'

the evidence

destined

to

arise f r o m

not

exegesis

description

Israel; a n d

allows for further definition of the

it

will

man's

' See P. Borgen, ' " T h e r e shall c o m e forth a M a n ' : Reflections on Messianic Ideas in Philo", in J . H . Charlesworth (ed.), The Messiah: Developments in Earliest Judaism and Christianity (Minneapolis, 1992), pp. 3 4 1 - 3 6 1 . For Philo's eschatological views, see H.A. Wolfson, Philo: Foundations of Religious Philosophy in Judaism, Christianity and Islam, 2 vols., ( C a m b r i d g e Mass., 2 n d ed. 1948), vol. 2, pp. 3 9 5 - 4 2 6 ; Borgen (1992), p p . 3 4 1 - 3 4 2 a n d literature t h e r e cited; R . D . H e c h t , "Philo a n d M e s s i a h " , in J . Neusner, W.S. G r e e n , a n d E. Frerichs (eds.), Judaisms and Thar Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era (Cambridge, 1987), pp. 139 148. Students disagree (inter alia) w h e t h e r messianism was central or tangential in Philo's thought; w h e t h e r he understated kingly messianic elements out of political expediency; a n d w h e t h e r his eschatological hopes stress messiah less than transformation of individual souls by the Logos. Conclusions of this essay suggest that messianism was important to Philo; that he predicted a royal messianic figure, but somewhat obliquely; a n d that both a messiah a n d enlightenment of the individual soul characterize the last days.

i d e n t i t y . It b e g i n s , h o w e v e r , w i t h n e c e s s a r y p r e l i m i n a r y about

Philo's treatment

of the B a l a a m

oracles.

observations

2

1. Balaam's Oracles in Philo: General Remarks T h r e e points must be emphasized. arate 24:3

oracles 9,

concerning

Israel

(Num.

1 5 - 1 9 ) : P h i l o r e d u c e d t h e s e t o t h r e e [Vit.

283-284, 289 For

of B a l a a m

First, t h e Bible r e c o r d s f o u r sep23:7-10, Mos.

I.

18;24‫־‬

278-279,

291). H i s love of a r i t h m o l o g y m a y explain this c h a n g e .

Philo, the n u m b e r

t h r e e is " a n

image

of a solid b o d y , since

a

s o l i d c a n b e d i v i d e d a c c o r d i n g t o a t h r e e - f o l d d i v i s i o n " (Leg. All.

1.3);

it is " f u l l a n d p e r f e c t , c o n s i s t i n g o f b e g i n n i n g , m i d d l e , a n d e n d "

(Qu.

Gen. I I I . 3 ) ; a n d t h e t r i a d is c o m p l e t e , " h a v i n g b e g i n n i n g , m i d d l e ,

and

e n d , w h i c h a r e e q u a l " (Qu.

Gen.

II.5). T h u s

Philo refers the

t o I s r a e l ' s b e g i n n i n g s i n t h e p a s t (Vit.

Mos.

h e r present status as divinely blessed

(e.g., Vit. Mos.

h e r f u t u r e v i c t o r i o u s d e s t i n y (Vit.

Mos.

oracles

I. 2 7 9 ) , o n I s r a e l ' s γ έ ν ε σ ι ς , I. 2 8 4 , 2 8 9 ) ,

I. 2 9 0 - 2 9 1 ) .

Signifying

and com-

pleteness, the n u m b e r three used to f o r m u l a t e B a l a a m ' s oracles invites t h e r e a d e r to r e g a r d t h e s e e r ' s w o r d s as a full e x p r e s s i o n o f Israel's significance. villain.5

S e c o n d l y , P h i l o a n d t h e R a b b i s insist t h a t B a l a a m w a s a Despite

this, P h i l o c o n t e n d s

uinely prophetic.

Balaam

that

his w o r d s

s p o k e his

first

about

Israel w e r e

gen-

oracle as o n e possessed

the p r o p h e t i c spirit (προφητικού π ν ε ύ μ α τ ο ς έπιφοιτήσαντος) w h i c h ridded ical

h i m o f h i s s o o t h s a y e r ' s c r a f t , s i n c e it w a s n o t sophistry

to dwell

alongside

277); the s e c o n d oracle h e I. 2 8 3 , Mos.

286); a n d

I. 2 8 8 ) .

the

Balaam

as G o d ' s i n s t r u m e n t ,

third

2

he

spoke

contributed expounding

i n g h i s o w n r e a s o n (Vit.

most

prophesied

Mos.

right

holy possession

(Vit.

in w o r d s n o t his o w n ένθους, inspired

nothing

for

another's words, without

had mag-

Mos.

I.

(Vit. Mos.

by G o d

to the oracles:

by

he

(Vit. spoke

employ-

I. 2 7 7 , 2 8 3 ) . E v e n a s a G e n t i l e

sooth-

O n the related text De Praem. 9 1 - 9 7 , 163-172, see Borgen (1992), pp. 3 4 2 - 3 4 3 , 348-351, 354-360. 3 See G. Vermes, " T h e Story of Balaam: T h e Scriptural Origin of H a g g a d a h " , in G. Vermes, Scripture and Tradition in Judaism ( l e i d e n , 2nd ed. 1973), pp. 127-177; J . R . Baskin, Pharaoh's Counsellors: Job, Jethro, and Balaam in Rabbinic and Patristic Tradition (Chico, 1983), pp. 9 4 - 9 6 ; M.S. M o o r e , The Balaam Traditions: Thar Character and Development (Atlanta, 1990), pp. 6 6 - 6 7 , 103; J . T . G r e e n e , Balaam and His Interpreters (Adanta, 1992), pp. 145-147; a n d M . M c N a m a r a , "Early Exegesis in the Palestinian T a r g u m (Neofiti 1) N u m b e r s 24", Proc. of the Irish Bib. Ass. 16 (1993), pp. 5 7 7 9 ‫ ־‬.

s a y e r , B a l a a m a c c u r a t e l y p r e d i c t e d t h e f u t u r e ( Vit. Mos. Inspired

by God,

t h e r e f o r e , his p r o p h e c y

q u a l i t y . 4 S o m u c h is e v i d e n t w h e n

I.

264-265).

w a s to be of

exceptional

Philo's w o r d s are j u x t a p o s e d

with

L X X ' s a c c o u n t of B a l a a m : never d o the latter refer to h i m as προφήτης o r say t h a t h e s p o k e in προφητεία, s a y i n g only that t h e Spirit of G o d c a m e u p o n h i m . ' R a t h e r , it is t h e T a r g u m s w h i c h m o s t c l o s e l y r e f l e c t Philo's

belief that

remarkable

Balaam's

oracles

about

Israel

were

those

of

W h e r e M T r e c o r d s t h a t B a l a a m " t o o k u p his p a r a b l e " , t h e

Targums

specify that h e " t o o k u p t h e p a r a b l e of his p r o p h e c y " ( N u m . 24:3, God

a

prophet.

15 in T N , which

PJ, F T V ,

came

upon

FTP; Num.

him

(MT

23:18 T N ,

of N u m .

23:7;

PJ). T h e spirit

24:2) was, for T O

of and

I J , " t h e spirit of p r o p h e c y f r o m b e f o r e t h e L o r d " . B a l a a m calls h i m self ‫ט ת ם ה ע י ן‬ TN,

FTP,

cealed den

(Num.

and

from

24:3,15), the o n e

FTP

took

this to m e a n

all t h e p r o p h e t s

mysteries

prophets were

[‫סת״מיא‬

‫|ררדא‬

revealed

"with that

the penetrating "what

is r e v e a l e d

to h i m " ;

which

been

to h i m " . '

had

had

been

PJ put

concealed

These Targums

eye".6 con-

"for

hid-

from

elevate the

the reve-

lation to B a l a a m a b o v e t h a t g r a n t e d to o t h e r p r o p h e t s , f u r t h e r stressing

his status

FTP,

FTV)

of this verse

4

in

that

their

versions

of N u m .

24:4 with

the

"mysteries of p r o p h e c y were revealed

calls

these

"hidden

mysteries".

How

note

(TN,

to h i m " :

these

PJ

Targums

For Philo's theory of prophecy, see Baskin (1983), pp. 9 3 - 9 4 ; J . R . Levison, "Inspiration a n d the Divine Spirit in the Writings of Philo J u d a e u s " , JSJ 26 (1995), pp. 2 7 1 - 3 2 3 . J . R . Levison, The Spirit in First Century Judaism (Leiden, 1997), pp. 29 33, 47 55, 2 2 9 2 3 3 ‫ ־‬examines Philo's Balaam story, c o m p a r i n g it with that of Josephus: both writers, in his view, distance G o d ' s direct p o w e r f r o m Balaam, by m a k i n g an angelic spirit possess him. H e argues that both have been influenced by {inter alia) Hellenistic treatises on o r a c u l a r inspiration, including Plutarch's essay De Defectu Oraculorum. H e says little, however, about the content of the oracles, a n d does not discuss Philo's emphasis on Balaam's seeing rather than hearing them. See f u r t h e r below. 5 So M T a n d L X X of N u m . 24:2; cf. L X X N u m . 23:6. See further V e r m e s (1973), pp. 144 145, a n d G. Dorival, IM Bible d'Alexandrie, vol. 4 Les Nombres (Paris, 1994), pp. 434, 444 445. 6 So rendered by M. R o s e n b a u m a n d A . M . Silbermann, Pentateuch with Targum Onkelos, Haphtaroth and Rashi's Commentary, N u m b e r s (New York, 1946), pp. 118, 120. 7 T h e s e T a r g u m s e x p o u n d the first H e b r e w word twice, first as f r o m root ‫ט ח ם‬ "to close" implying something concealed, a n d then as f r o m root ‫" ט ח ם‬to o p e n " as it occurs in some R a b b i n i c texts: see also b. Sanh. 105a; Nid. 31a, a n d B. Grossfeld, The Targum Onqelos to Leviticus and Numbers (Edinburgh, 1988), p. 136; H . Rouillard, IM Péricope de Balaam (Nombres 22~24) La Prose et les 'Oracles' (Paris, 1985), pp. 3 4 7 - 3 5 0 ; Dorival (1994), p. 138; A. Salvesen, Symmachus in the Pentateuch (Manchester, 1991), p. 133; M . M c N a m a r a , Targum Neofiti 1: Numbers (Edinburgh, 1995), p. 136.

relate to Philo's description

of B a l a a m

constitutes the

final

general

point. LXX etrating

translated Balaam's self-description "the m a n with the

pen-

eye"

"the

(Num.

24:3,15)

as

ό άνθρωπος ό άληθινώς όρων,

m a n w h o truly sees". T h i s Philo r e t a i n e d as i n t r o d u c t i o n to his t h i r d and

final

B a l a a m oracle. L X X of N u m . 24:4 a n d

16 d e s c r i b e

Balaam

as " h e a r i n g t h e u t t e r a n c e s of G o d " ;

2 4 : 1 6 says that h e " k n o w s

knowledge

both

of the M o s t

High";

and

verses state

that

t h e vision of G o d in sleep, his eyes b e i n g u n c o v e r e d " . Philo altered these words, to m a k e

Balaam

the

"he

saw

radically

s p e a k of himself as όστις καθ'

ϋπνον εναργή φαντασίαν είδε θεοΰ τοις της ψυχής άκοιμήτοις ΰμμασιν, "the

one

unsleeping

who

saw

eyes

in

of the

sleep

a

soul"

clear

(Vit.

presentation

Mos.

I. 2 8 9 ) .

of G o d He

with

suppressed

r e f e r e n c e s to B a l a a m ' s h e a r i n g G o d , a n d his k n o w l e d g e of t h e H i g h . H i s e m p h a s i s is w h o l l y o n ered eyes" of L X X

become

sight.

the

M o s t tellingly, B a l a a m ' s

"the unsleeping eyes of the

the Most

"uncov-

soul".

S o m e t h i n g e x t r a o r d i n a r y h a s h a p p e n e d . By so s p e a k i n g of B a l a a m , Philo has invested h i m with the c h a r a c t e r of Israel, w h o s e n a m e first

was Jacob.

God",

as

P h i l o insists t h a t

distinct

from Jacob,

'Israel' which

means

means

"the one who 'practiser'

and

at sees

who

r e c e i v e s i n s t r u c t i o n b y h e a r i n g . 8 T h e o b j e c t o f I s r a e l ' s s i g h t is k n o w l edge

of the divine,

makes

plain:

as the following passage

it s h o u l d

be

f r o m De

carefully c o m p a r e d

with

Mig. Philo's

Abr.

words

a b o u t Balaam. H e r e Philo c o m m e n t s on J a c o b ' s change of n a m e Israel, indicating vision t h r o u g h rior

to

39

to

t h e e y e s o f t h e s o u l w h i c h is s u p e -

hearing:

F o r t h e c o i n o f l e a r n i n g a n d t e a c h i n g f r o m w h i c h J a c o b t o o k his s u r n a m e is e n g r a v e d a n e w i n t o I s r a e l , " t h e o n e w h o s e e s " . N o w t h r o u g h t h i s c o m e s a b o u t t h e s e e i n g o f t h e d i v i n e light, w h i c h d o e s n o t d i f f e r f r o m k n o w l e d g e , w h i c h o p e n s t h e e y e o f t h e soul a n d l e a d s it t o p e r c e p tions m o r e l u m i n o u s a n d clear t h a n those w h i c h c o m e b y hearing.9

8 O f n u m e r o u s examples, see especially Leg. All. 11.34; 111.172,186; De Conf. 56, 72; De Proem. 27; De. Ebr. 82; De Mig. 125, 200, 224. For etymologies of H e b r e w names, Philo possibly used Jewish tradition: see G.J. Brooke, Exegesis at Qumran: 4QFl0rilegium in its Jewish Context (Sheffield, 1985), pp. 17-25. L.L. G r a b b e , Etymology in Early Jewish Interpretation: The Hebrew Names in Philo (Atlanta, 1988), argues (pp. 102-113) that Philo m a y have used a n onomasticon: for discussion of Israel, see pp. 172-173. 9 See also De Somn. 1.129. For Philo's interpretation of J a c o b ' s e n c o u n t e r at the J a b b o k , w h e n his n a m e was changed to Israel, see A. Butterweck, Jakobs Ringkampf am Jabbok: Gen. 32, 4jf. in der jüdischen Tradition bis zum Frühmittelatter (Frankfurt-amM a i n , 1981), pp. 6 2 7 1 ‫ ־‬.

Why about

should B a l a a m b e p r e s e n t e d as p r o p h e s y i n g the past, present

edly his self-designation

and

in persona Israel,

future of the J e w i s h people?

as "the

man

who

Undoubt-

truly sees" ( L X X

Num.

2 4 : 3 , 1 5 ; cf. 23:9) g a v e P h i l o r e a s o n t o link t h e p r o p h e t w i t h

Israel;

b u t J e w i s h t r a d i t i o n e n c o u r a g e d h i m to g o f u r t h e r . F o r a c c o r d i n g

to

T N , PJ, F T V , a n d a T o s e f t a T a r g u m o f G e n . 4 9 : 1 , t h e d y i n g J a c o b Israel h a d s u m m o n e d his twelve sons to a n n o u n c e to t h e m " t h e

hid-

d e n mysteries", including the secret of Israel's r e d e m p t i o n ; but mysteries, w h e n

revealed,

were

immediately

concealed

T h e T a r g u m s , however, declare that Balaam knew "hidden

these him.10

from

mysteries"

in his p r o p h e c y , t h e very t h i n g s h i d d e n f r o m J a c o b - I s r a e l . T h u s Targums,

like

Jacob-Israel.

Philo,

This

made

is n o t

of

Balaam

surprising.

a

The

latter-day Targumists

the

mouthpiece could

not

of fail

to n o t i c e s t r o n g similarities in w o r d i n g b e t w e e n J a c o b - I s r a e l ' s

bless-

ings in

these

Gen.

49

and

Balaam's

oracles.

Most

striking a m o n g

a r e t h e lion i m a g e r y a p p l i e d b y J a c o b to t h e t r i b e of j u d a h in 4 9 : 9 , r e f l e c t e d closely in N u m .

23:24 and

erence

both

to

a ‫שבט‬,

'sceptre',

in

Gen.

Gen.

24:9; a n d mysterious 49:10

and

Num.

ref-

24:17.

T h e s e , a n d o t h e r verbal similarities, allowed the T a r g u m i s t s to interprêt B a l a a m ' s oracles with a n eye to J a c o b ' s blessings." T h a t followed a similar p r o c e d u r e

is i n d i c a t e d

by a small but

detail. In p a r a p h r a s i n g B a l a a m ' s lion i m a g e r y

Philo

significant

h e t w i c e ( Vit. Mos.

I.

284, 291) uses f o r m s of the v e r b έγείρειν to refer to the rousing

or

rising u p o f t h e lion a l l u d e d to in N u m . 2 3 : 2 4 ; 2 4 : 9 . L X X

used

this

s a m e v e r b a t G e n . 4 9 : 9 , w h e r e J a c o b a s k s w h o shall r o u s e (τίς έγερεΐ) t h e l i o n ' s w h e l p w h i c h is J u d a h ? S t r i k i n g l y , L X X form

of this v e r b

in

their

the f a m o u s 'star' w h i c h Jacob:

the

Hebrew

(‫)וירד‬, b u t L X X

translation

Balaam

states

that

of N u m .

used a 24:19,

compound speaking

p r e d i c t e d as d e s t i n e d to arise this

star

shall

"exercise

of

from

dominion"

r e n d e r e d t h e v e r b as " h e shall a w a k e " or "rise

up"

10 For the Tosefta T a r g u m , see M.L. Klein, fíenizah Manuscripts 0J Palestinian Targum to the Pentateuch, vol. 1 (Cincinnati, 1986), pp. 1 6 2 1 6 3 ‫ ־‬, which speaks of iTTDD Π " Π (cf. FTV). T N a n d PJ speak of the mysteries as ‫סתמ־״א‬, as in their version of N u m . 24:3. O n the T a r g u m s of G e n . 49:1 a n d the Balaam oracles, see also Λ.Ν. Chester, Divine Revelation and Divine Titles in the Pentateuchal Targumim ( T ü b i n g e n , 1986), pp. 199 203. 11 Note references to ‫ ט ר ף‬, 'prey', in N u m . 23:24 a n d G e n . 49:9; the verb ‫ כ ר ע‬, "bow d o w n " in N u m . '24:9 a n d G e n . 49:9, a n d the 'lioness' with the lion in N u m . 24:9 a n d G e n . 49:9; a n d cf. B.B. Levy, Targum Neophyti 1: A Textual Study, vol. 1 ( L a n h a m , 1986), pp. 2 8 1 - 2 8 2 ; R. Syrén, The Blessings in the Targums (Âbo, 1986), pp. 54, 102, 196; a n d J . L . W . Schaper, " T h e U n i c o r n in the Messianic Imagery of the Greek Bible", JTS 45 (1994), pp. 130 131.

(έξεγερθησεται). It s e e m s likely t h a t L X X lexical

connection

between

the

fourth

had

already established

Balaam

oracle

blessing of J u d a h , which later interpreters might In

fine,

and

uttered

in t h e p e r s o n

presented

as three

oracles,

of Jacob-Israel.

thereby

he evidendy knew the L X X use

of exegetical

s i g n i f y i n g its c o m p l e t e n e s s

version of the Balaam

details

high-

This prophecy

p e r f e c t i o n a s it s p e a k s o f I s r a e l ' s p a s t , p r e s e n t , a n d f u t u r e .

makes

Jacob's

exploit.12

Philo p o r t r a y e d B a l a a m ' s oracles as p r o p h e c y of the

est o r d e r ,

found

also in

a

he and

Although

narrative,

the Targums.

Philo These

clarify his p u r p o s e in r e - w r i t i n g B a l a a m ' s oracles, a n d m u s t n o w

be

addressed.

2 . Philo's

Examination

version

of the oracles

of the substance

and

the Aramaic

of B a l a a m ' s

Targums

three oracles shows

P h i l o is f a m i l i a r w i t h t r a d i t i o n s o f J e w i s h

exegesis preserved

Aramaic

only

Targums.

Here

we

can

discuss

a

selection

g e r m a n e t o t h e t a s k i n h a n d . T h u s i n t h e first o r a c l e B a l a a m of

that

in

of

the

those

declares

Israel: B e h o l d , t h e p e o p l e shall d w e l l a l o n e , a n d shall n o t b e r e c k o n e d a m o n g t h e n a t i o n s . ( N u m . 23:9)

Philo recasts this as follows to speak

of

. . . a p e o p l e w h i c h shall d w e l l o n its o w n , n o t n u m b e r e d w i t h o t h e r n a t i o n s - n o t b e c a u s e t h e y d w e l l a t r a n d o m , n o r b e c a u s e o f t h e segr e g a t i o n o f t h e i r l a n d s ( f r o m t h o s e o f o t h e r s ) , b u t b e c a u s e o f t h e distinctive c h a r a c t e r of their special c u s t o m s not being mixed with o t h e r s so as t o c h a n g e t h e c u s t o m s o f t h e i r f o r e f a t h e r s . ( Vit. Mos. I. 278) T h i s o w e s little t o L X X , w h o r e m a i n e d c l o s e t o t h e o r i g i n a l b u t it r e c a l l s F T P a n d

FTV

(cf. a l s o

Hebrew;

TN):

Behold, these people e n c a m p o n their own, a n d d o not mix t h e m selves w i t h t h e l a w s (or. c u s t o m s , A r a m a i c ‫ ) נ י מ ו ס י‬o f t h e n a t i o n s . More Israel's

complex fidelity

is w h a t

follows.

to ancestral custom,

Having

made

Philo uses his

p r o p h e t i c u t t e r a n c e s to d e s c r i b e Israel's origins in

Balaam first

proclaim

of the

Vit. Mos.

I.

three 279:

12 In L X X of the Pentateuch, έγείρειν occurs at G e n . 41:4, 7; 49:9; Exod. 5:8; 23:5 (some Mss.); N u m . 10:35 (some Mss.), a n d έξεγείρειν at G e n . 28:16; 41:21; N u m . 10:35; 24:19. For its rendering of H e b r e w " h a v e d o m i n i o n " in this last verse, see Dorival (1994), p. 140.

W h o h a s f o u n d a c c u r a t e l y t h e first f o u n d a t i o n o f t h e b e g i n n i n g (γενέσεως) of these people? T h e i r bodies are f o r m e d of h u m a n seed, but their s o u l s a r e s p r u n g f r o m d i v i n e s e e d ; t h e r e f o r e , t h e y a r e n e a r o f kin t o God.13 Philo seems to be e x p o u n d i n g

LXX

Num.

23:10, where

Balaam

asks w h o h a s c a l c u l a t e d a c c u r a t e l y t h e seed of J a c o b , a n d w h o

shall

number

seem

the p e o p l e s of Israel? Yet o n

not to provide about

closer inspection

Philo with a springboard

Israel's b e g i n n i n g a n d

LXX

for such specific

character. T h e

comments

H e b r e w of N u m .

23:9

a n d its T a r g u m s o f f e r e d h i m m u c h m o r e . I n t h e H e b r e w o f t h i s v e r s e , Balaam which The

sees Israel " f r o m the may

equally

Targums

be

top

rendered

understood

them

of the "from

rocks", ‫צ ד י ם‬

‫מראט‬,

words

beginning

of the

rocks".

the

thus, with reference to the spiritual

c h a r a c t e r of Israel's great f o u n d i n g ancestors, m a k i n g B a l a a m

say:

F o r I see this p e o p l e b e i n g led a n d w a l k i n g in t h e m e r i t o f t h e r i g h t eous fathers w h o are likened to m o u n t a i n s , A b r a h a m , Isaac, a n d J a c o b ; a n d t h r o u g h the m e r i t of the r i g h t e o u s m o t h e r s w h o a r e likened to t h e hills, S a r a h , R e b e c c a h , R a c h e l a n d L e a h . 1 4 Like and

Philo's exegesis,

spiritual

this takes a c c o u n t

affinity. O n

the

latter,

Philo

both

of Israel's

ancestry

is f o r c e f u l : I s r a e l ' s

souls

a r e of divine origin, b e i n g n e a r of kin to G o d , άγχίσποροι θεοΰ. word

ά γ χ ί σ π ο ρ ο ς is r a r e i n P h i l o ' s w r i t i n g s ; a n d

its u s e h e r e

The

relates

the Israel of B a l a a m ' s p r o p h e c y b o t h with their righteous

ancestors,

and

virtue

in

144 Philo speaks

of

w h o s e c o m p a n y dwells m a n , w h o

is

with

all t h o s e

whose

a c c o r d with G o d ' s law.

15

reason

T h u s in

r a t i o n a l n a t u r e s like t h e

stars i n

"near

the

of kin

Patriarchs

to

God":

(De Plant. (Quis Rerum

purest form

12;

stars

De Gig.

leads

them

to practise

De Op. Mundi are

divine,

unblemished

souls

7-8) a n d especially represent

86ff.) to w h o m

G o d promised that their

in the

seed

" See Colson's note in Philo VI, p. 420, w h e r e he renders καταβολή as 'sowing' rather than 'foundation': he gains support from Philo's use of the word in De Op. Mundi 132; Qu is Rerum 115; Spec. Ixg. III.36; Leg. ad Gaium 54. 14 T N of N u m . 23:9; see also PJ, F T P , a n d F T V . O n L X X of N u m . 2 3 : 9 - 1 0 , see Dorival (1994), pp. 4 3 5 - 4 3 6 . For 'rocks' as Patriarchs a n d 'hills' as Matriarchs, see T N , PJ, F T P of G e n . 49:26; D e u t . 33:15; F T P of Exod. 17:12; Exod. Rab. 16:8; Numb. Rab. 20:19; b. RH l i a ; Tanh. Balak 1'2; Mekh. de R. Ishmael Amalek 1:116-118; N.A. van Uchelen, " T h e T a r g u m i c Versions of D e u t e r o n o m y 33:15: S o m e R e m a r k s on the Origin of a Traditional Exegesis", JJS 31 (1980), p p . ' 1 9 9 209‫ ;־‬Syren (1986), p. 59; M c N a m a r a (1995), p. 131. 15 For Philo's other uses of άγχίσπορος, see De Op. Mundi 144; Spec. Leg. IV. 14, 236; De Virt. 80. In what follows, Philo applies Balaam's words about Israel to practisers of virtue: see f u r t h e r Borgen (1992), pp. 346 351.

s h o u l d b e like t h e s t a r s ( G e n .

15:5). T h e

Patriarchs a n d their

right-

e o u s c h i l d r e n a r e p r i v i l e g e d , l i k e all w h o o b e y G o d ' s l a w : t h e y l i v e f o r e v e r a s s t a r s (De Dec. God

for people

who

are

49), realizing t h e destiny i n t e n d e d

"near

Neither the H e b r e w nor L X X and

the association

seem removed

of t h e m

of J a c o b ?

FTP

of kin"

to

of Balaam's

with those

Him first

"near

and

23:10, which

FTV

asks w h o

translate the

(Spec. Leg.

by

I V . 14).

oracle refer to stars, of kin" to G o d

from the words of Scripture; but

t o t h e stars in N u m .

will

may

the T a r g u m s

has counted

refer

the

dust

question:

W h o c a n n u m b e r t h e y o u n g m e n o f t h e h o u s e o f J a c o b , o f w h o m it w a s s a i d t h a t t h e y s h o u l d b e a s n u m e r o u s as t h e s t a r s o f h e a v e n ? 1 6 Here

the

Targums

writings a n d

stars,

introduce

significant

directly r e l a t e d to his views o n

G o d . In brief, the T a r g u m s of N u m . 2 3 : 9 1 0

elsewhere

in

Philo's

souls " n e a r of kin" ‫־‬

ical origins, spiritual c h a r a c t e r , a n d h e r n u m b e r s like t h e stars. elements

lay the f o u n d a t i o n

for Philo's exegesis,

not

easily

f r o m L X X , b u t entirely c o m p r e h e n s i b l e in the light of t h e

may be rendered

These derived

Targum.

Philo's second B a l a a m oracle p a r a p h r a s e s N u m . 23:19, the of which

to

catalogue Israel's phys-

Hebrew

as

G o d is n o t m a n , t h a t h e s h o u l d lie, n o r a s o n o f m a n , t h a t h e s h o u l d r e p e n t . H a s h e s a i d , a n d shall h e n o t p e r f o r m it? O r h a s h e s p o k e n , a n d shall h e n o t e s t a b l i s h it? LXX

altered

Balaam's

opening words,

saying that

God

is n o t

m a n t o w a v e r , n o r like a s o n o f m a n t o b e t h r e a t e n e d ; b u t t h e f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n s o f t h e o r i g i n a l . 1 ‫ ׳‬P h i l o (Vit.

Mos.

ever,

before

follows the

with an expanded

opening

Hebrew

of the

verse,

like

retained

I. 283), h o w continuing

interpretation:

H e will u t t e r a b s o l u t e l y n o t h i n g a t all w h i c h shall n o t b e s t e a d f a s t l y c o m p l e t e d , s i n c e his w o r d is his d e e d .

16 T h e H e b r e w of 23:10 begins: " W h o has counted the dust of J a c o b , a n d the n u m b e r of the fourth part of Israel?" This recalls G o d ' s promises to A b r a h a m a n d J a c o b that their descendants should be like the dust of the earth: see G e n . 13:16 (where the same verb 'count', ‫מנה‬, is used) a n d 28:14, neither of which, however, has any reference to 'stars'. T h e s e are introduced by the T a r g u m s : cf. T N , " W h o can n u m b e r the young m e n of the house of J a c o b , of w h o m it was said that they should be blessed like the dust of the earth? O r w h o can n u m b e r one of the four orders of the c a m p s of Israel, of w h o m it was said, they shall be as n u m e r o u s as the stars?" 17 See f u r t h e r Dorival (1994), pp. 4 3 8 - 4 3 9 .

TN,

FTP, FTV

and T O

eliminate the questions of the second

half

of the verse, t u r n i n g t h e m into s t a t e m e n t s . T O of N u m . 2 3 : 1 9 recalls Philo's

paraphrase:

T h e w o r d o f G o d is n o t like t h e w o r d s o f t h e s o n s o f m a n . S o n s o f m a n say, a n d tell lies. A l s o it is n o t like t h e d e e d s o f t h e s o n s o f flesh, w h o d e c r e e t h a t a c t i o n b e t a k e n , b u t r e p e n t o f it. H e says a n d p e r f o r m s , a n d all his w o r d h e e s t a b l i s h e s . Again

in

the

second

oracle,

Philo

makes

Balaam

describe

Israel's

present status by saying that G o d , w h o scattered the Egyptians

and

brought t h e m u p from their land, conspicuously covers t h e m with s h i e l d (Vit. Hebrew

Mos.

I. 2 8 4 ) . H e

reports

that

is e x p o u n d i n g N u m .

Israel's G o d

is w i t h

k i n g is i n h i s m i d s t . N o t h i n g i n t h e prepares explain

us

for m e n t i o n

of a

shield;

him,

Hebrew but

23:21, where

and

the shout

or L X X

TN

of this

(cf. F T P

and

a

the of

a

verse FTV)

that

T h e w o r d o f t h e L o r d t h e i r G o d is w i t h t h e m ; a n d t h e t r u m p e t - b l a s t o f t h e g l o r i o u s s p l e n d o u r o f t h e i r k i n g is a s h i e l d o v e r t h e m . Philo's c o r r e s p o n d e n c e with T a r g u m i c exegesis s h o w n here could illustrated further. H e its s e n s e too,

in

uses L X X ' s vocabulary,

to i n c o r p o r a t e recounting

notions

Balaam's

attested

prophecy,

in

only to d e p a r t

the

shows

Targum.

be

from

Josephus,

knowledge

of

tradi-

tions f o u n d in T a r g u m , d e m o n s t r a t i n g their c u r r e n c y in his d a y strengthening the case for Philo's k n o w l e d g e of t h e m : G e z a has presented With

due

minate

the evidence

care,

for this, w h i c h

therefore, T a r g u m i c

Philo's re-written

Balaam

need

material

has perceived

that

be

to

illu-

Philo fastened u p o n

Israel's victory

over

hymn

E g y p t at t h e E x o d u s as a g u a r a n t e e of f u t u r e victories. roborated of N u m .

used

oracles.

3. Imperial victory and the triumphal Borgen

repeated.'8

not be

may

19

T h i s is c o r -

b y his r e t a i n i n g B a l a a m ' s t w o a l m o s t identical 23:22; 24:8 at

Vit. Mos.

and

Vermes

utterances

I. 2 8 4 , 2 9 0 w i t h i n h i s s e c o n d

and

third B a l a a m oracles respectively. Since h e has c o n d e n s e d four

bib-

l i c a l o r a c l e s i n t o t h r e e , t h i s is o f m o m e n t : second

18 19

h e uses o n e verse in

oracle, speaking mostly of Israel's present, a n d the o t h e r

See V e r m e s (1973) passim. See Borgen (1992), pp. 3 5 2 - 3 5 4 .

his in

t h e t h i r d o r a c l e , d e a l i n g w i t h Israel's f u t u r e . A t r a n s l a t i o n o f t h e H e b r e w of t h e verses yields: G o d brings t h e m ( N u m . 24:8 has ' h i m ' ) o u t f r o m Egypt: he has as it w e r e the h o r n s (or: strength) of a wild ox. I n t e r p r e t e r s c o u l d not i g n o r e t w o s u c h verses, loosely p h r a s e d slightly d i f f e r i n g f r o m e a c h

other, separated

and

only by a brief

inter-

veiling text. B o t h L X X a n d T a r g u m s h e d light o n w h a t Philo

made

of t h e m . First, the m a j o r i t y of L X X witnesses t o N u m . 2 3 : 2 2 the verse to

took

mean:

G o d is the O n e w h o brings them o u t f r o m Egypt: H e has as it w e r e the glory of a n u n i c o r n (δόξα μονοκέρωιος). H e r e the unicorn's glory can belong only to G o d , a n d w h a t calls a " s p i r i t u a l i z i n g t r a n s l a t i o n " h a s b e e n a d o p t e d .

20

Schaper

This has

no

b e a r i n g o n Philo's second a n d third B a l a a m oracles, w h e r e he takes the beast with

one

horn

as a description

I s r a e l f r o m E g y p t " a s o n e m a n " (Vit. Mos.

of Israel: G o d

brought

I. 2 8 4 ) a n d is l e d b y G o d

f r o m E g y p t " a s a s i n g l e a r m y w i n g " ( V i t . M o s . I. 290). 2 1 T h e a m b i g u ous L X X

of N u m .

24:8, however, allows such an exposition:

God

b r o u g h t him o u t o f E g y p t a n d he ( u n d e r s t o o d a s m e a n i n g I s r a e l ) h a s glory.22

an unicorn's

T h e T a r g u m s of N u m . 23:22; 24:8, however, took the 'horns' "strength

of a wild o x " as attributes of G o d , w h o

Israel at the E x o d u s . F T P a n d FT V of b o t h verses

had

or

redeemed

read:

G o d w h o redeemed and brought them out redeemed from Egypt, s t r e n g t h a n d praise a n d e x a l t a t i o n b e l o n g to h i m . PJ is s i m i l a r , a d d i n g ' p o w e r ' t o t h e list. T N a n d T O o m i t r e f e r e n c e s to r e d e m p t i o n , T O

listing o n l y " s t r e n g t h a n d e x a l t a t i o n " as b e l o n g -

ing to G o d ; otherwise, they agree with the F r a g m e n t T a r g u m s . l a n g u a g e of the T a r g u m s of N u m .

The

23:22; 24:8 recalls T a r g u m s

of

t h e h y m n s u n g a f t e r t h e E x o d u s . It is c a l l e d " t h e h y m n o f t h i s p r a i s e " ( T N Exod.

15:1) o r " t h e p r a i s e o f t h i s h y m n " ( F T P , F T V , P J , a n d

glosses of T N

Exod.

15:1). I n it, G o d

is s t y l e d " t h e s t r e n g t h

and

m i g h t y O n e o f o u r p r a i s e s " ( P J ; cf. T N , T O , F T P E x o d . 15:2). I s r a e l must 20

'exalt' G o d

(PJ, F T P ,

FTV

Exod.

15:2). G o d ' s

'power'

and

See Schaper (1994), pp. 1 2 0 1 2 1 ‫ ־‬, and Dorival (1994), p. 138. See further Borgen (1992), p. 352. 22 See also LXX in Codex Alexandrinus of Num. 23:22; but the unicorn as such has no place in Philo's work. 21

' s t r e n g t h ' a r e a c c l a i m e d (PJ, F T P , F T V E x o d . 15:7; T N , F T P E x o d .

1 5 : 1 3 ; T N , PJ E x o d .

" f e a r e d in p r a i s e s " ( P J , F T P ,

FTV

Exod.

15:3; T O , T N

1 5 : 1 8 ) . G o d is t h e 15:11), w h o s e

a n d ' p o w e r ' d e s t r o y e d t h e E g y p t i a n s ( T N , PJ, F F V The

Targums

attributes

took Balaam's words about

of G o d

revealed

in the

Exodus,

Exod. ù ‫״‬

e

'strength'

Exod.

15:16).

the wild ox to

mean

later celebrated

in

the

h y m n h o n o u r i n g his t r i u m p h . P h i l o u n d e r s t o o d this h y m n a s a d d r e s s e d to " G o d

t h e g i v e r o f v i c t o r y a n d t h e g l o r i o u s l y v i c t o r i o u s " (De

Agr.

79) a n d s u n g b y all t h e m e n o f I s r a e l , " n o t w i t h b l i n d i n t e n t i o n , b u t s e e i n g k e e n l y " (De Agr. 8 1 ) . N o w t h e T a r g u m i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e p h r a s e " h o r n s of a wild o x " helps to explain the otherwise baffling m e n t i o n of a h y m n at the e n d of Philo's second B a l a a m oracle, p a r a phrasing L X X

Num.

23:24,

B e h o l d , t h e p e o p l e shall rise u p like a lion's c u b , a n d like a lion it shall exult: it shall not sleep until it eat p r e y a n d d r i n k the b l o o d of the w o u n d e d . Philo retains s o m e L X X v o c a b u l a r y , b u t gives t h e verse a d i f f e r e n t sense: I see the p e o p l e rising like a lion's c u b , a n d like a lion exulting: h e shall eat his fill of p r e y a n d take for drink the b l o o d of the w o u n d e d ; a n d w h e n he is satiated h e will n o t t u r n to sleep, b u t u n s l e e p i n g h e will sing t h e h y m n of victory, έγρηγορώς τον έπινίκιον ασεται ϋμνον. ( Vit. Mos. I. 284) N o t h i n g in t h e Bible suggests this c l i m a x of Philo's s e c o n d oracle. T h e

Targumic

evidence

Balaam

is t h u s e s p e c i a l l y v a l u a b l e ,

and

is

b e s t a p p r e c i a t e d i n l i g h t o f P h i l o ' s o v e r a l l t r a i n o f t h o u g h t . F i r s t ( Vit. Mos.

I. 2 8 2 ) h e tells h o w B a l a k s e n t B a l a a m

to get g o o d

(αισίους) by m e a n s of birds a n d voices (οιωνούς καί φήμας). h o w e v e r , p r o p h e s i e d that G o d w o u l d b e a shield for the

auspicies Balaam, Hebrews:

h e h a d s c a t t e r e d t h e evils o f t h e E g y p t i a n s a n d b r o u g h t u p I s r a e l a s o n e m a n . T h e r e f o r e H e b r e w s d i s r e g a r d o m e n s of b i r d s (οιωνών) a n d o r a c l e - m o n g e r i n g , t r u s t i n g i n t h e O n e R u l e r o f t h e w o r l d (Vit.

Mos.

I. 2 8 3 - 2 8 4 ) . T h e n B a l a a m s e e s t h e p e o p l e r i s i n g like a l i o n t o s i n g the victory

hymn.

All t h i s s m a c k s o f t h e R o m a n t r i u m p h . T h e w o r d s έ π ι ν ί κ ι ο ν ύ μ ν ο ν in p a r t i c u l a r suggest c h a n t s s u n g d u r i n g t h e t r i u m p h a l p r o c e s s i o n a victorious 23

imperatorP

To

qualify for a triumph,

the victor

of

must

This very phrase is found in Plutarch's Life of Romulus 16 describing one of the archetypical triumphs of a Roman leader.

h a v e b e e n a m a g i s t r a t e p o s s e s s i n g h i s o w n auspicia,

t h a t is, t h e

to consult the o m e n s , especially those of birds: at least

five

right

thousand

of a foreign e n e m y m u s t h a v e b e e n killed, w i t h o u t r i g h t victory e n s u ing. T h e

victor must have b e e n

granted

the

right

to

retain

acclaimed

his

impenum

imperator, within

and have

the

R o m e . S u c h w a s t h e c u s t o m in t h e last d a y s of t h e R o m a n As an

adult, however,

Empire

established

Philo would

by

Augustus,

have known

when

triumphs

been

boundaries

of

republic.

the custom became

of

the

the pre-

rogative of the e m p e r o r himself o r m e m b e r s of his family.24 O n

one

level,

tri-

umph

the

message

of the O n e

is p l a i n . God,

the Exodus.

represents, w h o umphal

Israel,

Balaam

prophesy

the

of the world", celebrated

by

I. 2 7 8 2 7 9 ‫ ) ־‬i n t h e i r t r i u m p h a l h y m n

This emperor's

p r o p h e s y i n g in persona

makes

the " e m p e r o r

h i s u n i q u e p e o p l e ( V i t . Mos. 25

Philo

triumph

r e q u i r e s n o auspicia:

does without them -

Balaam,

like t h e p e o p l e

he

' u n s l e e p i n g ' , " w i d e a w a k e " (έγρηγορώς) sing t h e

o d e in h o n o u r of G o d

the

at

tri-

victor.

T h e r e is, h o w e v e r , a n o t h e r s e n s e o f t h e w o r d s a b o u t t h e

triumphal

h y m n , w h i c h u s e f u t u r e t e n s e s a b o u t it a n d h i n t a t v i c t o r i e s y e t t o b e won.

Furthermore,

the

role

of M o s e s

as

Israel's

(earthly)

imperator

in t h e d e f e a t of the E g y p t i a n s , a l t h o u g h n o t explicitly

acknowledged,

would

A

be

evident

victory achieved

to a n y J e w without

a s a v i c t o r y o v e r auspicia

the

reading

Philo's words.

taking of auspicies

themselves,

and

may

resounding

be

construed

over the polytheistic

reli-

gion which they represent. Philo's w o r d s imply future victories (however understood) for Jewish h i s t r e a t i s e De

Vita

monotheism

Contemplativa

over pagan

polytheism,

as

shows.

T h e r e , B a l a a m ' s p r o p h e c y of the t r i u m p h a l h y m n c h a n t e d by u n s l e e p i n g is f u l f i l l e d a m o n g t h e T h e r a p e u t a e . 2 6 T h e y t r u l y

the

represent

24 Philo's emphasis on the bird o m e n s (again at Vit. Mos. I. 287) confirms that he here speaks in terms of a triumph a n d its necessary auspicia: see details in H.S. Versnel, Triumphus: An Inquiry into the Origin, Development and Meaning of the Roman Triumph (Leiden, 1970), pp. 1 7 4 - 1 9 3 , a n d (for the relationship of auspicia to Imperium) pp. 3 0 4 - 3 5 5 . For bird omens, see also M o o r e (1990), pp. 6 6 - 6 7 . Space forbids discussion of religious aspects of the R o m a n t r i u m p h , which m a y illuminate f u r t h e r what Philo makes Balaam say in this second oracle. 25 See above a n d PJ of N u m . 23:24 w h e r e Israel's likeness to a lioness is interpreted to m e a n that she is unique, .‫יחידאה‬ 26 For this group, see Philo's De Vita Contemplativa, relevant passages of which are given in G. V e r m e s a n d M . G o o d m a n (ed.), The Essenes according to the Classical Sources (Sheffield, 1989), pp. 7 5 9 9 ‫ ; ־‬a n d see E. Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ, vol. 2, G . Vermes, F. Millar, a n d M . Black (eds.) (Edinburgh, 1979), pp. 5 9 1 - 5 9 7 .

Israel, " t h e o n e w h o sees G o d " , since t h e y a r e c o n s t a n t l y t a u g h t u s e s i g h t a n d t o a s p i r e t o t h e v i s i o n o f t h e O n e w h o e x i s t s ( Vit.

Con.

10-13). T h e y m i n d only the pursuit of virtue a n d c o n t e m p l a t i o n God, which

t h e y c e l e b r a t e e a c h y e a r in a g r e a t festival (most

hymns

of t h a n k s g i v i n g ( ε υ χ α ρ ι σ τ ή ρ ι ο υ ς ΰ μ ν ο υ ς ) t h r o u g h o u t t h e n i g h t in of the victory

Exodus until

( Vit.

dawn;

Con. then,

feast b e g a n ,

song

84

which

88). T h e

more

wide

they greet

s i g h t e d r e a s o n i n g (Vit.

Moses

and

participants awake

sunrise

Miriam

(διεγηγερμένοι)

with

led

celebrate

a prayer

than

imi-

after

without

for truth

of

likely

Pentecost). T h i s celebration culminates in h y m n s , dancing, a n d

tation

to

the sleep

when and

the

sharp-

Con. 8 9 ) . T h e s e p e o p l e , s a y s P h i l o , l i v e f o r t h e

c o n t e m p l a t i o n of n a t u r e , a n d in soul alone; t h e y a r e citizens of h e a v e n a n d o f t h e w o r l d , p r e s e n t e d t o t h e F a t h e r a n d m a k e r o f all b y

( Vit. Con.

vitue

90).

This description those w h o

marks the T h e r a p e u t a e

have fought and obtained

sions. T h u s

i n De

Sob.

as s u p r e m e

examples

spiritual victory over the

13 P h i l o r e m a r k s t h a t M o s e s '

hymn

is

of

passung

by " t h e o n e w h o sees" after d e f e a t i n g Egypt, the e n e m y of the soul; a n d i n De Ebr.

1 0 4 - 1 2 1 , s p e a k i n g of the w a r w a g e d in e a c h

body between virtue a n d

h a s vision of t h e O n e w i t h t h e t h o u g h t l e s s m a n w h o fails to the cause of things a n d ends u p fashioning 'gods'. S u c h produces rebuked

atheism

in

at the E x o d u s a n d and

the

in his h y m n

Abraham

are

human

the passions, he contrasts the person

souls

of

the

senseless,

t h e s o n g of t h e well ( N u m . of the

discern

polytheism Abraham

14:22).27 M o s e s led t h e

of thanks (Gen.

leaders

whom

who

hymn

song

21:16-18): both

of triumph

and

he

thanksgiv-

ing, τον έπινίκιον καί εύχαριστικον ϋμνον, celebrating the t r i u m p h virtue

in t h e soul. S i m p l y e x p r e s s e d ,

everyone

who

overcomes

of the

passions, e m b r a c e s virtue, a n d arrives at t h e vision of G o d (and

thus

shares Israel's character) m a y c h a n t the imperial t r i u m p h h y m n ,

now

and

in t h e f u t u r e . I n this sense, t h e r e

win, the most important

of w h i c h

mission

to the universal

cosmic

Borgen

has

come

27

about

perceived, through

Philo

are yet victories for J e w s

will b r i n g all m a n k i n d

Law,

believed

the

Law

that

the ' m a n ' of Balaam's

this

given last

into

to Moses. victory

to

subAs

would

prophecy.28

For affinities between Philo's depiction of A b r a h a m a n d his description of the T h e r a p e u t a e , see R. M a r t i n - A c h a r d , Actualité d'Abraham ( N e u c h â t e l , 1969), p p . 132-137. 28 B o r g e n (1992), p p . 3 5 3 - 3 6 0 . F r o m w h a t has b e e n said h e r e a b o u t the T h e r a p e u t a e , it should be evident that there is truth in H e c h t ' s c o m m e n t (1987),

4. The "man who shall come forth" The

Hebrew

text of Balaam's

declares of Israel

third

and his antecedents

oracle

(Num.

24:7)

cryptically

that

W a t e r shall f l o w f r o m his b u c k e t s , a n d his s e e d shall b e o n m a n y w a t e r s ; a n d his k i n g shall b e h i g h e r t h a n A g a g , a n d his k i n g d o m shall be exalted. LXX

'decoded'

this m e t a p h o r i c a l

language to

yield:

A m a n shall c o m e f o r t h f r o m his s e e d a n d shall e x e r c i s e l o r d s h i p o v e r m a n y n a t i o n s ; a n d his k i n g d o m shall b e e x a l t e d h i g h e r t h a n G o g , a n d his k i n g d o m shall b e i n c r e a s e d . 2 9 Philo r e p r e s e n t s this in his t h i r d oracle, d e a l i n g with Israel's future, w o r k i n g c h a n g e s to L X X w h i c h a r e italicized in t h e t r a n s l a t i o n He

m a k e s B a l a a m s a y ( Vit. Mos.

I.

below.

290):

At some time a m a n shall c o m e f o r t h f r o m you a n d h e shall get the mastery o v e r m a n y n a t i o n s : a n d the k i n g d o m of this man, advancing day by day shall b e exalted to the height. Balaam,

speaking in the p e r s o n

of Israel, predicts his c o m i n g

from

' y o u ' , I s r a e l ' s c h i l d r e n h e r e a d d r e s s e d . H e will g e t m a s t e r y ( ε π ι κ ρ α τ ή σ ε ι ) r a t h e r t h a n exercise lordship (κυριεύσει), suggesting a n extension his p o w e r t h r o u g h struggle, c o n f i r m e d b y t h e n o t e t h a t his

kingdom

will a d v a n c e d a i l y . T h e i m a g e r y s u g g e s t s a m i l i t a r y c o m m a n d e r a Roman sition. T h e The

general

e x e r c i s i n g impenum,

goal of his k i n g d o m

exegesis shows

preserved in T a r g u m .

inexorably overcoming

is " t h e h e i g h t " , t h a t is,

affinities with

both

Philo compressed

cles i n t o t h r e e , e n c o u r a g e d

LXX

and

of

like

oppo-

heaven.

interpretation

B a l a a m ' s four biblical

n o d o u b t b y verbal similarities

ora-

between

t h e t h i r d a n d f o u r t h o r a c l e s . N o t e w o r t h y is N u m . 2 4 : 1 7 , t h e p r o p h e c y in t h e f o u r t h o r a c l e t h a t " a s t a r shall m a r c h a sceptre arise out of Israel", w h i c h s h o u l d c o m e f r o m J a c o b , a n d a man i n g a direct link w i t h

LXX

Num.

LXX rise

forth from Jacob,

took to m e a n

that a

and star

u p o u t of Israel, thus invit-

24:7's prediction

o f a man

com-

p. 162 that for Philo "the first line of m e a n i n g for Messiah a n d Messianic Era was the inner experience in which the soul was transformed. T h e Logos turns m a n from the chaos of the senses a n d pleasure toward the intelligible world". But that is not the whole story as regards the Balaam oracles. 29 O n this exegesis, see Dorival (1994), pp. 139, 446.

i n g forth.30 T h i s last v e r s e c o u l d t h e n b e r e a d in t h e light of which

Hebrew

and

LXX

ing the man's destruction and

an

unnamed

city:

a m p l i f y (in N u m . of Moabites,

here

we

have

24:1819

‫) ־‬

the sons of Seth, a

ready-made

24:17, by

list o f

"many

n a t i o n s " w h i c h t h e m a n will s u b d u e o n e b y o n e . P h i l o s a y s of the

star

p r e d i c t e d in N u m .

nothing

2 4 : 1 7 ; b u t stars f e a t u r e d in his

inter-

p r e t a t i o n of these oracles, as h e i n t i m a t e s t h a t t h e w h o l e J e w i s h pie

may

God".

31

be In

regarded

as stars

insofar as

this last o r a c l e , h e a p p e a r s

they

are

"near

deliberately

peo-

of kin

to focus o n

' m a n ' as single l e a d e r a n d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of t h e m u l t i t u d i n o u s w h o a r e " n e a r of kin to

of N u m .

to the

'stars'

God".

P h i l o h a s links w i t h t r a d i t i o n s p r e s e r v e d in T a r g u m . W e give then T N ,

predict-

Edomites,

TO,

24:7.

T h e k i n g w h o shall b e a n o i n t e d f r o m a m o n g his s o n s shall i n c r e a s e a n d h a v e d o m i n i o n o v e r m a n y n a t i o n s ; a n d his k i n g shall b e s t r o n g e r t h a n A g a g , a n d his k i n g s h i p shall b e e x a l t e d . T h e i r k i n g shall a r i s e f r o m a m o n g t h e m , a n d t h e i r r e d e e m e r shall b e f r o m a m o n g t h e m . H e shall g a t h e r f o r t h e m t h e i r exiles f r o m t h e p r o v i n c e s o f t h e i r e n e m i e s ; a n d his s o n s shall h a v e d o m i n i o n o v e r m a n y p e o p l e s . H e shall b e s t r o n g e r t h a n S a u l [ w h o ] s p [ a r e d ] A g a g , k i n g o f t h e A m a l e k i t e s ; a n d t h e k i n g s h i p o f K i n g M e s s i a h shall b e e x a l t e d . essential

exe-

gesis. T h e ' w a t e r ' o f t h e H e b r e w text b e c o m e s a p e r s o n , ' m a n '

In certain

details, L X X

and

Targum

who

h a s a ' k i n g d o m ' in L X X

take

and

share the same

' k i n g ' in T a r g u m ; b o t h v e r s i o n s

its ' f l o w i n g ' f r o m t h e ' b u c k e t s ' t o i n d i c a t e f r o m Israel; a n d

the

b y this individual.

32

of

the

Philo.

33

Hebrew

"many

the origin of this nations"

ruled

L X X , h o w e v e r , speak of G o g rather t h a n

Agag

text:

this

waters" become

is f o l l o w e d

neither

"many

person

by

Targums

F i n a l l y , t h e T a r g u m s r e f e r t h i s v e r s e a n d its c o m p a n i o n

nor

by

Num.

24:17 to an anointed king or Messiah. L X X are m o r e reticent, speak-

30 For a succinct account of messianic interpretation of this verse, see Dorival (1994), pp. 4 5 1 4 5 3 ; for its use in eschatological prayer at Q u m r a n , see B. Nitzan, Qumran frayer and Religious Poetry (Leiden, 1994), pp. 2 1 6 - 2 1 7 . O n the Balaam oracles a n d Q u m r a n in general, see M c N a i n a r a (1993), pp. 61 62 a n d the literature there cited. 31 See above pp. 25.26‫־־‬ 32 See further Dorival (1994), p. 139, a n d R. le D é a u t , Targum du Pentateuque III Nombres (Paris, 1979), pp. 2 3 0 - 2 3 3 . 31 M e n t i o n of G o g m a y allow L X X to avoid reference to a Davidic m o n a r c h : so Dorival (1994), pp. 139-140; but see Schaper (1994), pp. 127 131 for a different view.

i n g o f t h e ' m a n ' a n d " h i s k i n g d o m " . W h i l e a t first g l a n c e P h i l o s e e m s to reflect the reserve of L X X , closer inspection suggests that he in m i n d

a

figure

arising f r o m the tribe of J u d a h ,

t h e r e s t o f h i s t h i r d o r a c l e ( Vit. Mos.

has

as a s u m m a r y

I. 2 9 0 - 2 9 1 ) will h e l p t o

of

show.

F o r m e n t i o n o f t h e ' m a n ' is f o l l o w e d b y t h e s e c o n d e x p o s i t i o n o f t h e " h o r n s of t h e wild o x " : G o d h a s a c t e d as Israel's g u i d e f r o m

Egypt,

l e a d i n g t h e m a s a s i n g l e a r m y - w i n g c o n s u m i n g its e n e m i e s a n d their fatness to the (cf. N u m .

marrow

and

destroying

them

with

archery

24:8). T h e oracle e n d s with Philo's version of N u m .

a prediction that the people, after the a p p e a r i n g of the shall rest l y i n g fearing no-one, a n d rouses him. w h o curse you

24:9,

'man',

d o w n like a lion o r a l i o n ' s c u b , e n t i r e l y d i s d a i n f u l , p r o d u c i n g f e a r in o t h e r s . W r e t c h e d is h e w h o d i s t u r b s T h o s e w h o bless y o u a r e w o r t h y o f b l e s s i n g , b u t t h o s e a r e w o r t h y of curses.

Philo h a s so r e s t r u c t u r e d kingdom

eating

his

in t h e s a m e

the oracle

as to p l a c e t h e

'man'

and

his

n e t w o r k of ideas as the single a r m y - w i n g

led

by divine guidance u n d e r Moses f r o m Egypt. As Borgen has

shown,

this p a s t a c t i v i t y o f G o d ' s p r o v i d e s t h e g u a r a n t e e f o r w h a t will pen

in t h e f u t u r e .

to rest in

The

the m a n n e r

24:9, which separate

34

concludes

biblical

284; N u m .

the

of the

Vit. Mos.

two

outcome

oracles.

mentions

24:9 in

significant as the

final

is t h e l y i n g d o w n

of a lion, e l a b o r a t e d Philo

lion

on

the

has yet

of

Israel

basis of

Num.

retained

I. 2 9 1 ) . E v i d e n t l y , h e r e g a r d s t h e m

as

their

in

Vit.

two Ι.

with

23:24

the Mos.

Biblical verses

(Num.

hap-

'unicorn'

imagery.

T h e y s o m e h o w e n c a p s u l a t e I s r a e l ' s d e s t i n y a s s h e is l e d b y t h e

'man',

w h o s e k i n g d o m a d v a n c e s a n d is e x a l t e d t o t h e h e i g h t . L X X o f N u m . 2 4 : 9 a l o n e c a n n o t a c c o u n t f o r P h i l o ' s w o r d s . It

reads:

H e l a y d o w n , h e r e s t e d like a l i o n a n d like a l i o n ' s c u b : w h o shall r a i s e h i m u p ? T h o s e w h o bless y o u a r e b l e s s e d , a n d t h o s e w h o c u r s e you are cursed. Philo m a d e

the

first

p a r t of this u t t e r a n c e refer to the future,

elim-

inated the question, a n d a d d e d r e m a r k s a b o u t the lion's lack of fear and

his i n c u l c a t i o n

gesis recalls T N

of terror in others. In certain

of N u m .

24:9,

respects, his

exe-

reading

T h e y r e s t a n d e n c a m p ( N g l a d d s : in t h e m i d s t o f w a r ) like a lion a n d like a l i o n e s s , a n d t h e r e is n o n a t i o n o r k i n g d o m w h i c h shall s t a n d before them). . .

34

Borgen (1992), pp. 3 5 3 - 3 5 7 .

The in

repetition of the lion i m a g e r y recalls Israel's praise of J u d a h

Gen.

Israel,

49:8fif.; a n d

given

that

Balaam

prophesies

in

the person

of

t h i s e m p h a s i s o n t h e l i o n a n d its c u b c o m p e l s u s t o r e t u r n

to

t h e w o r d s of J a c o b - I s r a e l in blessing his sons, a n d their amongst

Philo's fellow J e w s .

blessing of J u d a h

in G e n .

Here

is T N ' s

version

49:9, so similar to T N

I liken y o u , Ο J u d a h , to a lion's c u b . Y o u f r o m his killers. I n t h e m a t t e r o f T a m a r , m y Y o u rest a n d e n c a m p in t h e m i d s t o f w a r like a n d t h e r e is n o k i n g d o m o r p e o p l e t h a t shall TN

and

other Targums

ing with

have

Balaam's prophecy.

ing the ' m a n '

and

undoubtedly

of Jacob-Israel's of N u m .

24:9.

rescued m y son J o s e p h son, you were innocent. a lion a n d like a lioness; stand against you.35

associated Jacob's

Philo has done

the lion i m a g e r y

interpretation

to an

much

the same,

army encamping;

he remarks before embarking on Balaam's

final

bless-

oracle, the

linkfor

as

Hebrews

w e r e e n c a m p e d (έστρατοπεδευκότας) in o r d e r , r e s e m b l i n g a city r a t h e r than

a

than

direct; but

camp

(Vit.

Mos.

I. 2 8 8 ) .

its s u s t a i n e d

Philo's

use of lion

language

is a l l u s i v e

rather

of terms

associ-

imagery,

ated with the imperial t r i u m p h , a n d of t h e m e s shared with tradition, combine

to suggest that the ' m a n ' w h o m

the Jews' representative and of J u d a h ,

a lion of a m a n

final

Targumic

he expected

as

leader would e m e r g e f r o m the tribe

to r e p r e s e n t a lion-like

people.

5. Conclusion T h e c o n t e n t of B a l a a m ' s oracles as re-written b y Philo supports

sev-

eral elements of P e d e r Borgen's interpretation of the sage's

eschato-

logical

and

opinions.

By m a k i n g

Balaam

speak

in persona

Israel,

r e p r e s e n t i n g h i m a s u t t e r i n g three o r a c l e s ( t h u s s i g n a l l i n g t h e i r

by

com-

p r e h e n s i v e character), Philo invests t h e p r o p h e c i e s with massive a u t h o r ity. T h i s a u t h o r i t y h e r e i n f o r c e s w i t h f r e q u e n t a l l u s i o n s t o

traditional

J e w i s h exegesis of t h e s e difficult u t t e r a n c e s . U n d e r l y i n g his t i o n o f t h e m is h i s a w a r e n e s s o f t h e i r a f f i n i t i e s w i t h J a c o b ' s of his royal son J u d a h in G e n . 4 9 : 8

explanablessing

12, a n a w a r e n e s s h e s h a r e s w i t h

t h e T a r g u m s . H e m a k e s B a l a a m p r e d i c t t h a t I s r a e l , a f t e r b a t t l e , will s i n g a v i c t o r y h y m n : t h i s is w i t h o u t p r e c e d e n t i n t h e B i b l i c a l t e x t the oracles, b u t m a y be explained with the help of the T a r g u m s

35

pp.

of

and

See also T O , a n d B. Grossfeld, The Targum Onqelos to Genesis (Edinburgh, 1988), 162-163.

their exposition

of Balaam's

the sort s u n g at a R o m a n

words.

Philo

triumph,

is s u n g h a s n o t r u c k ( u n l i k e a n

h a s in

although

mind

the O n e

earthly R o m a n

a

hymn

imperator)

with

nous birds. M e n t i o n of the h y m n , nonetheless, emphasises the rial c h a r a c t e r

o f I s r a e l ' s l e a d e r , b e it G o d

throughout

of

to w h o m

it omi-

impe-

the ages,

t h e ' m a n ' w h o shall c o m e in f u t u r e to get m a s t e r y o v e r n a t i o n s .

or

This

l e a d e r will e v e n t u a l l y r u l e t h e w o r l d . A n d g i v e n P h i l o ' s s t r o n g affinities with t h e T a r g u m s t h r o u g h o u t his e x p o s i t i o n of B a l a a m ' s w o r d s , his a w a r e n e s s of t h e links b e t w e e n

those words

and

Gen.

and

49:8-12,

it is l i k e l y t h a t t h e ' m a n ' w i l l b e l o n g t o t h e r o y a l t r i b e o f J u d a h . 3 6

Philo acts primarily oracles. H e tution

takes a n d

of a w o r d

tion.

as a Biblical e x e g e t e in r e - w r i t i n g t h e

Space

moulds

or phrase

prevents

LXX

Balaam

to his n e e d s b y c a r e f u l

substi-

t o b r i n g it i n t o c o n f o r m i t y w i t h

full c o m p a r i s o n

of Philo's

these oracles with the T a r g u m s ; but e n o u g h

exegetical

tradi-

work

in

has b e e n said to

show

b e y o n d r e a s o n a b l e d o u b t t h a t h e k n e w of, a n d used, t r a d i t i o n a l

mate-

rial s u r v i v i n g t o d a y in t h o s e texts.37 T h i s e v i d e n c e n o t o n l y c o n f i r m s B o r g e n ' s e m p h a s i s o n Philo as a Biblical exegete, b u t also gives s o m e support to Wolfson's view that Philo's notions of the messianic agree

in

Israel.

38

some In

measure

with

contemporary

supporting conclusions

advanced

t h i s s t u d y h a s (it is h o p e d ) u n d e r l i n e d

ideas by

in

the

these two

age

Land

of

scholars,

the i m p o r t a n c e of the

content

of B a l a a m ' s p r o p h e c i e s as r e p r e s e n t e d b y Philo. H e evidently r e g a r d e d t h e m as h a v i n g g r e a t a u t h o r i t y . W h i l e m u c h h a s b e e n w r i t t e n Philo's messianism

in his writings

as a whole,

about

his r e - s t r u c t u r i n g

B a l a a m ' s w o r d s a n d his motives for that re-writing h a v e b e e n

of

com-

paratively neglected. T h i s essay represents a m o d e s t a t t e m p t to address that

neglect.

36 Pace S. Sandmel, Philo of Alexandria: An Introduction (Oxford, 1979), pp. 1 0 9 - 1 1 0 a n d H e c h t (1987), pp. 1 3 9 - 1 6 8 , the latter seeing Philo's messianism as at best " a "realized eschatology" in which exegetical elements that might be nationalized a n d identified with specific mythical or historical figures in o t h e r systems of J e w i s h t h o u g h t . . . b e c a m e allegorical designators for the Logos . . ." (p. 162). 37 See Vermes, (1973). 38 See P. Borgen, "Philo of Alexandria", in M . E . Stone (ed.), Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period, C R I N T Section 2 (Assen, 1984), pp. 2 5 9 - 2 6 4 ; article "Philo of Alexandria", in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, D . N . F r e e d m a n (ed.), vol. 5 (New York, 1992), pp. 3 3 7 - 3 3 9 . Wolfson (1948), vol. 2, pp. 3 9 5 - 4 2 6 , advances some T a r g u m i c evidence in support of his case. H e c h t ' s strictures on this (1987), pp. 143, 164, n. 12) should be reconsidered, given that Wolfson did not have access to T a r g u m Neofiti.

T H E F U T U R E IN E H E B O O K O F

CHRONICLES

BY P.B.

DIRKSEN1 Leiden

D i d t h e C h r o n i c l e r ' i n t e n d to c o n v e y t o his r e a d e r s a specific e x p e c t a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e f u t u r e , b e it ' e s c h a t o l o g i c a l ' , ' m e s s i a n i c ' ,

'royal-

istic', o r o t h e r w i s e ? T h i s q u e s t i o n h a s b e e n a p o i n t o f d e b a t e at least s i n c e G . V o n R a d a r g u e d t h a t t h e r e is a s t r o n g m e s s i a n i c

(Geschichtsbild;

in C h r o n i c l e s This

debate

has not

see

expectation

below).'

led to a consensus.

On

the contrary:

is still a w i d e s p e c t r u m o f o p i n i o n . I n g e n e r a l t h e r e a r e t w o

there

diamet-

rically o p p o s e d views, o n e a s s u m i n g a specific e x p e c t a t i o n , the

other

r e f u t i n g this a s s u m p t i o n a n d a r g u i n g that the C h r o n i c l e r w a s

basic-

a l l y s a t i s f i e d w i t h t h e s i t u a t i o n a s it The

first

was.

v i e w is a d v a n c e d b y t h e m a j o r i t y o f s c h o l a r s , b u t

among

t h e m t h e r e is a g a i n a g r e a t v a r i e t y o f v i e w s w i t h r e s p e c t t o b o t h arguments

and

the conclusions. T h e r e

are, generally speaking,

l i n e s o f a r g u m e n t a t i o n : (1) t h e i d e a l i z e d p o r t r a y a l o f ( c e r t a i n o f ) t h e p a s t i m p l i c i t l y r e f e r s t o its r e a l i z a t i o n stood

either

in

a

historical

d y n a s t i c p r o m i s e (1 C h r o n .

or

in

an

in the

eschatological

future, sense;

the two

aspects under(2)

the

17), a l s o i n v i e w o f t h e r e f e r e n c e s t o it

1 Full details of works referred to by a u t h o r ' s n a m e a n d d a t e of publication can be found in the bibliography at the e n d of the article. I a m indebted to my form e r missionary colleague, M r . R i c h a r d G . Gibson, Lakeland, Fl., for correcting the English of this article at a n u m b e r of points. 2 In the past it was assumed by most scholars that Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah formed a single work, "the Chronistic History", from the h a n d of "the Chronicler". T h i s consensus was challenged by S. J a p h e t , " T h e Supposed C o m m o n Authorship of Chronicles a n d E z r a - N e h e m i a h Investigated Anew", VT 18 (1968), pp. 330 71, a n d H . G . M . Williamson, Israel in the Books of Chronicles (Cambridge, 1977), pp. 5 70. Most scholars now n o longer adopt this unity. In this article "the C h r o n i c l e r " is the a u t h o r of 1 / 2 Chronicles only. 3 V o n R a d (1930) m a d e this messianic expectation an important aspect of the Chronicler's message, but, as Williamson (1983), pp. 306 7, has noted, the messianic interpretation of the N a t h a n passage in 1 C h r o n . 17, which plays a central role in V o n R a d ' s a r g u m e n t , was d e f e n d e d as early as 1870 by C.F. Keil, Biblischer Commenlar über die nachexiluchen Geschichtsbücher: Chronik, Esra, Nehemia und Esther, B C A T (Leipzig, 1870), p. 164.

elsewhere

in C h r o n i c l e s ,

r e m a i n s valid a n d

a w a i t s its f u l f i l m e n t .

the latter case a distinction can again be m a d e between a and

a

'royalist'

expectation,

Davidic restoration

the

latter

in t h e c o u r s e of

being

the

In

'messianic'

expectation

of

a

history.

W i t h i n t h e c o n f i n e s o f t h i s a r t i c l e it is n o t p o s s i b l e t o g i v e a s u r v e y , let

alone

a

discussion,

arguments. A

of the

various

views

and

their

u s e f u l s u r v e y is p r e s e n t e d b y H . G . M .

underlying

Williamson,

in

his article " E s c h a t o l o g y in C h r o n i c l e s " of 1977, in w h i c h special a t t e n t i o n is p a i d , a m o n g o t h e r s , t o M o s i s a n d As

an

orientation

m a j o r views,

it

including

may

suffice here

those

of s o m e

themselves on the subject m o r e

below.4

Plöger, m e n t i o n e d to

mention

authors

who

briefly

have

some

expressed

recently.

A p r o m i n e n t r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e e s c h a t o l o g i c a l v i e w is R . in his i m p o r t a n t

monograph

overall

of Chronicles.

structure

that of Saul, which

of

The

past consists of three

typifies t h e exilic situation

is t h e

era

of completion.

the exile, w h e r e a s

the period

With

the

of D a v i d

first

finds

period

the

periods:

(1 C h r o n .

10),

o f D a v i d , w h i c h is t h e p e r i o d o f p r e p a r a t i o n , a n d t h a t o f which

Mosis

1973. M o s i s bases his v i e w o n

that

Solomon,

corresponds

its c o r r e s p o n d e n c e

t h e post-exilic p e r i o d , in w h i c h t h e w r i t e r h i m s e l f lives a n d w h i c h still

the

time

of preparation.

This

will

be

followed

by

final

fulfilment.

Apart from other reservations one

may

have, a major

views David the

and

Chronicler

Solomon

are separated presents

as

a

unity.

whereas

we

not

may

wonder

toward

hidden

in

such great the

overall

in a t t r i b u t i n g to a w r i t e r

whether

it is p r o b a b l e

almost literary

writing

is if

This

holds

good

a

of

expectations, yet keeps these implicit structure.

that

these

Moreover,

a half millennia a g o o u r sense of w h a t constitutes one

cautious

from each other,

them

two and

directed

be

objection,

although

clarity,

must

future

1 3 2 ) h a s r i g h t l y p o i n t e d o u t , is t h a t i n

consciously

is

5

S o l o m o n i c e r a , w h i c h will b e o n e o f

as Williamson (1977, p.

a

in

also

for

the

T.-S.

Im

following studies. As

indicated

in

the

subtitle

of his

defends the view that the Chronicler's

1985

monograph,

idealized portrayal of

David

implicidy expresses the expectation of a Davidic messiah. This s i a n i c e x p e c t a t i o n is, h o w e v e r , n o t e s c h a t o l o g i c a l b u t t h e o c r a t i c :

mesthe

4 A n o t h e r extensive survey is to be f o u n d in Kelly (1996), pp. 135-55. See for literature on the subject also I. Kalimi, The Book of Chronicles - A Classified Bibliography (Jerusalem, 1990), pp. 1 0 4 - 5 (Eschatology a n d Messianism). 5 M Ū sis (1973), e.g. pp. 1 6 4 - 1 6 7 .

future and

Davidic

ruler

of Israel

will a p p e a r

in

the

course

of

his r u l e will b e t h e r e a l i z a t i o n o f G o d ' s r u l e o v e r his A n o t h e r view has been a d v a n c e d

monograph.

He

argues

that

the

by E . M .

Moses

history

people.6

D ö r r f u s s in his

passages

1994

in C h r o n i c l e s

are

additions by a later r e d a c t o r w h o w a s critical of the d o m i n a n t attributed to D a v i d / S o l o m o n tic e s t a b l i s h m e n t by emphasising on

based

on

a n d t h e J e r u s a l e m t e m p l e w i t h its c u l -

royal authority.

the role of M o s e s a n d

his G o d - g i v e n

role

authority. T h e

He

tried to redress

the early cultic o r d e r

Moses

redaction,

and

this

based

with

it

the

B o o k o f C h r o n i c l e s i n its final f o r m ( p p . 1 7 , 2 8 2 ) , s t a n d s o v e r a g a i n s t both

viewing

the

present

cultic practice

as a n

ideal

situation,

and

e x p e c t i n g a r e s t o r a t i o n o f t h e D a v i d i c d y n a s t y . It p r e s e n t s a " t h e o k r a t i s e h e Z u k u n f t s e r w a r t u n g " ( p . 2 8 2 ) , t h a t is t h e e x p e c t a t i o n o f a f u t u r e in w h i c h G o d ' s r u l e o v e r h i s p e o p l e will b e u n i m p e d e d ( p p . 1 1 5 - 1 8 ) . The

m a j o r advocate of the view that the dynastic promise

to a messianic expectation monograph

(but see n o t e

in C h r o n i c l e s w a s V o n Rad

Rad

argues on

in his

the

C h r o n i c l e r ' s c h a n g e s i n t h e N a t h a n p a s s a g e (2 S a m . 7 / /

1 Chron.

17,

esp. vs.

elsewhere

in

the allusions to the N a t h a n

the

1930

basis of

11) a n d

3). V o n

points

prophecy

Chronicles that the dynastic promise

refers to "etwas

("something

an

logical

basically

new"),

expectation";

p.

and

123); t h e

to

Grundneues"

'Enderwartung'

Davidic

throne

is n o

("eschatolonger

s o m e t h i n g 'innerweldich' ('inner-worldly'), but "die S c h w e r p u n k t Institution wird

in d i e T r a n s z e n d e n z

verlegt" ("the point of

just

dieser gravity

o f t h i s i n s t i t u t i o n is r e l o c a t e d i n t o t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a l s p h e r e " ; p .

126).

A l t h o u g h this e x p e c t a t i o n d o e s n o t t a k e a c e n t r a l p l a c e (p. 128) t h e r e is " e i n s t a r k e r Z u g m e s s i a n i s c h c r E r w a r t u n g " ( " a s t r o n g t r a i t o f m e s sianic e x p e c t a t i o n " p. In in

two

135).'

articles, the

1983, Williamson

sianic expectation

first m e n t i o n e d argues that

in C h r o n i c l e s ,

above,

t h e r e is n o e s c h a t o l o g i c a l

the Davidic

dynasty. Williamson's in

1 Chron.

(1 C h r o n . 2 2 : 9 1 0 ; 2 8 : 6

6

published or

mes-

b u t a 'royalist' e x p e c t a t i o n : in

future, within the course of history, Y H W H

dynastic promise

the second

will r e s t o r e t h e r u l e

v i e w is b a s e d

17 a n d

the

on

a study of

a l l u s i o n s t o it

7; 2 C h r o n . 6 : 1 6 , 4 2 ; 7 : 1 7

the of the

elsewhere

18; 1 3 : 5 - 8 ; 2 1 : 7 ;

Im (1985), pp. 164-179. In his Theologie des Alten Testaments I ( M ü n c h e n , 1961 3 ), p. 349 = Old Testament Theology I The Theology of Israel's Historical Traditions (London, 1975), p. 352 V o n R a d only remarks that the Chronicler is a representative of the messianic tradition. 7

2 3 : 3 ) . C e n t r a l t o h i s a r g u m e n t is t h e m u c h d e b a t e d q u e s t i o n t h e d y n a s t i c p r o m i s e in C h r o n i c l e s is c o n d i t i o n a l o r Williamson respect

takes a

to S o l o m o n

after Solomon ence.

"With

rule . . . the

once the

middle but

road:

the

promise

unconditional

with

unconditional.

is c o n d i t i o n a l

respect

to the

the latter h a s fulfilled the c o n d i t i o n

completion

Chronicler

of the

period

of

i n t e n d s his r e a d e r s

whether

dynasty

of

obedi-

Davidic-Solomonic

to u n d e r s t a n d

that

d y n a s t y h a s b e e n eternally e s t a b l i s h e d " (1983, p. 318), w h i c h a royalist e x p e c t a t i o n ,

"the perpetuation

the

means

into the post-exilic

of a c o n t i n u i n g expectation of the r e - e m e r g e n c e of a ruling household"

with

period Davidic

(ibid.).

W i l l i a m s o n ' s d e t a i l e d e x e g e s i s is p l a u s i b l e i n itself, b u t i n m y v i e w not compelling.

The

d i f f i c u l t y is t h a t

many

details in the

passages

i n v o l v e d a r e a m b i g u o u s , a s is c l e a r f r o m t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e i r sis, a n d

also f r o m W i l l i a m s o n ' s

the overall perspective

own

from which

a n d it w o u l d s e e m t h a t w h e n

discussion. M u c h these passages are

alternative

interpretation

is a l s o p o s s i b l e .

perspective, Williamson's contribution

With

on

approached,

o n o t h e r g r o u n d s this h a p p e n s

a n attitude of d o u b t c o n c e r n i n g a messianic o r royalist an

exege-

depends

from

expectation,

respect

leaves m e with the

to

this

following

g e n e r a l r e s e r v a t i o n . T h e r e a l g r e a t f u t u r e is y e t t o b e g i n . T h e

restora-

tion of the D a v i d i c d y n a s t y m a y b e in t h e c o u r s e of o u r history, b u t it r e m a i n s , i n W i l l i a m s o n ' s o w n w o r d s , " a d r a m a t i c in the future" (1983, p.

153), w h i c h

transformation

renders the present,

including

the t e m p l e service, a provisional situation, with the real thing yet to c o m e . A w a r e of t h e subjective a s p e c t of this r e s e r v a t i o n , I

wonder

w h e t h e r it is p r o b a b l e t h a t s o g r e a t a n e x p e c t a t i o n is t o b e i n f e r r e d by the r e a d e r s f r o m just a few allusions to the dynastic p r o m i s e .

A

few e x a m p l e s of a n alternative i n t e r p r e t a t i o n m a y suffice. In 2 C h r o n . of J u d a h

to

13 w e h a v e t h e w e l l - k n o w n s p e e c h b y K i n g

King Jeroboam

of Israel.

In

vs. 5 A b i a h

Abiah

begins

speech with a n allusion to the dynastic promise: " D o y o u not

his

know

that the L o r d G o d of Israel gave the kingship over Israel forever to David and

his s o n s b y a c o v e n a n t

condition, but could

o f s a l t ? " T h e r e is n o h i n t o f a

there possibly be? T h e

Chronicler

has

Abiah

d e c l a r e J e r o b o a m ' s kingship to b e illegitimate. O v e r against this rebellious kingship h e d e f e n d s t h e legitimacy of t h e D a v i d i c d y n a s t y , w h i c h is g r o u n d e d

i n n o t h i n g less t h a n G o d ' s c h o i c e a n d c o m m i t m e n t

it: t h e r e is n o w a y f o r J e r o b o a m

to

to c l a i m divine legitimacy f o r his

kingship. T h e conditional or u n c o n d i t i o n a l c h a r a c t e r of the

promise

is n o t a t i s s u e . I t is i n k e e p i n g w i t h

t h a t it is

stressed

(vs. 8) t h a t w h a t is a t s t a k e is " t h e k i n g d o m o f Y H W H " . T h e

Chron-

icier c a n

hardly have meant

expression

was

the context

t o s a y t h a t t h e D a v i d i c d y n a s t y a s its

"therefore permanent

and

indestructible"

(William-

s o n , 1 9 7 7 , p . 1 4 7 ) . If t h a t w e r e t h e c a s e , o n e w o n d e r s h o w , f r o m t h e Chronicler's

perspective,

the

kingdom

of G o d

had

been

expressed

s i n c e 5 8 6 . T h e e x p r e s s i o n " a c o v e n a n t o f s a l t " i n vs. 5 m a y w e l l i n d i c a t e t h e s t a b i l i t y o f t h e c o v e n a n t b u t I t h i n k it is g o i n g t o o f a r t o s a y t h a t t h i s " p o i n t s c l e a r l y t o its e t e r n a l s i g n i f i c a n c e "

(Williamson

(1977), p.

claim

147). T h e

narrative

context

of a c o m p e t i n g

the C h r o n i c l e r an excellent o p p o r t u n i t y to e m p h a s i z e G o d ' s

gave choice

of a n d faithfulness to the D a v i d i c d y n a s t y , w h i c h w e r e basic to his theological

position.

M o r e o r less t h e s a m e r e a s o n i n g a p p l i e s t o 2 C h r o n . 2 3 : 3 . the

legitimacy

of the

Davidic

dynasty

is a t

stake,

Again

this t i m e

over

against t h e u s u r p e r A t h a l i a h . J e h o i a d a h says to the a s s e m b l y of Israel, referring to J o a s h ,

the only Davidide

left: " H e r e

is t h e k i n g ' s

son!

Let h i m reign, as the L o r d p r o m i s e d c o n c e r n i n g the sons of D a v i d " . A g a i n , i n m y v i e w , w h a t is r e l e v a n t i n t h i s s i t u a t i o n is G o d ' s of the Davidic dynasty, not the conditional/unconditional of the dynastic

choice

character

promise.

A n o t h e r a l l u s i o n is f o u n d i n 2 C h r o n . 2 1 : 7 : " Y e t t h e L o r d

would

not destroy the h o u s e of D a v i d , b e c a u s e of the c o v e n a n t w h i c h had made

with David, a n d since he h a d p r o m i s e d

to h i m a n d pp.

sizes

to his d e s c e n d a n t s f o r e v e r " ( R S V ) . W i l l i a m s o n

he

lamp (1977,

145, 153) a r g u e s t h a t b y m e a n s o f t h e t w o d i v e r g e n c e s f r o m his

Vorlage, the

to give a

2 Kgs. 8:19, ("the h o u s e of D a v i d " instead of ' J u d a h ' ,

r e f e r e n c e to the the

covenant

unconditional

with

character

David)

of the

the

Chronicler

promise.

With

and

empha-

respect

to

t h e f i r s t c h a n g e , h o w e v e r , a n o t h e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n is a l s o p o s s i b l e .

In

2 K g s . 8 : 1 9 t h e r e is a v e r y c l o s e r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e d y n a s t y

and

J u d a h : t h e failure of t h e d y n a s t y m i g h t well entail t h e d e s t r u c t i o n Judah,

but J u d a h

is s a v e d

for the

sake

of the

dynasty.

For

of the

C h r o n i c l e r , history h a s p r o v e d this w r o n g a n d h e severs this lifeline c o n n e c t i o n . A t s t a k e is o n l y t h e d y n a s t y , n o t Judah.

a n d n o t possibly so

I n t h i s c o n n e c t i o n it is n o t e w o r t h y t h a t i n 2 K g s .

24:1820‫־‬

it is a t l e a s t s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e f a t e o f J e r u s a l e m a n d J u d a h is b o u n d u p with that of the king. I n 2 C h r o n . 36:11

14, h o w e v e r , it is m a d e

unambiguously

the catastrophe

clear that what

was the disobedience of the

had

people.

caused

of

586

W i t h respect to the second c h a n g e , the reference to the with

David,

if it is m o r e

than

a

stylistic c h a n g e ,

may

G o d ' s faithfulness, but that does not necessarily imply

covenant emphasize

uncondition-

ality. T h e C h r o n i c l e r uses this o p p o r t u n i t y to e m p h a s i z e t h e sive l e g i t i m a c y

of the

Davidic

dynasty.

On

God's

choice

excluof

this

dynasty hinged the legitimacy a n d efficacy of the J e r u s a l e m

temple

and

not

its c u l t u s . T h e

(un)conditionality

is, i n

my

assessment,

at

issue. Williamson's

approach

(1996). A c c o r d i n g with

to

Kelly,

"The

the status q u o . . . but

o f s a l v a t i o n . . ., w h i c h (p.

is a d o p t e d

and

cultus

amplified reflects not

a longing for a n d

embraces

land,

by

people

B.E.

Kelly

a

satisfaction

hopeful

expectation

and

Davidic

line"

O e m i n g in his

1990

185). The

' r o y a l i s t ' p o s i t i o n is a l s o s h a r e d b y M .

monograph,

on

t h e basis of t h e g r e a t interest in D a v i d ' s f a m i l y in

the genealogical section,

1 Chron.

1 - 9 (p.

209).

T h e a p p r o a c h o f I. G a b r i e l i n h e r m o n o g r a p h o f 1 9 9 0 is b e t w e e n the 'royalist' a n d the 'messianic' position. S h e attributes to C h r o n i c l e s a "restaurativer Messianismus"

( p . 2 0 2 ) . I t is ' r e s t a u r a t i v ' i n a s f a r

a s I s r a e l ' s p a s t g r e a t n e s s will b e r e s t o r e d , ' m e s s i a n i s c h ' b e c a u s e restoration

will c o i n c i d e w i t h

the

re-establishment

this

of D a v i d i c

rule.

P a r t of this basically 'royalist' a t t i t u d e a r e eschatological traits w h i c h a r e b e y o n d t h e historically possible (p. 203). H e r m a i n a r g u m e n t

is

the C h r o n i c l e r ' s p o r t r a y a l of the S o l o m o n i c era as a g o l d e n age

of

p e a c e , w h i c h p o i n t s to his e x p e c t a t i o n

in

f r e e d o m a n d p e a c e u n d e r the rule of a The

opposite

future, has been

view,

that

there

defended by W .

is n o

o f a f u t u r e life f o r I s r a e l

Salomo redivivus

(pp.

107f.).

specific expectation

Rudolph

of

the

in his c o m m e n t a r y

and

his 1 9 5 4 article. H e h o l d s t h a t t h e C h r o n i c l e r ' s p u r p o s e w a s to p r e sent t h e r e a l i z e d t h e o c r a c y in t h e post-exilic t e m p l e c o m m u n i t y . a d m i t s t h a t t h e r e a r e " e s c h a t o l o g i c a l u n d e r t o n e s in t h e stress

He

upon

t h e e v e r l a s t i n g n a t u r e of t h e D a v i d i c d y n a s t y . . .", b u t " T h e fact t h a t in

the

whole

of the

Chronicler's

work

only

these

few hints

of

a

M e s s i a n i c e x p e c t a t i o n a r e to b e f o u n d , s h o w s h o w litde real significance they h a d for the a u t h o r " (1954, p. 408). R u d o l p h ' s view was a d o p t e d and

developed

Eschatologie exilic J u d a h

by

O.

of 1959,

Plöger

in

his influential w o r k

Theokratie und

19622. A c c o r d i n g t o P l ö g e r t h e r e w e r e in

two m a i n currents of theological thought, o n e

post-

eschato-

logical a n d o n e theocratic. F o r t h e C h r o n i c l e r the post-exilic J e w i s h community

represented

the

realized

theocracy.

Not

only

does

the

Chronicler

not

preach

any

form

of eschatological

expectation,

he

e v e n p o l e m i z e s against s u c h e x p e c t a t i o n s w h i c h existed in t h e J e r u s a l e m c o m m u n i t y o f his t i m e (p. 54). In this a p p r o a c h

the function of the

Davidic dynasty,

especially

o f D a v i d a n d S o l o m o n , w i t h i n t h e d i v i n e e c o n o m y is p r i m a r i l y

and

m a i n l y t h e b u i l d i n g o f t h e t e m p l e a n d t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f its c u l t u s . A f t e r t h a t its r o l e is b a s i c a l l y

finished.

A r e c e n t d e f e n c e o f t h i s p o s i t i o n is W . R i l e y ' s m o n o g r a p h o f 1 9 9 3 . Riley opines that the Davidic covenant was not b o u n d u p with

the

dynasty,

dy-

nasty

but

had

remained

ended.

dynasty had

In

finished

in f o r c e in the

the

temple

establishment

cultus after the

of temple

and

cultus

the

its c u l t i c t a s k . I t c o u l d n o w b e d i s p o s e d o f w i t h -

o u t t h e c o v e n a n t b e i n g affected (1993, e.g. p.

201).

T h e r e s e e m s to b e s o m e a m b i g u i t y in t h e a p p r o a c h o f S. J a p h e t . 1 fully a g r e e w h e n

she writes: " T h e

b o o k of Chronicles c a n n o t

d e f i n e d as eschatological in a n y sense of the w o r d " (1989, p. and,

"Continuity,

not change,

characterizes

the Chronistic

be

501),

way

of

t h i n k i n g o n e v e r y s u b j e c t " ( 1 9 8 9 , p . 5 0 2 ) . I a l s o a g r e e w h e n a little f u r t h e r o n she states that the C h r o n i s t i c e l e m e n t s such

as trust

God,

the

his p o w e r ,

divine

retribution

are

directed

toward

( 1 9 8 9 , p . 5 0 3 ) , b u t I find it d i f f i c u l t t o f o l l o w h e r w h e n s h e

future contin-

u e s , " T h e y a r e c o n c r e t e h o p e s t h a t t h e l a n d will b e r e d e e m e d I s r a e l ' s g r e a t n e s s a n d g l o r y will b e r e s t o r e d " , t o e n d h e r of the

issue with

"The

Israel's

fortunes" (1989,

Chronicler . . . awaited p. 504).

It m a y

not

the

happen

in

and

discussion

restoration as a

of

sudden

c h a n g e , b u t it d o e s c o n s t i t u t e a r a d i c a l c h a n g e , w h i c h , i n m y

view,

is n o w h e r e s u g g e s t e d b y t h e C h r o n i c l e r , u n l e s s o n e a s s u m e s b y i n f e r e n c e this to b e implicitly m e a n t by t h e C h r o n i c l e r , a m e t h o d , ever, J a p h e t herself strongly

how-

rejects.

T o close this survey, m e n t i o n m a y b e m a d e of D . E . M u r r a y ' s article of 1993. O n

the basis of a detailed discussion of three

2 Chron.

21; 7 : 1 2 - 2 2 ; 2 9 : 5 - 1 1

36:10

a n d 30:6

passages,

12, M u r r a y

comes

to the conclusion that the C h r o n i c l e r did not expect a n y f o r m of a Davidic restoration, but rather was concerned about the

restoration

of the people. T h i s h a d b e e n b r o u g h t a b o u t by the a d v e n t of Persian sovereignty.

In

this n e w

situation

the kingdom

of G o d

among

his

people has assumed a different form. The future of the people d e p e n d s upon

t h e i r p r e s e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p t o G o d , a n d t h i s is b o u n d

up

with

t h e f a i t h f u l a d h e r e n c e t o t h e t e m p l e a n d its c u l t u s . F r o m t h i s v e r y g e n e r a l s u r v e y it m a y b e c l e a r t h a t t h e a n s w e r

to

t h e q u e s t i o n at t h e b e g i n n i n g of this article d o e s n o t d e p e n d f e w s p e c i f i c p a s s a g e s , b u t is b o u n d

on

up with one's view of w h a t

b o o k o f C h r o n i c l e s is all a b o u t . T h i s i n its t u r n d e p e n d s u p o n assessment be

of t h e m a n y v a r i a b l e s at stake a n d

combined

in

a cohesive

overall

one's

the way these

view. T h e r e

s u b j e c t i v e e l e m e n t in this, as also in t h e p r e s e n t

a the

may

is u n a v o i d a b l y

a

article.

In m y o w n assessment the view that the Chronicler does not intend to c o n v e y a n y specific h o p e for t h e f u t u r e best a c c o u n t s for the evid e n c e . It is n o t p o s s i b l e n o w t o g o o v e r t h e e v i d e n c e a n d t h e

argu-

m e n t s w h i c h h a v e b e e n a d v a n c e d i n its s u p p o r t o r a g a i n s t it. I o n l y i n t e n d to o f f e r a n o t h e r p o i n t e r in this d i r e c t i o n , viz. t h e

observation

that the Chronicler recognizably portrays a development which culmin a t e s in t h e d e d i c a t i o n of t h e t e m p l e , w i t h o u t this b e i n g by anything comparable ment

in t h e w a y

paralleled

o f f u t u r e bliss. T h i s

develop-

is n o t j u s t a h i s t o r i c a l o n e , b u t c o n s i s t s o f a s e r i e s o f

interventions

which

should

make

clear

that

the

divine

institution

of

the

t e m p l e a n d t h e t e m p l e s e r v i c e is, f r o m b e g i n n i n g t o e n d , t o t a l l y

and

solely G o d ' s w o r k a n d n o t s u b j e c t to a n y historical c o n t i n g e n c y .

This

process begins with G o d ' s choice of D a v i d as king a n d in his a c c e p t a n c e of t h e t e m p l e as his s a n c t u a r y . T h i s

culminates development

is b u i l t u p a s f o l l o w s : (1) G o d t u r n s o v e r t h e k i n g s h i p f r o m S a u l D a v i d ; (2) G o d (3) G o d

indicates to David

chooses

Solomon

the place of the future

as D a v i d ' s

successor;

(4a) G o d

to

temple; chooses

S o l o m o n a s t h e t e m p l e b u i l d e r ; (4b) f o r this G o d h i m s e l f h a s t o disq u a l i f y D a v i d ; (5) G o d

reveals to David

the design

of the

temple;

(6) G o d a c c e p t s t h e t e m p l e a s h i s s a n c t u a r y . I n t h i s o r d e r t h e s e p o i n t s will b e w o r k e d o u t i n m o r e

detail.

(1) T h e C h r o n i c l e r ' s n a r r a t i v e b e g i n s i n c h a p t e r 10 w i t h t h e d e a t h of S a u l in his battle against t h e Philistines. been

asked

chapter

why

the

Chronicler

is p a r a d i g m a t i c

in t h a t

did

The question has often

this. A c c o r d i n g

it p o r t r a y s

to Mosis

this

t h e exilic s i t u a t i o n

(see

p. 38 above). A n u m b e r of scholars h o l d that this c h a p t e r f u n c t i o n s as the b a c k d r o p of D a v i d ' s kingship. V o n

Rad, for example,

"Saul

d e r sich

ist n u r

noch

die dunkle

Folie v o n

die

states:

Lichtgestalt

s e i n e s N a c h f o l g e r s u m s o s t r a h l e n d e r a b h e b t " ( " S a u l is o n l y t h e d a r k foil a g a i n s t

which

the

shining

figure

of his successor

is t h e

more

s h a r p l y c o n t r a s t e d " ; (1930), p . 79). K . G a l l i n g ( 1 9 5 4 , p . 41) a n d

Ru-

d o l p h (1955, p. 96), a m o n g o t h e r s , w r i t e in t h e s a m e vein. T h i s v i e w m a y be true to s o m e extent. Saul was a legitimate king, chosen God.

His rejection by G o d

is t h e c o n s e q u e n c e o f h i s

by

disobedience.

This chapter

thus makes

albeit chosen

by G o d ,

clear

that

a king (which

has to b e o b e d i e n t

means:

David),

to b e successful.

Failure

r e m a i n s a possibility. In c o n t r a s t to S a u l ' s d i s o b e d i e n c e , D a v i d ' s o b e d i e n c e c o m e s b e t t e r t o t h e f o r e (cf. 1 C h r o n . the main function. Verses is all a b o u t : G o d

13 a n d

13:3). B u t t h i s is n o t

14 m a k e c l e a r w h a t t h i s

chapter

turns over the kingship f r o m Saul to David.

this to b e possible

Saul's death

itself w a s n o t

sufficient. F r o m

C h r o n i c l e r ' s perspective, G o d himself h a d to reject him, w h i c h sitated the portrayal of Saul's d e a t h

For the

neces-

as t h e c o n s e q u e n c e o f his dis-

obedience. O f course, both for Saul's rejection a n d G o d ' s choice D a v i d , t h e C h r o n i c l e r c o u l d f i n d s u p p o r t in t h e D e u t e r o n o m i s t ' s r a t i v e (1 S a m . 1 3 , 1 5 , 1 6 ) , b u t i n 1 S a m . 2 1 2 battle do

on

with

Gilboa either:

and

Saul

the

ensuing

S a m . 5 t h e story of the

development

is k i l l e d , s u c c e e d e d

of

nar-

by

have

nothing

his s o n , w h i l e

David

s e i z e s t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o h a v e h i m s e l f a c c l a i m e d k i n g of J u d a h , only two years later he b e c o m e s king also of n o r t h e r n Israel.

and

Noth-

i n g o f all t h i s is a l l u d e d t o i n C h r o n i c l e s . I n o n e d i v i n e m o v e t u r n s a s i d e S a u l a n d p u t s D a v i d i n h i s p l a c e . T h e r e is n o

to

God

historical

c o n t i n g e n c y in t h e rise t o p o w e r of t h e k i n g w h o w o u l d p r e p a r e

the

building of the temple a n d whose son would complete the

project.

Incidentally,

chapter

in

a

number

of translations

the

title o f this

New American Bible: H i s [ S a u l ' s ] d e a t h a n d b u r i a l ; Traduction Oecuménique de la Bible: M o r t d u r o i S a ü l ; New International Version: S a u l t a k e s h i s life; Revised English Bible c o m e s a b i t c l o s e r w i t h " D a v i d s u c c e e d s S a u l " . If t h e t i t l e is refers to

the

story

told;

so, for e x a m p l e ,

s u p p o s e d to reflect t h e p u r p o s e of a passage, t h e n the a b o v e

means

t h a t t h e title s h o u l d b e " G o d t u r n s o v e r t h e k i n g s h i p f r o m S a u l D a v i d " . In

1 S a m . 3 1 , o f c o u r s e , a t i t l e s u c h a s t h e first t h r e e

to

men-

t i o n e d a b o v e is f u l l y a p p l i c a b l e . (2) I n

1 C h r o n . 2 1 w e h a v e t h e r e p o r t o f D a v i d ' s c e n s u s . T h i s is

t h e o n l y c a s e in C h r o n i c l e s w h e r e D a v i d t r a n s g r e s s e s a g a i n s t

God.

T h e r e is v i r t u a l u n a n i m i t y a s t o w h y t h e C h o n i c l e r g a v e t h i s r e p o r t a p l a c e i n h i s b o o k : it l e a d s u p t o G o d

indicating the place of the

f u t u r e t e m p l e i n vs. 2 6 ; 2 2 : 1 ; c o m p a r e 2 C h r o n . 3:1 a n d 7 : 3 , 1 6 ( ‫ ) ב ח ר‬. F o r this t h e C h r o n i c l e r h a d to edit t h e s t o r y as told in 2 S a m .

24,

where

any

t h i s is n o t a t i s s u e a t all. N e i t h e r

is t h e r e i n

1 Kgs. 5

h i n t t h a t t h e t e m p l e is t o b e b u i l t a t a p l a c e a s s i g n e d b y G o d ,

and,

p r e s u m a b l y , S o l o m o n h i m s e l f d e c i d e s w h e r e t h e t e m p l e will b e b u i l t . F o r t h e C h r o n i c l e r this c o u l d n o t be. T h e story of t h e c e n s u s p r o v i d e d h i m with a n o p p o r t u n i t y to h a v e G o d assign the place of the t e m p l e .

(3) I n

1 Kgs.

intrigues. T h e

1 Solomon

Chronicler,

becomes

king after a

history

of

court is

the

u n c h a l l e n g e d successor of D a v i d , installed by the latter himself.

o f c o u r s e , o m i t s all t h i s . S o l o m o n

But

t h i s is n o t e n o u g h ; t h e s u c c e s s i o n w o u l d still b e a m a t t e r o f

histor-

ical c o n t i n g e n c y , a n d t h e r e f o r e , in 1 C h r o n . 2 8 : 5 G o d h i m s e l f c h o o s e s Solomon

a s D a v i d ' s s u c c e s s o r . A s m a n y s c h o l a r s h a v e n o t e d , t h i s is

the only instance of the use of ‫ב ח ר‬

for a king after David. This

m o r e o v e r , e m p h a s i z e d in t h e p r e v i o u s verse, w h i c h m a k e s clear G o d ' s choice of S o l o m o n >

is, that

s t a n d s in a line of divine choices: J u d a h

David's father's house >

David.

(4a) B u t e v e n his s t a t u s a s D a v i d ' s s u c c e s s o r d o e s n o t

automatically

q u a l i f y S o l o m o n f o r b e i n g t h e t e m p l e b u i l d e r . I t is r a t h e r t h e

other

way

build

round:

Solomon

was chosen

as k i n g b e c a u s e

he was

to

the t e m p l e instead of vice versa. G o d ' s direct choice (again ‫) ב ח ר‬ h i m a s t e m p l e b u i l d e r is m e n t i o n e d i n now, for the Lord ary"; compare

has chosen you

22:11, a n d

(4b) Still, e v e n w i t h

1 C h r o n . 28:10: " T a k e

to build a h o u s e as the

of

heed

sanctu-

29:1.

G o d ' s choice of S o l o m o n

as D a v i d ' s

succès-

sor, t h e r e r e m a i n s the difficult q u e s t i o n w h y the t e m p l e w a s not built by David,

but

God

chose

S o l o m o n instead of D a v i d for the task. T h e c o u r s e of history

could,

as a m a t t e r

by

his s o n , o r

of principle,

l e r n is s o l v e d i n

1 Chron.

not

to b e

suffice as a n

22:8 / /

28:3.

i n g p r o j e c t b e c a u s e o f his w a r s a n d therefore

the

task

is t u r n e d

more

over

to

8

precise, w h y

explanation.

This

prob-

D a v i d is d e n i e d t h e

build-

his s h e d d i n g m u c h his

son.

The

blood,

argument

r e s p e c t t o D a v i d ' s w a r s is r e m a r k a b l e s i n c e it w a s w i t h G o d ' s i n g t h a t t h e s e w a r s w e r e c a r r i e d o u t (1 C h r o n . The

argument

is a t h e o l o g i c a l

adaptation

of

and

14:10-17;

1 Kgs.

5:17

with bless-

18:6,13). (English

v e r s e 3), w h e r e it is s a i d t h a t D a v i d c o u l d n o t b u i l d t h e t e m p l e

be-

c a u s e of his b e i n g e n g a g e d in w a r f a r e . T h i s w a s a n impossible

line

of t h o u g h t

for the

Chronicler.

This

theological

adaptation

already

m a k e s c l e a r t h a t t h e a r g u m e n t is a n ad hoc o n e , n o t b a s e d o n a

neg-

a t i v e v i e w o f D a v i d ' s w a r s o r w a r s i n g e n e r a l . T h i s is c o n f i r m e d the argument

of D a v i d h a v i n g shed m u c h

blood. This cannot

t o t h e w a r s , s i n c e n o w h e r e i n t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t is w a r f a r e with shedding blood. T h e of innocent people.

by

refer

equated

l a t t e r is a l w a y s a g u i l t y t a k i n g o f t h e l i f e

In the Chronicler's view G o d ' s choice of

Solo-

8 For a detailed treatment of this verse see my article " W h y was David disqualified as a temple builder?" JSOT 70 (1976), pp. 5 1 - 6 .

mon

implied t h a t D a v i d as the p e r s o n

first

in line w a s

disqualified

b y G o d , just as G o d ' s choice of D a v i d as king entailed G o d ' s rejection of Saul. David's warfare a n d shedding of blood are purely ological a n d

do

not

refer to a n y

details of D a v i d ' s

life a s t o l d

the Chronicler, or for that matter by the Deuteronomist. argument

theby

That

the

is a n ad hoc o n e , o n l y t o e x p l a i n t h e f a c t o f h i s t o r y

that

it w a s S o l o m o n w h o b u i l t t h e t e m p l e , is a l s o a p p a r e n t f r o m t h e f a c t t h a t it d i d n o t p r e v e n t t h e C h r o n i c l e r f r o m m a k i n g D a v i d d o thing possible

in

the way

of p r e p a r a t i o n s .

Another

every-

pointer

s a m e d i r e c t i o n , a t l e a s t w i t h r e g a r d t o w a r f a r e , is t h a t t h e

in

the

Chronicler

s a w n o p r o b l e m in h a v i n g D a v i d d e d i c a t e p a r t of t h e spoils of w a r to Y H W H

(1 C h r o n .

18:11) a n d in h a v i n g S o l o m o n

use t h e m

for

the m a n u f a c t u r i n g of the b r o n z e sea, the pillars of the t e m p l e t e m p l e v e s s e l s (1 C h r o n . The

and

18:8).

difference with

the

other

case

of D a v i d ' s

sin

occasioning

G o d ' s i n t e r v e n t i o n , t h a t o f t h e c e n s u s , is, t h a t i n t h e l a t t e r c a s e Chronicler could make

use of the story of 2 S a m .

the

24, whereas

this case h e h a d to rely solely o n his o w n theological

in

creativity.

(5) O n e t h i n g still r e m a i n s : t h e d e s i g n o f t h e t e m p l e . T h i s is d e a l t w i t h i n 1 C h r o n . 2 8 : 1 1 19: D a v i d h a n d s o v e r t o S o l o m o n t h e d e s i g n (‫ )תבנית‬of the t e m p l e building, the courts, a n d the c h e r u b s the ark.

9

This design has been

(vs.

19). It

recalls the design w h i c h h a d b e e n revealed to M o s e s for the

manu-

f a c t u r i n g of the

tabernacle

t h e r e is n o a l l u s i o n the

temple

participation verses 7

in

revealed to h i m by G o d

covering

and

its f u r n i t u r e

(Exod.

25:9,40),

to a n y divinely inspired design with

the book

of K i n g s , in w h i c h

rather

the

i n t h e p r o j e c t is h i g h l i g h t e d (1 K g s . 5 : 2 1

but

respect

to

Phoenician 26‫־‬

[English

12]; 7 : 1 3 - 4 7 ) . W i t h this G o d - g i v e n d e s i g n , n o t h i n g h a s b e e n

left to c h a n c e . T h e w h o l e p r o j e c t of t h e b u i l d i n g of t h e t e m p l e

has

been

the

God's

affair, f r o m

choosing

design to the c h o s e n t e m p l e (6) A f t e r t h e Both

temple

has

David

till h i s h a n d i n g

been

built

the

ark

is p u t

in

its

place.

1 Kgs. 8 : 1 1 - 1 2 a n d 2 C h r o n . 5:13,14 relate that at that

sion the glory of Y H W H

fills

the temple. After that Solomon

his p r a y e r of d e d i c a t i o n , w h i c h in heaven

consumes

the

occaoffers

1 K i n g s closes the c e r e m o n y .

2 C h r o n . 7 : 1 - 3 , h o w e v e r , t h e r e is a n i n t e r e s t i n g a d d i t i o n :

9

over

builder.

offerings a n d

the

glory

of Y H W H

fire fills

In

from the

In my article "1 Chronicles xxviii 11 18: its textual development", F T 47 (1997), ‫ ־‬a is a later addition. 4 2 9 - 3 8.‫קנן‬,I have argued that 1 C h r o n . 2 8 : 1 2 b 1 8

house.

In

other

words:

after

Solomon's

prayer

God

indicates

his

a c c e p t a n c e o f t h e t e m p l e as his s a n c t u a r y . F o r h e a v e n l y fire c o n s u m ing in

the

offering as

1 Chron.

a

sign

of G o d ' s

21:26; cp. j u d g .

acceptance

there

is a

parallel

6:21.

W i l l i a m s o n ( 1 9 7 7 , p . 146) t a k e s this v e r s e t o p o i n t t o G o d ' s

under-

lining the unconditionality of the divine promise to the Davidic

dy-

n a s t y (2 C h r o n . 6 : 4 2 ) . T h e r e s e e m s , h o w e v e r , t o b e n o r e a s o n t o a p p l y 7 : 1 3 ‫ ־‬o n l y to t h e last v e r s e o f t h e l o n g p r a y e r , i n s t e a d

of

t o t h e w h o l e p r a y e r o f d e d i c a t i o n . T h e l a t t e r is c l e a r l y s u g g e s t e d

2 Chron.

by

v e r s e 1, w h i c h b e g i n s w i t h " W h e n S o l o m o n h a d f i n i s h e d p r a y i n g . . . " . These words have b e e n taken over f r o m

1 Kgs. 8:54, but are

related to the signs of G o d ' s a c c e p t a n c e The

by the

direcdy

Chronicler.

a b o v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n is c o n f i r m e d b y 2 C h r o n .

7:12 a n d

I n v e r s e 12, a f t e r " I h a v e h e a r d y o u r p r a y e r " , t a k e n o v e r f r o m the Chronicler added offering". Verse

"and

chosen

Kings,

(‫ )ובחרתי‬this p l a c e as a h o u s e

16 a d d s " I h a v e c h o s e n ( ‫ " ) ב ח ר ת י‬b e f o r e " ( a n d ) 1 Kgs. 9:3. T h i s

the

Solomon's

ceremony God

abundantly

b y itself d o e s

b y his o w n

There

makes

is o n e

not

acceptance more

clear

guarantee

anything.

o f it a s h i s

transfer

of the

ark

to J e r u s a l e m .

way

dedication

I t is a n s w e r e d

by

sanctuary.

n o t e w o r t h y case of divine intervention

concerns the temple, t h o u g h indirectly. the

that

of

sane-

tified this h o u s e " , w h i c h w a s t a k e n o v e r f r o m Chronicler

16.

1 Chron. There

13 a n d

is a n

which

15

recount

interesting

and

t e l l i n g d i f f e r e n c e w i t h 2 S a m . 6 . I n t h e l a t t e r c h a p t e r U z z a is k i l l e d b e c a u s e o f h i s t o u c h i n g t h e a r k . D a v i d is f r i g h t e n e d a n d ues

the

Only does

undertaking,

when he

he

decide

hears

leaving about

to continue.

the the The

ark

in

the

care

of

blessing bestowed

on

Chronicler

mentions

discontin-

Obed-Edom. Obed-Edom the

blessing

(13:14), b u t n o t in relation to D a v i d ' s decision to c o n t i n u e t h e fer. D a v i d the

ark

cident

trans-

h a s h a d this i n t e n t i o n all a l o n g . H e p r e p a r e s a p l a c e

in J e r u s a l e m of U z z a

(15:1). T h e

is i n t e r p r e t e d

by

important David

change

as a n

is t h a t

expression

of

the

for in-

God's

d i s p l e a s u r e b e c a u s e t h e a r k h a d n o t b e e n c a r r i e d b y Levi tes (15:13).10 That

10

only Levites should

carry

the ark was an

ancient

rule

(Deut.

Although the p u r p o r t of this verse is clear, its text has p r o b a b l y not been preserved intact. In my article " T h e D e v e l o p m e n t of the T e x t of I Chronicles 15:1-24", Henoch 17 (1995), pp. 2 6 7 - 7 7 (reference o n p. 271, n. 6), 1 have suggested that ‫נ ט א ת ם‬ m a y have been d r o p p e d by homoioteleuton after • ‫" א ת‬because it was not you w h o carried (it)".

10:8), a n d

David

h e is p r o m p t e d to

what

could

not

by G o d

motivated

the

be

presented

t o r e i n f o r c e it. Chronicler

to

as i n a u g u r a t i n g There can

have

God

this,

but

be no doubt intervene

as

at

this

point. T h e real issue w a s n o t h o w the ark w a s to b e t r a n s p o r t e d t h e role of t h e Levites as t e m p l e singers. T h e y f o r m e d a n

but

important

aspect of the Chronicler's c o n t e m p o r a r y t e m p l e cultus, which he held in h i g h e s t e e m . the

ark

he

"These

found

arc

song in

the

the

(1 C h r o n .

In emphasizing possibility

men

house

6:16

a

their exclusive task w i t h

whom

of the

[English

to

introduce

David

Lord, verse

put

them

in c h a r g e

after the

ark

31]; c o m p a r e

into

respect the

of the

came

to

to

cultus:

service rest

there"

This

way

h e c r e a t e d a theological basis for their f u n c t i o n in the c u l t u s . "

The

Chronicler

uses here

the same

mentioned:

although

David's

16:4-7,37).

of

story technique

negligence

with

as in t h e cases just respect

to the

ark

n o t p r e s e n t e d a s a s i n , r a t h e r a s a n o v e r s i g h t , it d o e s o p e n t h e for G o d ' s intervention of the J e r u s a l e m

The

contention

wholly and

to i n t r o d u c e

temple

important

aspect

cultus.

of this article

recognizably

(indirectly) a n

is

way

is t h a t

directed

1 Chron.

toward

the

10-2

building

Chron. and

6

is

inaugu-

r a t i o n o f t h e t e m p l e , a n d a l o n g w i t h it t o w a r d t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n o f t h e Levites as singers. T h e

inauguration

of the

temple

is t h e

culmina-

tion of G o d ' s g u i d a n c e w h i c h b e g a n with his c h o i c e of D a v i d .

God's

interventions at the decisive points of the d e v e l o p m e n t f o r m the axis a r o u n d w h i c h t h e w h o l e d e v e l o p m e n t e v o l v e s . T h e r e is n o t h i n g

com-

p a r a b l e w h i c h p o i n t s t o a d r a s t i c c h a n g e w h i c h lies y e t i n t h e f u t u r e . I t is u n l i k e l y t h a t work

so as to m a k e

culmination intended the

the Chronicler

final

it p o i n t

structured

to the building

of G o d ' s intervention

his r e a d e r s

to u n d e r s t a n d

consummation

is y e t t o c o m e .

Rather,

the Davidic dynasty a n d

on

as

the yet

that

formal

notion.

of the

f u t u r e , in

which

o f G o d ' s p u r p o s e s f o r Israel will t a k e

place,

the Chronicler's

the great

temple

his

b e h a l f of his p e o p l e , a n d

stress o n

his faithfulness t o w a r d

size t h e sole l e g i t i m a c y o f t h e t e m p l e . rather

the greater part of

The

Chronicler's

choice

it s e r v e t o

'Legitimacy', purpose

God's

empha-

of course,

goes

of

beyond

is

a

this.

" For the connection between Levites a n d the ark as the bridge for their later cultic role, see V o n R a d (1930), pp. 98 1 15, a n d J . W . Kleinig, The Lord's Song: The Basis, Function and Significance of Choral Music in Chronicles, J S O T S 156 (Sheffield, 1993), pp. 9 1 - 5 .

H i s r e a l p u r p o s e is t o e m p h a s i z e institution

but

t h a t t h e t e m p l e is n o t a

G o d ' s gift to his p e o p l e .

They

are called

human upon

to

a d h e r e f a i t h f u l l y t o its c u l t u s t o b e a s s u r e d o f G o d ' s f a i t h f u l n e s s a n d his g u i d a n c e w i t h r e s p e c t to t h e f u t u r e . T h i s b r i n g s m e t o a final p o i n t . I n t h e d i s c u s s i o n o f t h i s i s s u e , t h e alternative to an

eschatological

or messianic expectation

is u s u a l l y

taken to b e the view of the post-exilic J e w i s h c o m m u n i t y as a theocracy. P r o m i n e n t p r o p o n e n t s of this position w e r e R u d o l p h a n d Plöger, according

to w h o m

the

Chronicler

considered

this c o m m u n i t y

"realized t h e o c r a c y " . O t h e r scholars, such as J . Becker, (1977,

a pp.

4 3 - 8 , 7 4 - 7 ) , just use 'theocracy' o r "theocratic c o m m u n i t y " . S o m e t i m e s t h i s is s p e c i f i e d a s ' h i e r o c r a c y ' , e . g . b y A . C a q u o t , ( 1 9 6 6 , p . T h e s e terms, however, are not u n a m b i g u o u s a n d especially

120). 'theoc-

r a c y ' c a n b e u n d e r s t o o d in m a n y d i f f e r e n t ways.12 A t a n y rate, h o w e v e r , it e a s i l y s u g g e s t s a c o n t e n t m e n t w i t h t h e p r e s e n t s i t u a t i o n ,

or

the idea of "die statische, g e g e n w a r t s z u f r i e d e n e G o t t e s h e r r s c h a f t

im

Gegensatz

zur dynamischen,

in die Z u k u n f t g e r i c h t e t e n

eschatolo-

gischen S t r ö m u n g " ("the static c o n t e n t m e n t with the present

situa-

t i o n o f G o d ' s r u l e , o v e r a g a i n s t t h e d y n a m i c c u r r e n t w h i c h is d i r e c t e d toward

the

future").13 This,

however,

need

a b s e n c e of a specific e s c h a t o l o g i c a l / m e s s i a n i c

not

be

the case.

The

expectation does

not

m e a n t h a t p e o p l e look to t h e f u t u r e as closed. F a i t h in G o d ' s

guid-

a n c e a n d his i n v o l v e m e n t in o u r history leaves t h e f u t u r e in

God's

hands, and therefore open. T h e Chronicler preaches no attitude

of

a c q u i e s c e n c e w i t h respect to t h e p r e s e n t , b u t faith in G o d , a n d p e r s e v e r a n c e in p a r t i c i p a t i n g in t h e cultic e x p e r i e n c e of t h e

believing

c o m m u n i t y , in the place G o d has given for that p u r p o s e : the J e r u s a l e m temple.14

12

See Dörrfuss (1994), pp. 18-118, which deals with the way 'theocracy' has been understood by a great number of authors. I:i Becker (1977), p. 43. With these words Becker characterizes the way many scholars view the two opposite possibilities. 14 In this respect I agree with Murray (1993), and, apart from the reservation expressed above, with Japhet (1989), pp. 499-504.

BIBLIOGRAPHY J. Becker, Messiaserwartung im Alten Testament, SBS 83 (Stuttgart, 1977) A. Caquot, "Peut-on parler de messianisme dans l'oeuvre du Chroniste?", RThPh 99 (= 3/16; 1966) E.M. Dörrfuss, Mose in den Chronikbüchern: Garant theokratischer ^jukunftserwartung, BZAW 219 (Berlin, 1994) I. Gabriel, Friede über Israel: Eine Untersuchung zur Friedenstheologie in Chronik 1 10 II 3 6 0 S B 10 (Klosterneuburg, 1990) K. Galling, Die Bücher der Chronik, Esra, Nehemia, ATD (Göttingen, 1954) T.-S. Im, Das Davidbild in den Chronikbüchern: David als Idealbild des theokratischen Messianismus für den Chronisten, Europäische Hochschulschriften 23/vol. 263 (Frankfurt am Main, 1985) S. Japhet, The Ideology of the Book of Chronicles and its Place in Biblical Thought, BEAT 9 (Frankfurt am Main, 1989) , I & II Chronicles: A Commentary (London, 1993) B.E. Kelly, Retribution and Eschatologf in Chronicles, J S O T S S 211 (Sheffield, 1996) R. Mosis, Untersuchungen zur Theologie des chronistischen Geschichtswerkes, Freiburger Theologische Studien 29 (Freiburg, 1973) D.F. Murray, "Dynasty, People, and the Future: The Message of Chronicles", JSOT 58 (1993), pp. 71-92 M. Oeming, Das wahre Israel: "Die genealogische Vorhalle" 1 Chronik 1-9, BVV ANT 128 (= 7/8; Stuttgart, 1990) Ο. Plöger, Theokratie und Eschatologie, YVMANT 2 (Neukirchen, 1959, 19622) G. Von Rad, Das Geschichtsbild des chronistischen Werkes, BWANT, 54 (Stuttgart, 1930) VV. Riley, King and Cultus in Chronicles: Worship and the Interpretation of Histoiy, J S O T S S 160 (Sheffield, 1993) W. Rudolph, "Problems of the Book of Chronicles", FT 4 (1954), pp. 401-409 , Chronikbücher, HAT (Tübingen, 1955) H.G.M. Williamson, "Eschatology in Chronicles", Tyndale Bulletin 28 (1977), pp. 1 15-54 — , "The Dynastic Oracle in the Books of Chronicles", A. Rofé and Y. Zakovitch, (eds.), Essays on the Bible and the Ancient World, Fs. I.E. Secligmann (Jerusalem, 1983), vol." 3, pp. 305-18

I KNOW THAT MY REDEEMER LIVETH BY J.

GIBSON Edinburgh

There

are not m a n y

h o p e f u l passages in the speeches of J o b ,

t h e y p l a y a crucial role in his slow r e c o v e r y of faith. T h e

but

first

to

s u r f a c e is J o b ' s p o i g n a n t w i s h o f 9 : 3 2 f f . f o r a n a r b i t e r t o s t a n d b e t w e e n h i m a n d G o d , w h o w o u l d s e e t o it t h a t t h e c a r d s w e r e n o t stacked

against

him.

The

next

is t h e f a m o u s p a s s a g e

in

always 13:15ff.,

t r a n s l a t e d i n t h e A V " T h o u g h h e s l a y m e , y e t will I t r u s t i n

him"

b u t m o r e a c c u r a t e l y i n t h e R V , " Y e t will I w a i t f o r h i m " . T h i s is f o l l o w e d in t h e s a m e s p e e c h b y 14:13ff., w h e r e J o b asks G o d to h i d e h i m in S h e o l , a n d g o e s o n "All t h e d a y s of m y service I w o u l d wait, till m y r e l e a s e s h o u l d c o m e " .

Finally, there are the t w o visions

16:18ff. a n d , t h e c e l e b r a t e d p a s s a g e with w h i c h w e a r e in

1 9 : 2 5 f f . , in w h i c h J o b c a l l s G o d h i s w i t n e s s a n d h i s

in

concerned, redeemer.

F h e r e are, of course, m a n y authorities w h o d e n y that these

pas-

sages a r e h o p e f u l . I n particular, c o n s i d e r i n g the subject of this p a p e r , t h e y d e n y t h a t t h e w i t n e s s o f c h a p t e r 16 a n d t h e r e d e e m e r o f c h a p t e r 19 a r e t o b e e q u a t e d w i t h G o d o r s o m e h e a v e n l y a d v o c a t e ;

rather

t h e y r e p r e s e n t m e t a p h o r i c a l l y J o b ' s o w n s t a t e d case; his o w n

words

a l o n e c a n s p e a k f o r h i m u n t i l (if e v e r ) G o d d e i g n s t o r e s p o n d .

Such

views, n a m e l y that J o b c a n n o t b e allowed to express h o p e in the G o d w h o m e l s e w h e r e h e so remorselessly attacks, s e e m to m e t o o m o d e r n istic f o r a n O l d T e s t a m e n t

b o o k . I m e a n , if g i v e n t h e

opportunity,

to e n g a g e m o r e fully w i t h t h e m at a n o t h e r t i m e . M e a n w h i l e , I cite as chief evidence for m y o w n view a n archetypal O l d T e s t a m e n t source. It is p r o b a b l e t h a t f o r t h e s e h o p e f u l p a s s a g e s , w h i c h f o r a m o m e n t here

and

there

pierce

through

the

darkness

of J o b ' s

despair

and

a n g e r , w e should look to the m o d e l of the L a m e n t a t i o n Psalms, u p o n w h i c h J o b d r a w s so which

otherwise

richly

for the l a n g u a g e of c o m p l a i n t a n d protest

d o m i n a t e s his r h e t o r i c . T h e r e

a r e i n m o s t , if n o t

q u i t e all o f t h e L a m e n t a t i o n

P s a l m s little w a r m s e c t i o n s c a l l e d

larations of trust w h e r e

Psalmist,

the

having made

his a t t a c k s

decon

G o d a n d b e i n g a b o u t to a p p e a l to h i m for help, states his c o n f i d e n c e

that

the

God

in w h o m

he

had

l o s t f a i t h is, a s h e o u g h t

to

have

realised, fully able to a n s w e r his a p p e a l a n d supply the r e m e d y

for

his affliction. W e c a n n o t b u t feel t h e s u d d e n i n f u s i o n of w a r m t h . g o o d e x a m p l e is P s a l m i n g tells us. I n

the

first

102, a p r a y e r of o n e afflicted, as t h e part

of the psalm

the

A

head-

Psalmist's days

are

p a s s i n g a w a y l i k e s m o k e , h e is l i k e a v u l t u r e i n t h e w i l d e r n e s s o r lonely bird on the housetop (AV, probably wrongly, but m u c h poetically, has

a pelican

b y his e n e m i e s , a n d nation, w h o verse

and

a sparrow),

h e is t a u n t e d a n d

h e k n o w s t h a t t h i s is all d u e

has taken him

up and thrown

him

derided

to G o d ' s

away.

indig-

But then

12 t h e r e is a n a b r u p t c h a n g e o f g e a r : " B u t t h o u , Ο

a

more

Lord,

at art

e n t h r o n e d f o r e v e r . . . (16) F o r t h e L o r d will b u i l d u p Z i o n , . . . a n d h e will r e g a r d t h e p r a y e r o f t h e d e s t i t u t e , a n d will n o t d e s p i s e supplication" (RSV). Thereafter comes the appeal: " Ό

their

my God', I

say, 'take m e n o t h e n c e in the midst of m y days, t h o u w h o s e

years

e n d u r e t h r o u g h o u t all g e n e r a t i o n s ' " ( 2 4 ) ( R S V ) , a n d t h e p s a l m c l o s e s w i t h p r a i s e t o h i m , w h o is a l w a y s t h e s a m e a n d w h o s e y e a r s no end.

have

The L a m e n t a t i o n P s a l m s h a v e b e e n well d e f i n e d as "strate-

gies for c o n s o l a t i o n " , t h e y p r o v i d e t h e w o r d s w h e r e b y t h e suffering a n d perplexed worshipper m a y edge himself gradually into the frame of m i n d , in w h i c h h e c a n b e s u r e in his G o d a g a i n a n d b e g i n to praise h i m ; a n d

again

the sections of trust a n d c o n f i d e n c e a r e a

vital

c o m p o n e n t i n s u c h s t r a t e g i e s . S o it is, I b e l i e v e , i n t h e s p e e c h e s Job;

the

hopeful passages

I mentioned

show

tarily f r o m his c o n t i n u o u s o n s l a u g h t s o n G o d to the conviction that only G o d tation

and

lead

him

can -

him

momen-

and winning

through

a n d will -

fill

restore his

to faith in t h e d i v i n e p r o v i d e n c e

t h e i r i m p o r t a n c e is o u t o f all p r o p o r t i o n t o t h e i r To

in t h e b a c k g r o u n d

in b o t h

speeches J o b

breaks through. In chapter at last to h e a v e n , w h e r e

once

t o t h e r e d e e m e r p a s s a g e it is is a t h i s l o w e s t t h a t

1 6 . I t is j u s t hope

reaching

by a witness w h o

will

a r g u e his c a s e f o r h i m b e f o r e G o d . If y o u r e a d c a r e f u l l y ( R S V ) ,

you

will see t h a t t h e w i t n e s s t o o c a n o n l y b e

up

salutary

the light of

16 it is o f h i s a n g u i s h e d c r i e s

they are taken

repumore;

numbers.

to take a brief look at the witness p a s s a g e in c h a p t e r when

of

resiling

God.

Ο earth, cover not my blood, a n d let m y c r y find n o r e s t i n g p l a c e . E v e n n o w , b e h o l d , m y w i t n e s s is in h e a v e n , a n d h e t h a t v o u c h e s f o r m e is o n h i g h . M y friends scorn me;

m y eye p o u r s o u t tears to G o d , t h a t lie w o u l d m a i n t a i n t h e right of a m a n with G o d , like a m a n with his n e i g h b o u r . F o r w h e n a few y e a r s h a v e p a s s e d , I shall g o the w a y w h e n c e I shall n o t r e t u r n . M y spirit is b r o k e n , m y d a y s a r e extinct, t h e g r a v e is r e a d y for m e . (16.18 17.1) J o b , as h e looks a r o u n d h i m , sees t h e o p e n d e r i s i o n of his f r i e n d s , a n d h e k n o w s t h a t his d a y s a r e n u m b e r e d .

H e is a b o u t t o set

out

o n a j o u r n e y f r o m w h i c h t h e r e c a n b e n o w a y b a c k . T h e r e will b e no

reward

for h i m

i n t h i s life. H i s s p i r i t is b r o k e n

and

only

grave awaits (Coverdale here has the splendid r e n d e r i n g "I a m

the

harde

at d e a t h e s d o r e " ) . Y e t in his m i n d ' s e y e h e also sees a f u t u r e c o u r t i n h e a v e n , a t w h i c h h e h i m s e l f will n o t - a l a s ! - b e p r e s e n t . B u t h i s s p i l t b l o o d will s p e a k f o r h i m , a s t h e m u r d e r e d

Abel's blood

cried

o u t f r o m t h e g r o u n d i n G e n e s i s 4 ; a n d t h e r e will b e a n o t h e r s p e a k e r too. As G o d

h i s e n e m y sits o n t h e b e n c h , G o d

h i s w i t n e s s will

be

p r e s e n t t o s a y o n J o b ' s b e h a l f w h a t h e h i m s e l f will n e v e r n o w

have

the o p p o r t u n i t y to say, a n d to wrest f r o m t h a t o t h e r G o d t h e

ver-

d i e t t h a t is h i s d u e . T h e v i s i o n d o e s n o t l a s t , a n d i n c h a p t e r

17 J o b

is b a c k w i t h h i s v a n i s h e d h o p e s a g a i n : t h e y will d e s c e n d w i t h to t h e b a r s of S h e o l a n d die w i t h h i m in t h e dust; b u t h o w

him

brightly

it s h i n e s t h e little w h i l e it d o e s last! Which and

brings us to the r e d e e m e r

of c h a p t e r

19. B o t h

textually

i n t e r p r e t a t i v e l y t h e p a s s a g e is o n e o f t h e m o s t d i f f i c u l t i n

the

whole O l d T e s t a m e n t . Surely part of the reason must be that J o b ' s e m o t i o n s a r e so t a u g h t l y s t r e t c h e d its m a g n i f i c e n c e , o n

that his l a n g u a g e veers,

the incoherent.

He

despite

is a t t h e f r o n t i e r o f

what

h u m a n w o r d s a r e c a p a b l e o f e x p r e s s i n g ; it t h e r e f o r e b e h o v e s u s t o p r o c e e d w a r i l y , f o r w e a r e t r e a d i n g o n t h e o l o g i c a l eggshells. I discuss t h r e e r e n d e r i n g s .

The

first

is t h e

King James

version,

k n o w n perhaps from the ravishing soprano aria from Handel's

better Messiah,

w h e r e it is j u x t a p o s e d w i t h a v e r s e f r o m t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t (1 C o r . 1 5 : 2 0 , " B u t n o w is C h r i s t r i s e n f r o m t h e d e a d " ) , a n d t h u s g i v e n thoroughly

Christianized

meaning

which

is q u i t e

illegitimate.

a

The

second a n d third are m y o w n translations, representing w h a t I cons i d e r t o b e t h e t w o p o s s i b l e w a y s o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e p a s s a g e in its context

in t h e p r e - C h r i s t i a n

would claim to be the right

Book

of J o b .

The

t h i r d is t h e o n e

interpretation.

W h a t are we m e a n t to u n d e r s t a n d by the A V ' s

translation:

I

I k n o w that m y r e d e e m e r liveth, a n d that h e shall s t a n d at t h e latter day u p o n the e a r t h ; a n d though a f t e r m y skin worms d e s t r o y this body, yet in m y flesh shall I see G o d : w h o m I shall see for myself, a n d m i n e eyes shall b e h o l d , a n d n o t a n o t h e r , e s p e c i a l l y if w e r e a d it ( a n d w h o n o w d o e s n o t ? ) w i t h t h e s o u n d

of

H a n d e l ' s m u s i c i n o u r e a r s ? At the latter day t a k e s u s f o r w a r d t o t h e Last J u d g e m e n t a n d the resurrection of the d e a d at the e n d of the a g e , w h e n C h r i s t will r e t u r n t o e a r t h t o i n a u g u r a t e G o d ' s dom;

and

we, escaping through

the

merits of o u r

final

t h r e a t o f a n a d v e r s e v e r d i c t o n o u r sins, shall rise f r o m o u r l e a v i n g b e h i n d u s t h e e a r t h l y b o d i e s w h i c h t h e worms

king-

Redeemer,

the

graves,

have devoured,

a n d s h a l l live f o r e v e r i n G o d ' s n e a r e r p r e s e n c e , e n j o y i n g i n

body,

t h a t is i n o u r n e w r e s u r r e c t i o n b o d i e s , t h e b e a t i f i c v i s i o n . Y o u

will

notice that I have underlined some words; these words d o not a p p e a r in t h e H e b r e w t e x t b u t h a v e b e e n a d d e d b y t h e t r a n s l a t o r s o f

1611

(they a r e italicised in t h e A V ) . R e m o v e t h e m , a n d w e get a n entirely d i f f e r e n t m e a n i n g . T h i s p a s s a g e c a n n o t b e r e f e r r i n g t o t h e last t i m e s , n o r c a n it b e r e f e r r i n g t o r e s u r r e c t i o n , f a r less i m m o r t a l i t y , f o r J o b , w h o l i v e d i n a p e r i o d w h e n t h e r e w a s n o r e a l b e l i e f i n a life a f t e r death. And

the R e d e e m e r

h e g l i m p s e s is G o d ,

not yet G o d ' s

son

a n d , i n c o n f o r m i t y w i t h w h a t J o b is p l e a d i n g f o r , h e is c l e a r i n g J o b ' s n a m e , n o t c l e a r i n g h i m f r o m guilt. It is v e r y r e v e a l i n g t h a t o n l y o n c e i n t h e w h o l e O T d o e s

redeem

o r r e d e e m e r , a p p l i e d t o G o d , r e f e r t o f o r g i v i n g s i n s (in P s .

130:8).

T h e contrast with the N e w T e s t a m e n t could hardly be greater, e q u i v a l e n t G r e e k n o u n s a n d verbs, t h o u g h n o t so c o m m o n , always denoting salvation

through

Christ

the

nearly

f r o m sin o r s o m e

alien

s p i r i t u a l p o w e r (e.g., G a l . 3 : 1 3 ; E p h . 1:7; T i t u s 2 : 1 4 ; 1 P e t . 1:18). E l s e w h e r e in the O l d T e s t a m e n t t h e w o r d s a r e used of G o d as deliverer of his p e o p l e f r o m b o n d a g e in E g y p t ( E x o d . 6:6; 106:10) o r f r o m slavery in exile (Isa. 43:1; 4 4 : 2 2

15:13; Ps.

77:15;

23; 5 1 : 1 0 - 1 1 ; 52:9),

i n c l u d i n g p l e a d i n g t h e i r c a u s e a g a i n s t B a b y l o n (Isa. 5 2 : 3 4 ‫ ) ־‬, o r ind e e d f r o m g e n e r a l t r o u b l e (Ps. 25:22), t h o u g h j u s t b e f o r e t h e Psalmist is c o m p l a i n i n g o f t h e c a l u m n i e s o f e n e m i e s . G o d a l s o r e d e e m s v i d u a l s , o f t e n f r o m m o r t a l illness (Ps. 4 9 : 1 5 , H o s .

indi-

13:14), b u t

f r o m t h e r e p r o a c h of w i d o w h o o d (Isa. 54:5), f r o m t h e u n j u s t

also treat-

m e n t m e t e d o u t to o r p h a n s (Prov. 23:11), f r o m t h e m a l i c e of p e r secutors

(Ps.

119:154),

from

imprisonment

in

a pit

(Lam.

3:58).

S e n t e n c e s with G o d as r e d e e m e r o r r e d e e m i n g a r e of course m e t a p h o r ical; b u t t h e y d e r i v e f r o m a s e c u l a r s o u r c e , f r o m old Israelite l a w , w h e r e t h e r e d e e m e r (in H e b r e w goel)

is t h e t e c h n i c a l t e r m

clan for

a n e a r r e l a t i v e w h o is o b l i g e d t o b u y b a c k p r o p e r t y s o t h a t it b e kept within the family (Lev. 2 5 : 2 5 - 3 4 ) , or to r a n s o m a f r o m slavery (Lev. 25:47

kinsman

55), o r to m a r r y a w i d o w so t h a t a n

m a y be provided for h e r d e a d h u s b a n d ( R u t h 4:16‫)־‬, or to the blood of a m u r d e r e d relative (Deut.

19:11

T h e r e is n o c a s e r e c o r d e d w h e r e a h u m a n suit, t h o u g h

may

the metaphorical

13; 2 S a m .

goel

heir

avenge

14:4 -11).

takes p a r t in a l a w -

legal l a n g u a g e a d o p t e d

in several

of

t h e e x a m p l e s a t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h i s p a r a g r a p h m a k e s it likely t h a t such

did

exist.'

But whether

or

not

s p h e r e , t h e p a s s a g e s c o n t a i n i n g Ps. situations sufficiently akin f r o m all a r o u n d

to J o b ' s

as to m a k e

they

did

exist in t h e

119:154 or Lam. of slander

it n o t a l t o g e t h e r

and

3:58

false

secular describe

accusation

unique, even

where

G o d h i m s e l f is, i n . J o b ' s v i e w , t h e c h i e f s l a n d e r e r a n d a c c u s e r . A b o v e all, i n c o n t e x t s h u m a n o r d i v i n e ,

goel is

idarity a n d

duty, which

family affection a n d

a w o r d r e d o l e n t o f c l a n solis n o d o u b t w h y

the

a u t h o r p u t s it o n J o b ' s lips h e r e . G o d , J o b is t a n t a m o u n t t o i m p l y ing, owes h i m

one.

T h e only two viable interpretations of Job

1 9 : 2 5 f f , t h a t is, i n t e r -

p r e t a t i o n s t h a t will h a v e a r e l e v a n t m e a n i n g i n t h e b o o k o f J o b , a r e :

Either

(with

the

NEB

and

GNB

among

modern

versions), J o b

e x p e c t i n g to h a v e his vision b e f o r e h e dies, in w h i c h case w e

is

may

translate: I k n o w t h a t m y k i n s m a n is n o w living a n d t h a t h e will b e the last to s t a n d u p o n the e a r t h ; a n d a f t e r m y skin h a s [all b u t ] p e e l e d a w a y [I k n o w ] this, t h a t while still in m y flesh I shall see G o d . I shall see h i m to b e o n m y side; m y v e r y o w n eyes shall see h i m a n d not a n o t h e r ' s . E v e r y t h i n g in this b o o k so far, h o w e v e r , e v e n his p r e v i o u s vision of t h e w i t n e s s in c h a p t e r

16, h a s J o b a c c e p t i n g t h a t h e is g o i n g t o d i e ,

e v e n w e l c o m i n g t h e p r o s p e c t o f d e a t h ; a n d all h e is h o p i n g f o r a t t h i s p o i n t is t h a t h i s r e p u t a t i o n f o r i n t e g r i t y will s u r v i v e

him.

Or t h e r e f o r e , J o b d o e s n o t e x p e c t t o h a v e h i s v i s i o n u n t i l a f t e r h e d i e s ; r a t h e r , in a m o m e n t o f e x c e p t i o n a l d a r i n g f o r a n O l d T e s t a m e n t b e l i e v e r , h e e x p e c t s G o d t o a p p e a r t o h i m i n S h e o l . H e is c o n v i n c e d at this m o m e n t

t h a t his s u f f e r i n g s a r e c a u s e d , n o t b y a n y t h i n g

he

has d o n e , but by G o d himself: " H a v e pity o n m e , have pity o n

me,

Ο

rails

ye m y friends, for the h a n d of G o d h a t h t o u c h e d m e " . H e 1

See J.C.L. Gibson, Iuinguage and Imagery in the Old Testament (London, p. 137.

1998),

at the s u r r o u n d i n g c o m p a n y ; but they are only the m o n k e y , not the o r g a n - g r i n d e r . H e longs f o r a m e m o r i a l to b e c u t in t h e rock,

but

r e a l i z e s t h i s will n o t b e e n o u g h . O n l y G o d c a n u n d o w h a t G o d

has

d o n e a n d give h i m justice. S o h e cries out in a n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , w h i c h is i n e s s e n t i a l s if n o t i n its d e t a i l s t h a t o f t h e R S V a n d s e v e r a l o t h e r modern

translations:

I k n o w t h a t m y k i n s m a n d o e s n o t die, a n d t h a t as t h e o n e w h o will c o m e a f t e r m e h e will t a k e his s t a n d o v e r m y g r a v e ; a n d a f t e r m y skin h a s [wholly] p e e l e d a w a y - [I k n o w ] this, t h a t e v e n w i t h o u t m y flesh I shall see G o d . I shall see h i m to b e o n m y side; m y o w n eyes shall see h i m , a n d [he will] n o [ l o n g e r b e a] s t r a n g e r . I n v i s i o n a r y flight J o b s e e s h i s e r s t w h i l e e n e m y b e c o m e h i s k i n s m a n and

s t a n d i n g o v e r his g r a v e

to p r o n o u n c e

himself be dead, but s o m e h o w

his i n n o c e n c e .

h e will k n o w , f o r G o d

He

will

will

appear

t o h i m i n S h e o l t o tell h i m , a n d h e , a b o d i l e s s s h a d e , will s e e

him

t h e r e . T h e p a s s a g e is b o t h s u b l i m e a n d d i s j o i n t e d ; it d o e s n o t f o r e see resurrection

for J o b ,

b u t it d o e s b r e a k

through

the barrier

of

d e a t h in m u c h t h e s a m e w a y as t h a t o t h e r e x c e p t i o n a l O l d T e s t a m e n t p a s s a g e , Ps. 139, " t h o u g h I m a k e m y b e d in S h e o l , t h o u a r t t h e r e " . That

we should not read too m u c h

previous

line, g i v i n g rise to a n

i n t o Ps.

equally

1 3 9 is s h o w n b y

impossible

scenario:

the

"If I

ascend u p into heaven, thou art there". Neither J o b n o r the Psalmist is g i v i n g u s a d o c t r i n e o f r e s u r r e c t i o n , b u t b o t h a r e p i e r c i n g t h r o u g h to the o t h e r side of d e a t h a n d asserting that w h a t e v e r m a y t h e r e , G o d will b e

happen

present.

A l a s ! t h e v i s i o n s o o n f a d e s , a s t h e e a r l i e r o n e i n c h a p t e r 16 f a d e d , b u t w h i l e it l a s t s , it s u r e l y m a r k s t h e z e n i t h o f t h e b o o k . J o b out,

"My

heart

sinks w i t h i n

me",

as t h o u g h

saying "This

cries

cannot

b e " ; a n d in t h e s u c c e e d i n g c h a p t e r s h e gives w a y o n c e m o r e to pessimism a n d

despair, though

significantly n o t a g a i n to s a r c a s m

and

b l a s p h e m y . H e is n o w s i n c e r e l y a n d i n d e e d d e s p e r a t e l y s e a r c h i n g f o r G o d a n d , w h e n t h e m o m e n t is r i g h t , G o d will s p e a k t o h i m o u t o f t h e w h i r l w i n d . T h e e n c o u n t e r will h a p p e n i n t h i s life, a s will J o b ' s r e s t o r a t i o n to p r o s p e r i t y a f t e r w a r d ; f o r t h e t i m e in w h i c h t h e

Book

of J o b w a s w r i t t e n this w a s i n e v i t a b l e , a n d in n o w a y d e t r a c t s f r o m the force of the short a n d u n i q u e vision of c h a p t e r and angry m a n reproached

God

having, by extrapolation for his m i s m a n a g e m e n t

19. I n it a s a d

f r o m his o w n

experience,

of the universe,

finds

the

faith to see b e y o n d a b l e a k p r e s e n t a n d c a t c h sight of t h e k i n d

God

b e h i n d t h e c r u e l a n d c a l l h i m r e d e e m e r , b e c a u s e o n e d a y , b e it a f t e r his d e a t h ,

h e will s p e l l o u t

his v i n d i c a t i o n ; a n d

h e will m e e t

him

face to face. A leap of faith c a n m o m e n t a r i l y shatter reality even in a b o o k w h i c h is o n l y t o o w e l l a c q u a i n t e d w i t h r e a l i t y ' s p a i n . T h e r e a r e t w o lessons to b e l e a r n e d f r o m this glorious vision. is t h e o l o g i c a l ,

f o r it i n v i t e s u s t o s t r e t c h

One

o u r ideas of salvation

i n c l u d e n o t o n l y t h o s e like S t . P a u l , w e i g h e d d o w n w i t h a

to

hopeless

s e n s e o f sin a n d g u i l t a n d s h a m e , b u t t h o s e m i l l i o n s o f i n n o c e n t v i e t i m s in o u r w o r l d

who

a r e hopeless in a n o t h e r

a g o n y cry o u t for relief a n d

recognition. W e

way and

in

m u s t all b o w

their before

G o d ' s m a j e s t y a n d p o w e r , b u t n o t e v e r y o n e n e e d s to c o n f e s s his sins in o r d e r

to be

saved;

his distress m a y

be

enough

to d r a w

down

heaven's compassion. T h a t

is t h e p a t t e r n w e m e e t i n t h e B o o k

Exodus where

need

the

people

only

to cry out

because

b o n d a g e to h a v e G o d c o m i n g d o w n to rescue t h e m f r o m clutches.

And

it is t h e

pattern

we

meet

in J e s u s '

first

of

of

their

Pharaoh's sermon

at

N a z a r e t h w h e r e , citing Isaiah, h e says: T h e Spirit preach the h e a r t e d , to sight to the Where

of t h e L o r d is u p o n m e , b e c a u s e h e h a t h a n o i n t e d m e to gospel to t h e p o o r ; h e h a t h sent m e to heal t h e b r o k e n p r e a c h d e l i v e r a n c e to t h e captives, a n d t h e r e c o v e r i n g of blind, to set at liberty t h e m that a r e bruised (Luke 4:18, A V )

there do you

find

a n y t h i n g a b o u t f o r g i v e n e s s o f s i n s ? It is

s i m p l y , is it n o t , J e s u s b e i n g c o m p a s s i o n a t e pattern

of salvation

is a s t h o r o u g h l y

t o t h o s e in n e e d ?

biblical

as the

This

Pauline,

and

s h o u l d g e t m o r e o f a h e a r i n g t h a n it o f t e n d o e s . T h e s e c o n d l e s s o n h a s m o r e t o d o w i t h t h e i n n e r life. It is t h a t t h e v i s i o n o f t h e l i v i n g G o d is g r a n t e d , n o t t o t h e p i o u s , b u t t o t h e desperate; not to the well-meaning, b u t the d r o w n i n g m a n ; not t h o s e w h o set t h e m s e l v e s d o u g h t i l y t o d e f e n d t h e f a i t h o n c e ered

to the saints, b u t

to the m a n

who

has thought

to

deliv-

himself to

s t a n d s t i l l a n d is, like J o b , a t t h e e n d o f h i s t e t h e r . T h e v i s i o n not b e the self-indulgent vision of the mystic b u t a s u d d e n

a

will

glimpse

o f G o d e n g a g i n g w i t h evil a n d , t h o u g h h e finds it h a r d , c a r r y i n g h i s purpose

out.

T h i s l i t d e s t u d y is p r e s e n t e d t o T o n y G e l s t o n , w h o m

I first m e t

in

Sir G o d f r e y D r i v e r ' s classes so l o n g a g o at O x f o r d , with m y w a r m e s t wishes for a long a n d healthy

retirement.

T H E SHAPE O F T H E PSALTER: AN E S C H A T O L O G I C A L DIMENSION? BY M.A.

VINCENT Durham

T o n y Gelston has written several interesting articles o n the

Psalter,

o n e o f w h i c h is a s o b e r r e v i e w o f t h e d e b a t e s u r r o u n d i n g t h e e x p r e s sion ‫ י ה ו ה מ ל ך‬w h i c h recurs a m o n g a g r o u p of p s a l m s in b o o k 4 of t h e P s a l t e r . 1 It w a s t h e c u l t i c a p p r o a c h posais of an a u t u m n

enthronement

of M o w i n c k e l a n d his p r o -

festival w h i c h b e g a n

the

arly focus o n these p s a l m s w h i c h has c o n t i n u e d ever since.

2

scholE v e n if

h a s b e c o m e k i n g ' 5 is u n w a r r a n t e d

(as

G e l s t o n argues), t h e t h e o r y of a n a u t u m n festival d o e s n o t h a n g

on

Mowinckel's reading " Y H W H

it, a n d M o w i n c k e l ' s w o r k h a s l e f t a n i n d e l i b l e s t a m p o n p s a l m s s t u d y . Recently

a number

of scholars

have

focused

on

the ‫מ ל ך‬

ίΤΙΓΡ

e x p r e s s i o n a n d t h e a s s o c i a t e d p s a l m s in b o o k 4 f r o m a q u i t e d i f f e r e n t perspective. Pursuing the question of the organisation of the

Psalter

a n d t h e p r o c e s s o f e d i t o r i a l s h a p i n g w h i c h p r o d u c e d it, 3 s o m e s c h o l a r s h a v e s e e n i n t h e a s s e r t i o n ‫ מ ל ך‬ΓΠΓΓ a n d i n t h e o t h e r d i s t i n g u i s h i n g f e a t u r e s o f b o o k 4 4 t h e ' a n s w e r ' t o a crisis p e r c e i v e d t o b e a d d r e s s e d i n b o o k 3. T h i s h a s l e d t o t h e d e s c r i p t i o n o f b o o k 4 a s t h e " e d i t o r i a l

1

A. Gelston, "A Note on ‫ מ ל ך‬ΓΠΓΤ\" VT 16 (1966), pp. 507 512. For other bibliography, see for example, ). Day, God's Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea University of Cambridge Oriental Publications 35 (Cambridge, 1985), p. 36. 2 S. Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien 2 (Oslo, 1922), pp. 6(f. = The Psalms in Israel's Worship 2 (Oxford, 1962), pp. 222-224. 3 T h e pioneering work (and still the best) is G.H. Wilson, The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter S B I D S 76; (Chico, 1985). T h e most up-to-date survey of the literature and bibliography is in D.M. Howard, The Structure of Psalms 93 100 Biblical and Judaic Studies from the University of California, San Diego 5 (Winona Lake, 1997). Other treatments include J.C. M c C a n n (ed.), The Shape and Shaping of the Psalter J S O T S S 150 (Sheffield, 1993), N. deClaisse-Walfoord, Reading from the Beginning (Mercer, 1998), and other works in the following footnotes. For a more critical assessment see R.N. Whybray, Reading the Psalms as a Book J S O T S S 222 (Sheffield, 1996), especially pp. 118 124. 4 There can be little doubt that the ‫ מ ל ך‬ΓΠΓΓ psalms form a crucial group (if not the dominant one) among the psalms of Book 4. Other themes will be introduced later in this essay.

c e n t r e o f t h e P s a l t e r " . 3 S u c h s u g g e s t i o n s will b e a m p l i f i e d a n d ined

exam-

later.

T h i s is a v o l u m e a b o u t e s c h a t o l o g y , a n d it is w o r t h p o i n t i n g that the expression ‫מ ל ך‬

out

‫ יהרה‬c a n b e r e a d as a n a f f i r m a t i o n of t h e

v a l i d i t y o f e s c h a t o l o g i c a l h o p e . I n d e e d , t o a s s e r t t h a t " T h e L o r d is k i n g " and t h a t o n e ' s e n e m i e s will p e r i s h a n d o n e d a y b e n o (as d o e s 9 2 : 1 0 - 1 3 ,

for example)

m a y well b e eschatological. A related p s a l m ,

6

which,

of the

s t a t e m e n t s e c h o t h e a s s e r t i o n s o f Pss.

as I shall a r g u e

below,

are

that

94, asserts that

will o n e d a y b e a n a n s w e r t o t h e a p p a r e n t t r i u m p h (94:14,15,23). S u c h

more

implies a divine intervention

organisationally

there wicked

1 and

2

significant.

To

c o n t i n u e in b o o k 4, the p i c t u r e of t h e w h o l e c r e a t i o n (including e v e n t h e n a t i o n s ! ) r e j o i c i n g b e f o r e t h e L o r d is m o r e c l e a r l y still a v i s i o n o f t h e f u t u r e ( 9 6 , 9 7 , 9 8 , 100), a n d t h e r e is a l s o t h e t w i c e

repeated

a s s e r t i o n t h a t " h e is c o m i n g ; h e is c o m i n g t o j u d g e t h e e a r t h ! " ( 9 6 : 1 3 and

98:9).

Given, then, that some scholars have suggested book 4 a n d ‫ יהוה מ ל ך‬expression to be theologically a n d organisationally

the

central

t o t h e P s a l t e r , and t h a t t h e r e a r e e l e m e n t s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e ΓΠΙΤ ‫מלך‬

psalms

and

their

neighbours

which

suggest

an

eschatological

h o p e , it s e e m e d w o r t h w h i l e t o e x p l o r e t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t t h e of the Psalter as a w h o l e m i g h t b e t r a y a n eschatological

shape

interest.

S e a r c h i n g f o r e s c h a t o l o g y i n t h e p s a l m s is n o n e w e n t e r p r i s e ; b o t h J e w s a n d Christians have long pursued the quest. T h e r e are

many

p s a l m s w h i c h can b e s o r e a d , e v e n t h o u g h t h e y m a y n o t r e q u i r e it. D a v i d Mitchell's recent work7 d e m o n s t r a t e s clearly s o m e of the possibilities h e r e . N o r m a n

Whybray's

Reading the Psalms as a BookR

is

r a t h e r less p o s i t i v e , b u t a l s o c o n t a i n s i m p o r t a n t m a t e r i a l o n t h e t o p i c . W h y b r a y examines evidence that certain psalms m a y show traces of a process of eschatological

redaction.

He

concludes that such

n o t a stage of m a j o r s i g n i f i c a n c e in t h e h i s t o r y of t h e Psalter,

5

was even

T h e expression is Wilson's (1985), p. 215. Witness, too, the title o f J . L . Mays's book: The Lord Reigns - A Theological Handbook to the Psalms (Louisville, 1994). 6 T h e interconnectedness of Pss. 93 100 and the importance of considering them as a group is demonstrated convincingly in Howard (1997). See also his shorter summary article "A Contextual Reading of Psalms 9 0 - 9 4 " in M c C a n n (1993), pp. 108-123. 7 D.C. Mitchell, An Eschatological Programme in the Book of Psalms J S O T S S 252 (Sheffield: Sheffield, 1997). Unfortunately Mitchell's work was not available to me when this study was researched. See, however, the review in L.L. Grabbe (ed.), SOTS Booklist 1998 (Sheffield, 1998), p. 87. 8 Whybray (1996), pp. 88-99.

though

certain

eschatological

psalms

may

contain

accretions

which

manifest

an

interest.

M y a i m h e r e is n o t t o i n q u i r e t o w h a t e x t e n t e s c h a t o l o g y m a y f o u n d in t h e

Psalter as a w h o l e .

Rather

I am

concerned

question of the Psalter's s h a p e a n d organisation: does the of the Psalter contain clear organisational patterns a n interest in eschatology b e d i s c e r n e d a m o n g

be

with final

the form

a n d if s o ,

can

them?

T o d o this I shall p r e s e n t a synthesis of t h e w o r k d o n e so f a r b y various scholars on plemented

the

organisational

shaping of the

by s o m e suggestions of m y own. M u c h

focus specifically o n

eschatology,

Psalter,

sup-

o f t h i s will

s i n c e t h i s is n o t t h e

not

predominant

d i r e c t i o n in w h i c h s c h o l a r s h a v e g o n e . N e v e r t h e l e s s , I shall a t e v e r y stage be asking w h e t h e r the alleged patterning or shaping m a y an eschatological

have

a s p e c t t o it. P e r h a p s t h e m o s t s i g n i f i c a n t

element

o f this s t u d y , h o w e v e r , will b e t h e a t t e m p t t o e v a l u a t e a n d

critique

the suggestions which have been put forward, something which

has

b e e n all t o o r a r e i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e . J u s t h o w m u c h e v i d e n c e is t h e r e concerning

the

shaping

and

organisation

of the

Psalter,

and

m u c h weight c a n be a t t a c h e d to the suggestions of scholars in this f a s h i o n a b l e

how

working

field?

1. The beginning and ending of the Psalter All b o o k s h a v e a b e g i n n i n g , m i d d l e a n d e n d , a n d m o s t a u t h o r s

(and

editors) p a y particular

The

attention

b e g i n n i n g helps f o r m vital

first

to the

first

and

last of t h e s e .

impressions; the ending can

strongly

c o l o u r t h e o v e r a l l e f f e c t o f a w o r k . I n l i n e w i t h t h i s it m a k e s to begin the s e a r c h for s t r u c t u r e a n d o r g a n i s a t i o n

in t h e P s a l t e r

these very places. W h a t d o the choices m a d e by the of the Psalter b e t r a y a b o u t their

obtained

the

historical

its p r e s e n t

processes

opening,

final

in

compilers

interests?

i) The introduction to the Psalter: Psalms Whatever

sense

1&2 according

to w h i c h

there are a n u m b e r

d e n c e w h i c h s u g g e s t t h a t both p s a l m s

the

Psalter

of pieces of evi-

1 a n d 2 are intended to

con-

s t i t u t e t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e P s a l t e r i n its p r e s e n t f o r m . T h e s e

are

as follows: 1. N e i t h e r p s a l m

h a s a title. T h i s sets t h e m

p s a l m s in b o o k s

apart

1 - 3 , the vast m a j o r i t y of w h i c h

from the

other

do have

titles.

Indeed, the two psalms stand out even other

psalms

titles

and

Pss.

1 and

in

a

book

Davidic

1

only

ascription

Pss.

more

10 a n d

MT.9

in

strikingly f r o m 33

do

not

Furthermore,

2 are the only psalms in the entire

in

2. T h e r e which

are

of the

a number

disappear

in

LXX

Psalter which

n o t h a v e a title. T h i s s u g g e s t s t h e s e t w o p s a l m s a r e t o b e ered independently

the

contain

do

consid-

others.

of key word-links b e t w e e n subsequent

psalms:

the

psalms

1 and

occurrence

of

2

‫הנה‬,

meditate, devise in 1:2 and 2:1; the use of ‫אבר‬, pe1ish, at the end of both psalms: sidered

1:6; 2 : 1 2 . T h i s s u g g e s t s t h a t

1 a n d 2 are to be

con-

together.

3 . T h e r e is a n i n c l u s i o a r o u n d t h a t . . .,"

t h e t w o p s a l m s : " B l e s s e d is t h e

1:1; " B l e s s e d a r e all t h e y t h a t p u t

2:12. Although

Ps. 3 also c o n c l u d e s w i t h a n e x p r e s s i o n

i n g , a d i f f e r e n t r o o t , ‫ ב ר ך‬, is u s e d o n

that

man

t h e i r t r u s t in

him",

of bless-

occasion.

4. W h i l s t m o s t c o m m e n t a t o r s h a v e r e c o g n i s e d t h e i n t r o d u c t o r y f u n c tion

of Ps.

1, s o m e

have

questioned

it f o r

Ps.

2.

However,

its

t h e m e s as a royal p s a l m (with clear eschatological overtones) r e p e a t e d as a m o t i f t h r o u g h o u t t h e Psalter, o f t e n in p l a c e s

which

a r e o r g a n i s a t i o n a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t (as I shall s h o w b e l o w ) . T h i s gests t h a t Ps. 2 m a y also b e d e l i b e r a t e l y p o s i t i o n e d a n d to carry an introductory 5.

On

a more

subjective note, both

make

sug-

intended

function. psalms

1 and

a n d u n i q u e p s a l m s . W h i l s t it is q u i t e p o s s i b l e t o which

are

2 are find

distinctive

other

psalms

b a s i c a l l y t h e s a m e p o i n t s as, s a y , Pss. 3, 4 , 5, 6,

7

( a n d s o f o r t h , t h o u g h n o t 8), t h e c o n t e n t a n d m o d e o f e x p r e s s i o n o f Pss.

1 and

2 is m o r e

that, along with

certain

d i s t i n c t i v e . T h i s is r e f l e c t e d i n t h e other

p s a l m s (18,

19, 4 5 ,

72,

110,

fact 119,

etc.) b o t h h a v e h e l d t h e a t t e n t i o n of s c h o l a r s (despite Ps. l ' s a p p a r ent

simplicity).

This

again

suggests

a

deliberate

editorial

place-

m e n t of these psalms, a n d the likelihood of a n introductory function. W h a t , t h e n , is t h e i n t r o d u c t o r y f u n c t i o n p e r f o r m e d b y P s s . 1 a n d

2?

9

T h e absence of titles for these two psalms can be a c c o u n t e d for. Either, they were originally unified compositions with the following psalm (witness the c o r r u p t e d alphabetic p a t t e r n across 9 10, a n d c o m p a r e the usual assumption for 4 2 4 3 ‫; ) ־‬ the absence of a title is an editorial strategy to indicate that in this otherwise Davidic book these psalms are to be considered as linked to (and considered in conjunction with) the Davidic psalms which preceded t h e m .

or,

ii) Psalm 1: individual obedience Psalm

1 begins by emphasising the i m p o r t a n c e of individual

sibility a n d

obedience.

It depicts a r i g h t e o u s a n d

respon-

'blessed' m a n

in

r e l a t i o n t o t h e u n g o d l y (1:1 3) a n d t h e n i n v e r t s t h i s b y d e p i c t i n g t h e wicked in relation to t h e r i g h t e o u s (1:4-5). O n l y the

righteous

man

will b e f r u i t f u l a n d t h u s ' s t a n d ' i n G o d ' s j u d g e m e n t ; t h e w i c k e d will be blown

a w a y like c h a f f a n d p e r i s h . T h e

psalm

thus contains

u n a m b i g u o u s statement b o t h of m a n ' s duty a n d of a

an

reward/penalty

system. A f u r t h e r c r u c i a l t h e m e is t h a t o f G o d ' s l a w ( T o r a h ) . T h e e o u s m a n is o n e w h o " m e d i t a t e s d a y a n d n i g h t " u p o n it.

right-

Through

t h e p o s i t i o n i n g o f t h i s p s a l m a s t h e first i n t h e P s a l t e r , p r i d e o f p l a c e is g i v e n t o G o d ' s T o r a h ( w h i c h I t a k e t o b e a r e f e r e n c e b o t h t o t h e P e n t a t e u c h , to G o d ' s instruction a n d t e a c h i n g elsewhere, a n d to the teaching which

is t o f o l l o w i n

the

remainder

of the

Psalter).1"

seems to be b e y o n d coincidence that a b o o k with a clear

It

five-fold

s t r u c t u r e (like t h e P e n t a t e u c h ) s h o u l d b e g i n w i t h a p s a l m w h i c h e x t o l s t h e v i r t u e s o f o n e w h o m e d i t a t e s clay a n d n i g h t i n G o d ' s T o r a h . word Torah

and

the topic of m a n ' s

l a t e r i n t h e P s a l t e r (e.g.

19, 3 7 ,

meditating upon

it will

The recur

119), a n d it is t h u s s i g n i f i c a n t

it s h o u l d b e i n t r o d u c e d a t t h e v e r y

that

start."

It is i m p o r t a n t a l s o t o n o t i c e t h e e s c h a t o l o g i c a l d i m e n s i o n t o Ps. 1. It a s s e r t s t h a t t h e r e will b e a f u t u r e d a y o f r e c k o n i n g a n d ment

in w h i c h

t h e r i g h t e o u s will s u r v i v e b u t

judge-

t h e w i c k e d will

T h u s one's behaviour and one's alignment towards God's T o r a h

111

not. do

In this sense the use of the word torah at the beginning claims for the Psalter a continuity between God's revelation in the Pentateuch and the material contained in the psalms which arc to follow (interestingly, the Psalter begins the third section of the Hebrew canon, so the point may be extended). A particular status as 'torah' is thus obliquely claimed for the Psalter by the use of this term in the opening psalm. 11 J.L. Mays, " T h e Place of the Torah-Psalms in the Psalter," JBL 106 (1987), pp. 3-12; and (1994), places considerable emphasis on these 'torah' psalms, suggesting that they arc one of the keys to the Psalter and that their positioning is organisationally significant. While his demonstration of the importance of the motif is helpful, I cannot accept that there is convincing evidence for seeing any except psalm 1 to occur in places of structural prominence within the Psalter. Glaus Westermann, "Zur Sammlung des Psalters," Theologia Viatorum 8 (1962), pp. 278 284 = " T h e Formation of the Psalter," in Praue and Lament in the Psalms (Atlanta, 1981), pp. 2 5 0 - 2 5 8 attempts a case for 119, suggesting that an earlier form of the Psalter originally concluded with that psalm, but there is scant evidence for his proposal. It seems better to recognise that while the motif of the importance of God's torah is an important one in the Psalter, it is not one of the central organising concerns.

matter. This was a theme we noted

in b o o k 4, a n d

it is

repeated

t h r o u g h o u t t h e P s a l t e r . I s u g g e s t t h a t its o c c u r r e n c e i n t h i s f i r s t p s a l m is i m p o r t a n t ; a n y o n e w i t h a n e s c h a t o l o g y w o u l d in t h e s e a s s e r t i o n s of Ps.

iii) Psalm 2: international Psalm

find

s u p p o r t f o r it

1.

responsibility

2 a l s o e m p h a s i s e s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y b e f o r e G o d , b u t t h i s t i m e it

is national

not individual. W h e r e a s psalm

eousness,

psalm

2 is i n t e r n a t i o n a l

1 called for personal

in scope, a d d r e s s i n g

the

rightnations

a n d s u m m o n i n g t h e m to s u b m i t to G o d a n d his ' M e s s i a h ' a n d T h e r e are other important the

m o t i f s a l s o w h i c h will r e c u r

'son.'

throughout

Psalter (the c h o i c e of Z i o n , the p u r p o s e with t h e nations),

these cannot be developed

but

here.

I t is i m p o r t a n t t o s t r e s s t h a t t h i s p s a l m w a s c h o s e n ( o r a t t h e v e r y least

allowed

when

it w a s

to

remain)

finally

as a n

compiled

introductory

psalm

h i s s o n / k i n g is p r o m i s e d a n d a s s e r t e d , at a time when and

when

God

the

nation

had

little p o l i t i c a l

promises the nations a n d

his i n h e r i t a n c e . from

God's

H e will s u b d u e t h e m final

Psalter and

there was no

significance. T o

king,

this

king

the uttermost parts of the world

h o l y hill o f Z i o n .

s p e c t i v e o f its

for the

after the Exile. Victory for G o d

and

Reading

reign over t h e m as

the

Psalter

from

as

king

the

per-

f o r m a n d taking into a c c o u n t the editorial

deci-

sion m a d e in p l a c i n g this p s a l m in this p o s i t i o n w e a r e f o r c e d

into

u n d e r s t a n d i n g it e s c h a t o l o g i c a l l y , w h a t e v e r its o r i g i n s m a y h a v e b e e n . Let

me

should

emphasise

front a

this p o i n t .

collection

which

I t is r e m a r k a b l e includes

a

that

this

substantial

psalm

number

p s a l m s w h i c h d e a l w i t h G o d ' s rejection o f Z i o n a n d t h e failure kingship

and

kingdom.

That

this p s a l m

should

assert

of

of the

God's

rule

( w h e n w e k n o w w h a t is c o m i n g i n t h e r e s t o f t h e P s a l t e r ) m a k e s it a l m o s t c e r t a i n t h a t t h i s P s a l m is t o b e g i v e n a n e s c h a t o l o g i c a l

inter-

p r e t a t i o n . All h a s n o t b e e n lost d e s p i t e t h e c a p t i v i t y a n d t h e loss o f t h e k i n g d o m ; G o d w i l l still b e v i n d i c a t e d , a n d w i l l v i n d i c a t e h i s p e o p i e ; Z i o n w i l l still b e t h e c e n t r e o f t h e w o r l d ! S o t h e P s a l m

asserts.

T h e D a v i d i c p r o m i s e o f 2 S a m u e l 7 is r e a s s e r t e d h e r e , e v e n

though

o t h e r p a r t s o f t h e P s a l t e r r e c o g n i s e t h a t it w a s n o t h i s t o r i c a l l y f u l f i l l e d . That

fulfilment (following a

v l 5 , 8 , 9 ‫ ) ־‬is y e t t o The sent, has

final

and not

clash

between

God

and

the

nations,

come.

stanza of the Psalm brings the r e a d e r back to the

effectively a d m i t s happened

yet.

The

that

the

kings

situation

and

princes

described are

pre-

previously

addressed

and

e x h o r t e d t o b e w i s e w h i l e t h e y still h a v e o p p o r t u n i t y -

b e f o r e it is

too late. T h e m o m e n t of decision a n d j u d g e m e n t has n o t yet

come,

a n d the n a t i o n s a r e e n c o u r a g e d to m a k e the right choice n o w while t h e y still h a v e c h a n c e . T h i s is a p o w e r f u l l e a d - i n t o t h e P u t t i n g t h e s e p o i n t s f r o m Pss.

1 and

Psalter.

2 together, we have

found

e m p h a s i s o n b o t h individual a n d national responsibility, along with a n e x p l a n a t i o n o f t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h i s i n v i e w o f w h a t is y e t c o m e . T h e j u d g e m e n t o f G o d is p r o c l a i m e d a s a p p l y i n g t o b o t h individual a n d

to the

t o t h e w o r l d . A s r e a d e r s o f t h e first t w o p s a l m s

of

t h e P s a l t e r w e a l r e a d y k n o w w h a t we h a v e t o d o , a n d w e k n o w w h a t God is p l a n n i n g t o d o . This p r o g r a m m a t i c beginning contrasts sharply with the following p s a l m s (3ff.) w h i c h f o r m t h e h e a r t o f b o o k

1. T h o s e p s a l m s a r e all

a b o u t troubles a n d difficulties, a n x i e t y a n d suffering. T h e y a r e p s a l m s w h i c h a r i s e o u t o f t h e p e r s o n a l e x p e r i e n c e o f crisis i n life. W e c o n s i d e r the significance of these later, b u t and

2 c a n b e seen as the p r o g r a m m a t i c

one steady through such

for the present

Pss. 1

foundation that can

hold

crisis.

iv) The ending of the Psalter: psalm 150 or psalms Psalm

shall

1 5 0 is g e n e r a l l y t h o u g h t

146-150?

to constitute the conclusion

to

the

Psalter, t h e w h o l e p s a l m serving as a d o x o l o g y r a t h e r t h a n a single sentence

(as is t h e c a s e f o r t h e o t h e r b o o k s ) . T h i s is a n

attractive

o p t i o n : t h o u g h o n l y o n e o f a n u m b e r o f p s a l m s 111 b o o k 5 f r a m e d by the expression total c o n c e n t r a t i o n

' H a l l e l u j a h , ' t h e p s a l m s t a n d s o u t b e c a u s e o f its on

praising G o d

to such

an extent

p e r s o n a l i t y o f t h e p s a l m i s t a n d h i s c o m m u n i t y is e n t i r e l y

that

the

forgotten.

G o d is b r o u g h t t o t a l l y t o t h e f o r e a s t h e o b j e c t o f m a n ' s p r a i s e ;

man

is c o m p l e t e l y i n t h e b a c k g r o u n d . C o n t r a r y t o t h e u s u a l p r a c t i c e , j u s t i f i c a t i o n is g i v e n h e r e a s t o why G o d is t o b e p r a i s e d . T h e

no

psalm

is s o t o t a l l y G o d - f o c u s e d t h a t t o s p e c i f y o n e ' s m o t i v a t i o n w o u l d

be

out of place.12 I believe t h a t a closer look at t h e c l o s u r e of b o o k 5 b r i n g s to light a n a n a l y s i s s u p e r i o r t o t h e a b o v e , h o w e v e r . 1 3 S i n c e t h e r e is g o o d e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e P s a l t e r h a s a n i n t r o d u c t i o n w h i c h is n o t p a r t o f t h e 12 A point made in W. Brueggemann, "Bounded by Obedience and Praise: The Psalms as C a n o n , " JSOT 50 (1991), pp. 6392‫ ;־‬reprinted in P.D. Miller (ed.), 771e Psalms and the Life of Faith, (Minneapolis, 1995), here pp. 192-193. 13 Wilson (1985), pp. 225-226, gives a similar analysis, although I came to the conclusion independently.

five-fold

structure of the Psalter but rather stands outside that

ture (book

1 really consisting of psalms 3

struc-

41), this suggests t h a t

we

l o o k f o r a s i m i l a r l y i n d e p e n d e n t c o n c l u s i o n . F u r t h e r m o r e , P s . 1 5 0 is the

finale

of a sequence

thus part

of the

of a larger structure;

t h e r e f o r e t h a t Ps.

five

Hallelujah

it d o e s

not

Pss.

stand

146-150.

alone.

I

I t is

suggest

1 4 5 is t h e c o n c l u d i n g p s a l m o f b o o k 5 , a n d

the Hallelujah sequence a s a w h o l e (of w h i c h

1 4 6 - 1 5 0 forms the conclusion of the

1 5 0 is t h e " g r a n d

that

Psalter

finale").

B u t w h a t o f a c o n c l u d i n g d o x o l o g y f o r b o o k 5 ? I s u g g e s t t h a t it m a y b e i d e n t i f i e d as t h e last v e r s e o f Ps. 145: " M y m o u t h shall s p e a k the praise of the L O R D :

And

l e t all

flesh

bless his holy n a m e

ever a n d ever." (145:21, R S V ) . T h i s requires c o m p a r i s o n doxologies of the other 1. B l e s s e d b e t h e

with

for the

books:

LORD

the G o d

of Israel, f r o m everlasting,

to everlasting. A m e n , a n d A m e n . (41:14, 2. Blessed b e t h e L O R D ,

the G o d

and

RSV).

of Israel, w h o a l o n e does

won-

d r o u s things. Blessed b e his glorious n a m e for ever; a n d m a y g l o r y fill t h e w h o l e e a r t h ; A m e n , a n d A m e n . ( 7 2 : 1 8 - 1 9 , 3. Blessed b e t h e L O R D

his

RSV).

for ever. A m e n , a n d A m e n . (89:53,

RSV).

4. Blessed b e t h e L O R D , t h e G o d of Israel, f r o m everlasting to everl a s t i n g . A n d l e t all t h e p e o p l e s a y , ' A m e n ' . ( 1 0 6 : 4 8 ,

RSV).

T h e r e are, admittedly, big differences between these a n d Ps.

145 does

not

use the

phrases

"God

145:21.

of Israel" or " A m e n

and

A m e n " which are characteristic elsewhere (although " G o d of Israel" is n o t f o u n d i n P s . 8 9 e i t h e r ) . N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e p a r a l l e l s a r e striking:

the

r e f e r e n c e to blessing the

holy n a m e

of the

equally

Lord

and

t h e e x p r e s s i o n " f o r e v e r a n d e v e r " a r e t o b e f o u n d i n all t h e doxologies.

This

seems

to m e

to be convincing

evidence

other

that

p s a l m d o e s i n d e e d f u n c t i o n as t h e last p s a l m in t h e g r o u p t h a t

this make

u p B o o k 5. Also (given t h e p r o p o s a l to b e p r e s e n t e d b e l o w t h a t royal p s a l m s o c c u r at t h e e n d of b o o k s o r i m p o r t a n t divisions in t h e Psalter), it is s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t t h e t h e m e o f P s .

1 4 5 is t h e

kingdom o r reign

of

G o d . T h e c o n c l u d i n g d o x o l o g y of the p s a l m n o t only blesses

God's

h o l y n a m e a s d o t h e o t h e r d o x o l o g i e s , b u t it a l s o s t r e s s e s t h e

inter-

national dimension

of the kingdom:

"and

let

all flesh

bless his

n a m e for ever a n d e v e r " ( R S V ) . A n eschatological vision o n c e T h i s l e a v e s us w i t h Pss. 1 4 6

150 as the conclusion to the

W i t h their crescendo of praise to G o d culminating in

holy

more? Psalter.

150 they

are

e m i n e n t l y s u i t a b l e f o r t h i s f u n c t i o n . T h e r e is a l s o a c o n t r a s t w i t h

the

introduction to the Psalter. T h e introduction focused on the s i b i l i t y o f man

respon-

(whether individual or national) to acknowledge

serve G o d . T h e

Psalter concludes by focusing on

j o y s of praising h i m . M a n

is n o w

thoroughly

God a n d

wrapped

and

on

the

u p in

this

w o r k o f p r a i s e ( o r i n e n f o r c i n g it, P s . 149!). A t t h e e n d o f t h e P s a l t e r t h e w h o l e c r e a t i o n is u n i t e d i n p r a i s i n g G o d

(Pss.

148 a n d

150 in

p a r t i c u l a r , p i c k i n g u p o n t h e m e s f r o m t h e ‫ מ ל ך‬ΓΠΓΓ p s a l m s ) . A n y o n e who

read

those psalms a n d

believed that the picture they

w o u l d c o m e a b o u t (as t h e p s a l m i s t s c e r t a i n l y s e e m t o h a v e m u s t h a v e h a d a n e s c h a t o l o g y . Ps. God,

spoken

o f i n Pss.

1 and

present believed)

149 describes the j u d g e m e n t s

214 a n d

reiterated

again

and

of

again

( c o m p a r e t h e ‫ מ ל ך‬ΓΠΓΓ p s a l m s ) , a t last b e i n g c a r r i e d o u t o n t h e e a r t h b y t h e s a i n t s . T h e v e n g e a n c e p r o m i s e d is a t l a s t b e i n g

performed,

a n d G o d ' s p r a i s e will t h u s a s c e n d u n h i n d e r e d b y t h e d e e d s o f t h o s e w i c k e d e n e m i e s t h e P s a l t e r s o f r e q u e n t l y d e s c r i b e d . S u c h is t h e g o a l towards which the Psalter

2 . Keynotes

moves.

of the Psalter:

what

happens

in

between?

H a v i n g established that the psalms at the beginning a n d e n d i n g

of

the Psalter a p p e a r to have b e e n deliberately chosen to function

as

the introduction a n d conclusion to the collection has a definite "starting place" a n d "what

happens

in b e t w e e n ? "

'ending' -

Psalter

the next question

reader

W e c a n b e g i n s i m p l y b y " j o i n i n g t h e d o t s " , a s it w e r e . T h e

Psalter

i)

a progression

is

as the

passes f r o m start to

Is t h e r e

that the

finish?

Progressions

b e g i n s w i t h o b e d i e n c e a n d e n d s w i t h praise: t h e t w o c a n easily linked u p in the suggestion that the Psalter charts a progression, path

o r a j o u r n e y , w h e t h e r i n t h e life o f t h e f a i t h f u l i n d i v i d u a l

i n t h e e x p e r i e n c e s o f I s r a e l , f r o m obedience t o praise.

This

be a or

suggestion

is t h e b a s i s o f B r u e g g e m a n ' s j u s t l y f a m o u s e s s a y " B o u n d e d b y O b e d i ence a n d Praise."15 T h e other; in b e t w e e n

14

Psalter begins with one a n d ends with

it will e x p l o r e

and

expand

on

the problems

the of

Perhaps an inclusio is to be seen here between Pss. 2 and 149? It is also worth exploring the possibility that one is to be discerned between 1 and 150 also. 15 Brueggemann (1991), pp. 63 92; reprinted in Miller (1995), pp. 189-213.

o b e d i e n c e a n d faith which arise t h r o u g h the circumstances a n d h a r d s h i p o f life. It will s h o w t h a t t h r o u g h

obedience

i n t i m e s o f crisis

a n d d i s t r e s s t h e b e l i e v e r will l e a r n h o w t o p r a i s e G o d , t o b e less f o c u s e d on Τ

and more centred on praising

God.

T h e progression m a y b e expressed differently as a progression f r o m lament

t o praise.

The

P s a l t e r is l i k e a p e n d u l u m

constantly

alternat-

i n g b e t w e e n t h e t w o e x t r e m e s of l a m e n t a n d p r a i s e ; in f o r m - c r i t i c a l t e r m s t h e s e a r e t h e m o s t c o m m o n g e n r e s o f p s a l m . B u t it is s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t n u m e r i c a l l y l a m e n t s a r e in t h e a s c e n d a n c y in t h e

first

half of

t h e Psalter (books 1 - 3 ) a n d in d e c l i n e t h e r e a f t e r . In c o n t r a s t , w e a n increasing n u m b e r of h y m n s a n d praises as w e progress

find

towards

t h e c o n c l u s i o n , w i t h a p a r t i c u l a r l y h i g h p r o p o r t i o n i n b o o k s 4 a n d 5. 1 6 C o n s o n a n t w i t h t h i s o b s e r v a t i o n , it is a l s o t r u e t h a t t h e r e is less i m p r e c a t i o n to b e f o u n d as w e m o v e t h r o u g h t h e Psalter. it d e p e n d s o n o n e ' s d e f i n i t i o n o f i m p r e c a t i o n t o d i s c u s s it), o n

a rough

estimate

the

Although

(this is n o t t h e

ratio of psalms

i m p r e c a t o r y p a s s a g e s a c r o s s Pss. 1 - 5 0 , 5 1 - 1 0 0 ,

place

containing

1 0 1 - 1 5 0 is a p p r o x -

i m a t e l y 3 : 2 : 1 . T h e r e is less f o c u s o n me a n d my e n e m i e s , a n d focus o n G o d as w e p r o g r e s s t h r o u g h t h e Psalter (the Τ

more

of the psalms

f a d e s i n t o t h e b a c k g r o u n d ) . All t h e s e f a c t s l e n d s u p p o r t t o t h e gestion that reading t h r o u g h

the Psalter represents a j o u r n e y

l a m e n t t o p r a i s e , f r o m f o c u s o n self t o f o c u s o n In a n o t h e r context W a l t e r B r u e g g e m a n n ogy of f u n c t i o n " to categorise

God.

has suggested a

t h e p s a l m s as a n

sugfrom

alternative

"typolto

the

s t a n d a r d form-critical distinctions.17 H e has discerned three types of p s a l m : p s a l m s of o r i e n t a t i o n

(statements of theoretical

and

untried

f a i t h ) , d i s o r i e n t a t i o n ( ' l a m e n t ' p s a l m s i n w h i c h f a i t h h i t s crisis),

and

r e o r i e n t a t i o n (in w h i c h crisis is w o r k e d t h r o u g h , r e s p o n d e d t o ,

and

a d e e p e r a n d wiser faith r e a f f i r m e d ) . A l t h o u g h this t e r m i n o l o g y

was

developed

to categorise individual p s a l m s a n d n o t t h e Psalter as a

w h o l e , it is p e r h a p s w o r t h o b s e r v i n g t h a t a l t h o u g h t h e ' b o d y ' o f t h e P s a l t e r c o n t a i n s a m i x t u r e o f t h e t h r e e types, Pss. 1 a n d 2 a r e defin i t e l y p s a l m s o f o r i e n t a t i o n a n d Pss. 1 4 6 - 1 5 0 m a k e s e n s e a s p s a l m s 16 It is in books 4 and 5 and in the conclusion of the Psalter that the Hallelujah and "bless the Lord" psalms are found. It is here too that there are more 'straightforward' compositions transparently suited to every age (that is, not requiring a strategy of interpretation in the way that imprecatory psalms and laments seem to require for modern readers). 17 W. Brueggemann, The Message of the Psalms - A Theological Commentary Augsburg O T Studies (Minneapolis, 1984); also Miller (1995), pp. 3-32.

o f r e o r i e n t a t i o n . W h a t h a p p e n s i n b e t w e e n is t h e t r a n s i t i o n

between

t h e t w o : largely p s a l m s of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n ( c o m i n g to a h e a d in 3), b u t w i t h a n e w o r i e n t a t i o n and

book

e m e r g i n g ever stronger in books

4

5.

The

progression

can

b e seen in eschatological

t e r m s also

(albeit

less c o n v i n c i n g l y ) . T h e P s a l t e r b e g i n s w i t h t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s now

to

s h o w o b e d i e n c e to G o d , c o u p l e d with the p r o m i s e that o n e d a y there will b e a r e w a r d f o r t h i s , a n d t h a t G o d a n d h i s ' s o n 5 will r e i g n o v e r the earth. W e

then

move through

a series of l a m e n t / c r i s i s

psalms

w h i c h r e f l e c t t h e t r i a l s o f f a i t h a n d h a r s h e x p e r i e n c e o f life a s it is now. B u t a s w e c o n t i n u e t h e v i s i o n o f t h e w h o l e w o r l d p r a i s i n g in t h e e s c h a t o n g r o w s In

God

stronger.

outlining this progression

we

are

of course

in t h e

s w e e p i n g generalisation. C h a r a c t e r i s i n g t h e Psalter as a

realm

of

progression

f r o m l a m e n t to praise, f r o m o b e d i e n c e to praise, f r o m ' m e ' to ' H i m ' is a n a t t e m p t t o c h a r a c t e r i s e a l a r g e , d i v e r s e a n d c o m p l e x w o r k t h e b o u n d s o f a s e n t e n c e . T h e q u e s t i o n is, h o w u s e f u l is t h e

gener-

alisation? F o r t h e p r e s e n t t w o p o i n t s a r e w o r t h m a k i n g . First, a r e m a n y c o u n t e r e x a m p l e s t h a t spoil t h e p a t t e r n : h y m n s a n d in b o o k

1, l a m e n t s

and

imprecation

in b o o k

5. T h e

transition

there praises

Psalter

s t a n t l y a l t e r n a t e s b e t w e e n l a m e n t a n d p r a i s e ; t h e r e is n o t a

in

con-

smooth

f r o m o n e to t h e o t h e r . S e c o n d , a n d in t e n s i o n w i t h

foregoing,

the

generalisation

undeniably

true

centredness

decreases

that

the

is n e v e r t h e l e s s

frequency

through

the

of laments, Psalter. T o

based

on

imprecation be

able

to

for this t h r o u g h a p r o p o s a l of a n overall f r a m e w o r k for t h e is a v e r y a t t r a c t i v e

the

f a c t s . It and

is '1'-

account Psalter

option.

ii) The book divisions The

f i v e - f o l d d i v i s i o n o f t h e P s a l t e r is c e n t r a l t o its

structure.

The

five

'books'

of p s a l m s

organisational

reflect i m p o r t a n t

differences,

n o t o n l y in t h e u s a g e o f p s a l m titles a n d o t h e r t e c h n i c a l t e r m s

but

also in g e n r e

and

of psalm,

subject

matter,

and

even

vocabulary

style.'" O n t h e l o o k o u t for editorial s h a p i n g , s o m e scholars h a v e p a i d p a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n to the p s a l m s w h i c h o p e n a n d c o n c l u d e the

18

five

M.A. Vincent, " T h e Organisation of the Psalter: What can Lexical Evidence Contribute?" unpublished paper read at the Psalms Group of the 1998 SBL Meeting in Orlando, Florida.

books,

the

psalms

has termed

them.

at

the

'seams'

of the

Psalter,

as

Gerald

Wilson

19

Wilson f o u n d an examination of the concluding psalms of the books to be particularly fruitful. H e claimed that the usually a royal psalm,

and

saw organisational

that

145

is a l s o

a

psalm

about

72 a n d the

five

psalm

activity lying

t h i s . T h i s is c e r t a i n l y t r u e i n t h e c a s e o f P s s . interesting

final

was

behind

89, a n d

it is

kingdom/reign

G o d ( s e e a b o v e ) . T h e p r o b l e m w i t h W i l s o n ' s o b s e r v a t i o n is t h a t pattern

fails at

contains

Pss.

elements

41

and

of the

106

royal

(although

genre,

the

Wilson attempt

claims

sustained

of

five

without

41

found

unconvincing by others, including myself). Wilson's proposal be

the

that

has been

of

cannot

m o d i f i c a t i o n , s i n c e it o n l y w o r k s i n t h r e e

out

cases.

A s will b e

suggested

below,

books

1 and

2 and

books

4 and

5

s h o u l d in s o m e respects b e c o n s i d e r e d t o g e t h e r , a n d f r o m this

point

o f v i e w W i l s o n ' s p o i n t still h a s m e r i t ( s i n c e P s s . 7 2 , 8 9 a n d

mark

the end

of the books

t o t h e P s a l t e r (Pss. Each

1+2) also c o n t a i n s a royal p s a l m

o f t h e s e p s a l m s is i m p o r t a n t

of tracing the

Davidic

tant bearing on

Another books.

king, but

option This

rightly points out

shall w i t h h o l d is t o l o o k has that

been

at

the

a

final

the

they

in

have

final

place.

psalm

of Clinton

73 and

an

impor-

eschatological

judgement

opening

strategy

Pss. 3, 4 2 ,

145

introduction

not only f r o m the point of view

also b e c a u s e

the questions of Messianic a n d

in the Psalter. W e

five

1 + 2 , 3, 4 + 5 ) ; 2 0 f u r t h e r m o r e , t h e

90 are

until

hope

later.

of each

of

McCann.

21

all l a m e n t s .

is t r u e , b u t t w o o b s e r v a t i o n s s e r v e t o l i m i t t h e p o w e r o f t h e v a t i o n . F i r s t , P s . 1 0 7 , t h e o p e n i n g p s a l m o f b o o k 5 , is n o t a

the He This

obserlament,

s o t h e p a t t e r n o n l y w o r k s i n f o u r o u t o f five c a s e s . S e c o n d , t h e o b s e r vation

that

Pss. 3, 4 2 a n d

7 3 a r e l a m e n t s is

of t h e o t h e r p s a l m s in t h o s e b o o k s a r e

l!

uninteresting,

l a m e n t s also.

since

Psalm

3

most does

' Wilson (1985), 208 207 .‫קנן‬, but c o m p a r e also pp. 2 0 7 - 2 2 8 . deClaisse-Wa (1998) is an e x a m p l e of this a p p r o a c h being taken too far. In a short m o n o g r a p h she dedicates most of her space to a t r e a t m e n t of the o p e n i n g a n d closing psalms of each of the five books without a r g u i n g that these psalms are typical or representative of the books as a whole. 20 F r o m the point of view of structural symmetry this suggests that book 3, not book 4 as is claimed by Wilson, M c C a n n a n d others, is the editorial heart of the Psalter. F u r t h e r evidence for this will be b r o u g h t forward w h e n each of the books is considered below. 21 J . C . M c C a n n , "Books 1 - 3 a n d the Editorial Purpose of the H e b r e w Psalter," in M c C a n n (1993), pp. 9 3 - 1 0 7 .

n o t s t a n d o u t f r o m a n y o f t h e p s a l m s w h i c h f o l l o w it a s a

lament;

n e i t h e r d o e s Ps. 4 2 . I n n o w a y c a n t h e s e p s a l m s b e said t o

betray

a clue a b o u t the organisational s h a p i n g of the Psalter; they are m e r e l y typical of the p s a l m s that are to follow later in t h e respective Other

strategies for d e t e r m i n i n g the organisational

book.

shape of the

P s a l t e r h a v e b e e n t o p a y less a t t e n t i o n t o t h e b o o k d i v i s i o n s a n d i n s t e a d to look f o r signs of editorial r e d a c t i o n . A t t e m p t s h a v e b e e n

made

to discern a w i s d o m r e d a c t i o n , a sacrificial r e d a c t i o n a n d a n

escha-

t o l o g i c a l r e d a c t i o n . E a c h o f t h e s e a v e n u e s is e x p l o r e d i n V V h y b r a y ' s w o r k , a n d h i s c o n c l u s i o n is t h a t e a c h is u l t i m a t e l y

unconvincing.‫״‬

3. Do the five books have a story to tell? I s h a l l n o w d i s c u s s e a c h o f t h e five b o o k s i n t u r n , o u t l i n i n g t h e d i s tinctive t h e m e s a n d e m p h a s e s of e a c h in a n e n d e a v o u r to d e t e r m i n e if o r h o w t h e y c a n b e s e e n a s c o n t r i b u t i n g t o a ' s t o r y ' o r

'message'

f o r t h e Psalter as a w h o l e , a n d w h e t h e r o r n o t e s c h a t o l o g y part to play in such a i) Books

has

a

scheme.

I&2

It is d i f f i c u l t t o d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n b o o k s 1 a n d 2 o n a n y t h i n g o t h e r t h a n stylistic g r o u n d s , 2 3 a l t h o u g h it is t r u e t h a t c o m m u n a l p s a l m s a r e m o r e f r e q u e n t i n b o o k 2. 111 t h e final e d i t o r i a l s h a p i n g o f t h e

Psalter

the two books are to be c o n n e c t e d because a c c o r d i n g to the

psalm

titles 2 1 t h e y a r e b o t h p r e d o m i n a n t l y D a v i d i c . 2 5 It is n o t e w o r t h y

that

t h e c o l o p h o n to b o o k 2, " T h e p r a y e r s of D a v i d the s on of J e s s e a r e ended," provides a

fitting

c o n c l u s i o n n o t j u s t to b o o k 2, b u t to b o t h

b o o k s 1 a n d 2. F u r t h e r m o r e , c o m m o n t h e m e s a n d m o o d s n a n t l y i n d i v i d u a l l a m e n t s ) a r e d e v e l o p e d in t h e t w o 22

(predomi-

books.

Whybray (1996). Particularly the use of • ‫ א ל ה ״‬in book 2, a feature which continues into Ps. 83 of book 3. See Vincent, (1998). 24 See note 9, above. 25 T h e exception is the Korah cycle 42 49. An explanation of this and other stylistic facts connecting books 2 and 3 may be that book 2 and most of book 3 (the so-called 'elohistic' Psalter, 42 83) originally constituted a collection, that 84 89 (a second Korah group) was then added to creatc a symmetry with the opening of the collection (an inclusio of Korah psalms: 42 49 and 84 88/89). T h e colophon of 72 may have been left intact from such a collection, and, in the final form of the Psalter, it would serve a double function when book 1 was put in front it concluded the whole group of predominantly Davidic psalms, 1 72. 23

The

figure

of D a v i d

is t h u s t h e k e y t o t h e f u n c t i o n o f b o o k s 1

a n d 2 as p a r t of the overall s t r u c t u r e of the Psalter. N o t only d o 5 5 p s a l m s h a v e D a v i d i c s u p e r s c r i p t i o n s ; all b u t o n e o f t h e p s a l m s

con-

t a i n i n g h i s t o r i c a l titles r e l a t i n g t o i n c i d e n t s i n D a v i d ' s life o c c u r these two books. Although

there

are psalms

about

David

as

in

king

( 1 8 , 2 0 , 2 1 , 6 1 , 6 3 ) , it is s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t m o s t o f t h e s e D a v i d i c p s a l m s p o r t r a y D a v i d as a suffering a n d victimised

figure,

r a t h e r t h a n as a

m i g h t y s w a s h b u c k l i n g k i n g . C h i l d s s u g g e s t s t h a t D a v i d is t o b e s e e n as a representative individual, w h o s e sufferings a r e typical of those e x p e r i e n c e d b y e v e r y o n e . 2 6 It w a s t o t h i s s u f f e r i n g resentative

of e a c h

individual

Israelite, a n d

figure

(as a

i n all p r o b a b i l i t y

s y m b o l o f t h e n a t i o n a s well) t h a t t h e p r o m i s e s w e r e m a d e . like I s r a e l a n d

rep-

like t h e I s r a e l i t e h e e p i t o m i s e s , h a d

as

a

David,

to cling o n

to

this belief in t h e f a c e of t h e crises w h i c h h e s u f f e r e d . b e l o w is t h a t o n e o f t h e

themes

b e i n g t r a c e d t h r o u g h t h e P s a l t e r is t h e s t o r y o f t h e D a v i d i c

The

proposal

to be developed

monar-

c h y f r o m t h e t i m e s of D a v i d in w h i c h t h e p r o m i s e s w e r e

received,

t h r o u g h t o its c o l l a p s e in t h e e x i l i c p e r i o d ( a n d t h e a s s o c i a t e d

ques-

tion " w h a t h a p p e n e d to t h e p r o m i s e s , then?!"). In this s c h e m a

books

1 and

2 deal with the historical D a v i d himself. T h e two psalms

at

t h e close of b o o k 2 a p p e a r p a r t i c u l a r l y p e r t i n e n t h e r e as D a v i d passes off the scene. Psalm

71 is a b o u t o l d a g e ; a t l a s t t h e g r e a t k i n g is

c o m i n g t o t h e e n d o f his life - G o d , w h o h a s b e e n w i t h h i m t h r o u g h o u t h i s life f r o m h i s y o u t h , is p l e a d e d w i t h n o t t o d e s e r t h i m

now

t h a t h e is o l d . B u t w h a t will f o l l o w t h e p a s s i n g o f t h e g r e a t

king?

Is t h i s t h e e n d

point

of the

Davidic

m a d e v e r y clearly in Ps. 72, t h e

dynasty? final

final

psalm

a

psalm of the Davidic

(note: a royal psalm at the conclusion the Psalter). T h i s

O f course not! -

of a n

important

Psalter

division

is a b o u t t h e D a v i d i c k i n g -

but

in not

a b o u t D a v i d h i m s e l f . T h e p r o m i s e s m a d e t o D a v i d in 2 S a m u e l a r e e c h o e d h e r e (as w e l l a s t h e p r o m i s e s t o A b r a h a m ) a s D a v i d o v e r the reins to S o l o m o n (the p s a l m tide r e a d s " t o / f o r asking G o d to give his j u d g e m e n t s to

his (David's) son. T h e

7

hands

Solomon"), hope

and

f u t u r e o f t h e D a v i d i c m o n a r c h y is n o w b e i n g p l a c e d i n t h e h a n d s o f S o l o m o n a n d h i s s u c c e s s o r s . E v e n t h o u g h D a v i d is d y i n g , his k i n g s h i p will b e i m m o r t a l i s e d in h i s c h i l d r e n .

211

B.S. Childs, Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture (London, 1979), p. 522. I like this inteipretation, although it must be said that the function of the historical tides appears to do the very opposite: to situate them specifically in the life of David, and to insist that these are not 'generalised' or 'stylised' sufferings.

ii) Book 3 The

kingship was indeed passed on, but the nation's fortunes

w e n t downhill (according to the historical narratives), a

soon

degeneration

w h i c h c u l m i n a t e d in t h e captivity. B o o k 3 wastes n o t i m e in

inform-

i n g u s t h a t all h a s g o n e b a d l y a w r y , a n d i n t a k i n g u s f o r w a r d t o trauma

o f t h e e x i l e : t h e s h o r t b o o k is d o m i n a t e d

the

b y p s a l m s of cri-

sis w h i c h t e l l G o d i n t h e m o s t d i r e c t t e r m s o f s u f f e r i n g , d o u b t , u n f a i r ness, a n d

o f God's

apparent

f a i l u r e t o d o a n y t h i n g a b o u t it. G o d

is

q u e s t i o n e d a n d criticised m o r e f o r c e f u l l y h e r e t h a n e l s e w h e r e in

the

Psalter. There

are

two

types

o f crisis p s a l m

in

the

book,

reflecting

d i f f e r e n t levels in w h i c h crisis w a s e x p e r i e n c e d . First t h e r e a r e which

record

question

individual

crises

(especially p s a l m s

communal

laments which

of faith: in

73 a n d

particular

77). T h e n

complain

that

the

there are

God

two

psalms

theodicy

national

h a s r e j e c t e d his

or

peo-

p i e a n d is d o i n g n o t h i n g a b o u t t h e i r n a t i o n a l d i l e m m a ( w h i c h 1 t a k e t o b e t h e c a p t i v i t y ) . G o d is n o t b e i n g a p r o p e r s h e p h e r d ; 2 7 r a t h e r is d e s t r o y i n g

his p e o p l e

and

their expectation.

God

seems

to

have

completely rejected the Davidic m o n a r c h y and the promises he (74, 79, 80). All this c o m e s to a h e a d in t h e

final

he

made

two psalms of the

8 9 . 8 8 is s i g n i f i c a n t f o r its t o t a l l y b l e a k o u t l o o k , 2 8

book, 88 and

89

b e c a u s e it is a r e h e a r s a l o f G o d ' s p r o m i s e s t o D a v i d - w i t h t h e d e l i b erate intention

of t h r o w i n g t h e m

half of the psalm psalm

about

to ask w h a t

has become

the king/kingdom

Psalter, this t i m e a p s a l m

b a c k in G o d ' s face in the

is p l a c e d

of t h e m .

second

Once

again

at a t u r n i n g p o i n t

in

challenging the truth of these h o p e s

a the

and

promises. I t is s u r e l y

significant

that

the

problem

p s a l m s of i n d i v i d u a l l a m e n t in b o o k assertion suffer

o f Ps.

1 -

that

the

in

the

3 is t h e a p p a r e n t f a l s i t y o f

the

righteous

are

being

dealt

blessed

with

and

the

i n t h e light o f t h e p s a l m i s t ' s e x p e r i e n c e o f life. T h e

b e i n g dealt w i t h in t h e c o m m u n a l Ps. 2, t h e o t h e r p s a l m w h i c h

wicked problem

l a m e n t s is t h e a p p a r e n t f a i l u r e o f

forms the introduction

to the

Psalter.

W h e r e is G o d ' s ' M e s s i a h ' ? W h e r e is t h e k i n g s i t t i n g o n G o d ' s h o l y hill of Zion? W h y are the other nations t r i u m p h i n g over G o d ' s instead

27

of being s u b d u e d

by

it? T h e

crises of b o o k

3 are

monarchy a

direct

T h e use of shepherd language appears to be d o m i n a n t in the Asaph Pss. 7 3 8 3 ‫ ־‬. It is usually invoked in o r d e r to criticise G o d (contrast Ps. 23, whose words are in effect t h r o w n back at G o d in Ps. 80). 28 B r u e g g e m a n n (1984), pp. 78 81; (1995), pp. 56, 57.

challenge to the assertions of psalms

1 and

2. A l t h o u g h

hinting

at

a n s w e r s h e r e a n d t h e r e , b o o k 3 d o e s n o t a t t e m p t to a n s w e r this crisis o f f a i t h d i r e c t l y , p a r t i c u l a r l y

the national

crisis a n d

the

failure

o f t h e m o n a r c h y . T h i s is left h a n g i n g , i n m o s t d r a m a t i c f a s h i o n , b y the bitter complaint of psalms 88 a n d

89.29

iv) Book 4 Book 4 plays a very i m p o r t a n t

role in t h e s t r u c t u r e d e v e l o p i n g

f a r s i n c e it p r e s e n t s t h e ' a n s w e r 5 t o t h e crisis o f b o o k 3. S o s o t h a t , a s n o t e d e a r l i e r , it h a s b e e n t e r m e d of the

Psalter.

scholars

the

a p p e a r a n c e o f M o s e s in t h e first p s a l m o f t h e b o o k , s u g g e s t i n g

that

he

turn

representative

a g a i n to his p e o p l e a n d

have

seen

'heart5

the theological

s i g n i f i c a n c e in

is t h e

Some

intercessor w h o

great

so

much

pleads with

God

to

heal the b r e a c h of captivity (contrast

w i t h t h e a r g u i n g t h a t h a s o c c u p i e d s o m u c h o f b o o k 3).

30

this

It is c e r -

t a i n l y t r u e t h a t t h e r e is a s u s t a i n e d M o s a i c / w i l d e r n e s s t h e m e i n b o o k 4 which

must

be

accounted

f o r (90:1

(title); 9 9 : 6 ;

103:7;

105:26;

1 0 6 : 1 6 , 2 3 , 3 2 ; a l s o n o t e t h e w i l d e r n e s s t h e m e i n 8 1 a n d 9 5 ) . E v e n if the idea of Moses

as a n

intercessor be dismissed

a s f a n c i f u l , it is

n e v e r t h e l e s s p o s s i b l e t h a t a p a r a l l e l is b e i n g d r a w n b e t w e e n experience

in

the wilderness

(many

dying,

Israel's

not i n h e r i t i n g t h e

land

G o d p r o m i s e d - a n d yet a s u b s e q u e n t g e n e r a t i o n seeing the fulfilment of those promises by G o d ' s mercy) a n d

Israel's e x p e r i e n c e in

tivity ( m a n y d y i n g / b e i n g t a k e n c a p t i v e , t h e D a v i d i c m o n a r c h y in tatters -

and

yet the h o p e

that

God

caplying

will n e v e r t h e l e s s k e e p

p r o m i s e s a n d t h a t t h e r e will b e a r e t u r n ) . I n t h e w a k e o f t h e

rience of captivity, Israel h a v e to l e a r n their lesson, r e f o r m , a n d patient ‫ ־‬just

like t h e w i l d e r n e s s g e n e r a t i o n .

The

theme

of

his

expebe

God's

r e p e a t e d m e r c y is n o w h e r e m o r e c l e a r t h a n i n t h e l a s t p s a l m o f t h e book,

106, a p o i n t w h i c h m a y b e significant (notice M o s e s '

u l a r s i g n i f i c a n c e i n t h e first a n d l a s t p s a l m s o f t h e b o o k , 9 0 a n d T h e r e a r e t w o f u r t h e r t h e m e s w h i c h a r e central to a n tion of b o o k 4. T h e

first

partie106).

apprécia-

is t h e e m p h a s i s o n p r a i s i n g G o d ; G o d

is

2 '•' Pace M c C a n n , (1993), pp. 95-100, especially p. 97. McCann's table gives a misleading impression about the extent of positive material in book 3; furthermore, the alternation between positive and negative moods that he describes is characteristic of the Psalter as a whole and is not a noteworthy feature of book 3. 3 " C.R. Seitz, "Royal Promises in the Canonical Books of Isaiah and the Psalms,'' in Word Without End: The Old Testament as Abiding Theological Witness (Grand Rapids, 1998), pp. 162-165.

still t o b e p r a i s e d d e s p i t e all t h a t h a s b e e n e n d u r e d , a n d i n

what-

e v e r s i t u a t i o n o n e f i n d s o n e s e l f ( t h e ‫ מ ל ך‬ΓΠΓΓ p s a l m s , a n d o t h e r s like 100,

103,

104,

1 0 6 all e m p h a s i s e this). T h i s n o t e o f p r a i s e

u e s i n t o b o o k 5, 5 1 a n d elusion of the Psalter.

contin-

builds u p t o w a r d s a c r e s c e n d o at the The second

con-

t h e m e c e n t r a l t o b o o k 4 is t h e

‫ מ ל ך‬ΓΠΓΓ m o t i f itself, t h e a s s e r t i o n t h a t h e is k i n g d e s p i t e it all ( d e s p i t e t h e i n d i v i d u a l d o u b t a n d n a t i o n a l / h i s t o r i c a l crisis o f b o o k 3). I n

the

f a c e o f all a p p e a r a n c e s t o t h e c o n t r a r y t h e s e p s a l m s p r e s s t h e n o t i o n that G o d

is k i n g ( e v e n

if h e d o e s n ' t

t h r o n e ! ) , a n d t h a t h e is in

have an

earthly ruler on

his

control.

111 t h e l i g h t o f t h e crisis o f c a p t i v i t y t h e ‫ מ ל ך‬ΓΠΓΓ p h r a s e c a n o n e level b e u n d e r s t o o d a s a n a s s e r t i o n t h a t God is still k i n g , if t h e h u m a n

Davidic king has long since disappeared. T h e

king m a y have been taken a w a y because of the repeated

on

even

human

sinfulness

o f b o t h h i m a n d h i s p e o p l e , b u t G o d r e m a i n s e n t h r o n e d in

heaven.

T h u s h e is still t o b e p r a i s e d , a s t h e ‫ מ ל ך‬ΓΠΓΓ p s a l m s e n c o u r a g e ,

as

t h e l o r d o f all c r e a t i o n . H o w e v e r , a s w e n o t e d a t t h e o u t s e t , t h i s is n o t t h e o n l y w a y o f l o o k i n g a t t h e ‫ י ה ו ה מ ל ך‬p s a l m s . It is a l s o p o s s i b l e t o i n t e r p r e t t h e m in a n e s c h a t o l o g i c a l s e n s e : s i n c e G o d is k i n g h i s p r o m i s e s will y e t b e f u l f i l l e d a n d e i t h e r h e h i m s e l f , o r h i s

rep-

r e s e n t a t i v e ( t h e f u t u r e M e s s i a n i c k i n g ) will c o m e . T h i s v e r y a s s e r t i o n f o r m s the c l i m a x of t w o of t h e ‫ יהרה מ ל ך‬psalms, 9 6 a n d 98. T h r o u g h t h e b o d y o f t h e s e p s a l m s t h e r e is n o t a

pronounced

emphasis on

this

e s c h a t o l o g i c a l s o l u t i o n , b u t t h e r e is n o d o u b t t h a t it is d i s c e r n i b l e .

v) Book

5

B o o k 5 is t h e m o s t d i f f i c u l t o f t h e five b o o k s t o c a t e g o r i s e , a n d it is here that the progression that we have been developing appears its w e a k e s t . T h e b o o k e n d s in a n a p p r o p r i a t e w a y , w i t h p s a l m dealing extensively with the topic of G o d ' s k i n g d o m

and

his

at 145

lord-

s h i p o v e r t h e e a r t h . T h i s p s a l m c a n easily b e i n t e r p r e t e d in a n e s c h a t o l o g i c a l m a n n e r . F u r t h e r , t h e e m p h a s i s o n p r a i s e 111 t h e b o o k ( w i t h the 'hallelujah' a n d

"bless the L o r d " psalms, along with the

Songs

" 111 this sense, books 4 and 5 are best seen together (book 4 is not closed with a royal psalm, unlike the Davidic Psalter and unlike book 3). Furthermore, the two books have many stylistic similarities: Vincent, (1998). However, in other respects book 4 stands apart with its Mosaic emphasis and the yhwh mlk motif. T h u s it is not clear whether the superior analysis would be to group books 4 and 5 together or to consider them separately. As will become apparent, book 5 is difficult whichever strategy is adopted, though less so if the two books are linked.

of Ascents)

also c h i m e s

from lament

with

the general

to praise (trusting a n d

circumstance).

Nevertheless,

the

movement

in t h e

r e j o i c i n g in G o d

book

does

not

Psalter

whatever

appear

to

the

have

s p e c i f i c m e s s a g e o r s t o r y t o tell i n t h e w a y t h a t c a n b e c l a i m e d the other four books. Instead we authorship

find

no

a chiastic p a t t e r n in t e r m s

David

111-119

no

author

no

author

120-134

Songs of Ascents

135-137 138-144

David

145

no

author

M o s t of the p s a l m s in b o o k 5 a r e c o n t e n t to get o n with the j o b p r a i s i n g G o d in a s i m p l e a n d d i r e c t m a n n e r w i t h o u t tirades i m p r e c a t i o n of earlier books h a v e largely d i s a p p e a r e d (though to be

140,

a deliberate

143,

reminder

o f it r i g h t

at the e n d

and there

of

and

failed in

the

144).

M o r e d i f f i c u l t is t h e a p p a r e n t l a c k o f i n t e r e s t i n t h e D a v i d i c in M e s s i a h ,

of

against

enemies, or, indeed, against G o d himself. T h e incessant l a m e n t

has

of

author

108-110

book:

for

ascription:

107

appears

a

in eschatology.

book

3 and

that

Given

that the Davidic

this failure h a s b e e n

king,

monarchy

dealt

with

in

b o o k 4, w e w o u l d expect messianic a n d eschatological interest to b e at a height exception, appears

in b o o k such

to

be

5. Y e t

as p s a l m no

Davidic monarchy

t h i s is t h e p l a c e

where

1 1 0 ) it is c o n s p i c u o u s l y

conscious

attempt

to project

(with

the

absent.

the

hopes

odd

There for

the

f o r w a r d t o t h e f u t u r e , t o s a y " y e s , it d i d f a i l i n

t h e p a s t , b u t all is g o i n g t o b e p u t r i g h t i n t h e f u t u r e ! " I n s t e a d ,

we

have a sequence of psalms which are straightforward h y m n s of praise t o G o d . I t is o n l y t o w a r d s t h e e n d o f b o o k 5 , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n p s a l m s 144 a n d

145, t h a t eschatological interests a r e

revived.

vi) An eschatological interest? The

twin

t h e m e s of both

individual

faith a n d

the

Davidic

monar-

c h y i n crisis t h a t h a v e b e e n s k e t c h e d f o r b o o k s 1 - 3 m i g h t b e e x p e c t e d to l e a d to a c l e a r e x p r e s s i o n of e s c h a t o l o g i c a l h o p e in b o o k s 4

and

5 . H o w e v e r , a l t h o u g h it is p o s s i b l e t o s e e s u c h a t c e r t a i n p o i n t s b o o k 4 (as o u t l i n e d i n t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h i s e s s a y ) , it d o e s n o t

in

seem

t h a t t h i s is a d o m i n a t i n g e m p h a s i s i n t h a t b o o k , l e t a l o n e b o o k

5.

T h u s , although f r o m a consideration of the introduction a n d elusion

to the

Psalter

eschatological nation nant

it a p p e a r e d

probable

e m p h a s i s i n its s h a p i n g ,

of the individual concern.

Even

that

books themselves that

if t h e

there

it a p p e a r s o n

concluding

may

psalms

be

closer

t h i s is n o t of book

conan

examia

domi-

5 and

the

e m p h a s e s of b o o k 4 are a c c o r d e d extra weight, the bulk of the Psalter s h o w s little t r a c e o f h a v i n g b e e n s u b j e c t e d t o a s y s t e m a t i c

editorial

process intended

absence

to highlight eschatological

solutions. T h e

of s u c h m a t e r i a l in t h e b o d y of b o o k 5 c o u n t s strongly a g a i n s t

this.

E v e n if o n e o f t h e k e y o r g a n i s a t i o n a l c o n c e r n s o f t h e P s a l t e r is t o chart the meant

rise

a n d fall o f t h e m o n a r c h y a n d o f h o w f a i t h i n G o d

to cope with those experiences,

gested by the Psalter's organisation not predominantly

eschatological.

the solutions implicidy

sug-

(if t h e y a r e n o t i m a g i n a r y ! )

They

are rather to keep

is are

trusting

a n d to keep praising. T o this message o n e c a n a d d "until o n e

day

e v e r y t h i n g will b e p u t r i g h t " , a m e s s a g e w h i c h c a n i n d e e d b e

seen

a t v a r i o u s p o i n t s i n t h e P s a l t e r ( a m o n g o t h e r s : 2 , 7 2 , ‫ מ ל ך‬ΓΠΓΠ P s s . 1 4 4 , 1 4 5 ) , p a r t i c u l a r l y if o n e is l o o k i n g f o r it. B u t it is a t h e m e has

to b e

searched

for, rather

than

being deliberately

which

put

in

r e a d e r ' s w a y to e n c o u r a g e h i m o r h e r to think eschatologically. can r e a d

the

Psalter eschatologically,

even

to the extent

a n e s c h a t o l o g i c a l ' p r o g r a m m e ' w i t h i n it; b u t t h e i s a t i o n a l s c h e m e is a f a r c r y f r o m making to r e a d

the

emphasise

Psalter in

the

only that such

that

importance

way.

Even

dominant

One

of finding

editors'

organ-

o n e o r e v e n encouraging someone

of eschatology

themes were

final

who

would

at the

c o l l e c t i o n s o f t h e P s a l t e r ( p e r h a p s in t h e ‫מ ל ך‬

be

was

one

keen

to

able

to

claim

boundaries

of

major

‫ יהרה‬p s a l m s too,

h a p h a z a r d l y elsewhere). S u c h a p e r s o n w o u l d n o t b e able to a systematic s c h e m e t h r o u g h the b o d y of the Psalter as a

4. Evaluation

the

and claim

whole.

and Conclusion

I turn now

f r o m the specific question of eschatology to a n

tion of the

thesis of a n

organisational

plan and

message

évalua-

from

the

P s a l t e r as d e v e l o p e d in this e s s a y a n d b y o t h e r s c h o l a r s in t h e

sec-

o n d a r y literature. At least t h e f o l l o w i n g c r i t i q u e s h o u l d b e 1. M o r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n

needs to be given to the possible

made.

artificiality

of l o o k i n g for a n o r g a n i s a t i o n a l m a s t e r - p l a n for t h e P s a l t e r in t h e first

place.

Why

should

the

Psalter be

thought

to h a v e

such

a

plan?

Is s o m e

such

comparable

scheme

to be

found

in

other

a n c i e n t collections?32 O n e could p e r h a p s take a n y h y m n - b o o k p o e t r y c o l l e c t i o n (to u s e a m o d e r n

analogy), look at the

w h i c h b e g i n a n d e n d it a n d l i k e w i s e c o n s t r u c t a n

pieces

interpretation

o f t h e e d i t o r i a l p l a n . B u t i n all l i k e l i h o o d t h i s w o u l d b e t o something into the editorial work far b e y o n d tors themselves ever intended. H y m n

or

read

anything the

books would not

edi-

normally

s e e m to b e c o n s t r u c t e d a c c o r d i n g to e l a b o r a t e theological s c h e m e s containing

hidden

'messages'

even

in

their very

organisational

s t r u c t u r e s . T h i s b e c o m e s all t h e m o r e p e r t i n e n t i n t h e l i g h t o f t h e following points. 2. T h e r e a r e a n u n c o m f o r t a b l e n u m b e r of e x c e p t i o n s to t h e a l i s a t i o n s . It is

generally true

t o s a y t h a t t h e r e is less

in b o o k 5, f o r e x a m p l e , yet p s a l m s

109 a n d

gener-

imprecation

137 f r o m t h a t

book

are generally thought to be the most violent examples within Psalter! Likewise, in b o o k s

the

1 and 2 there are m a n y examples

psalms which are not individual laments a n d which do not

of

con-

f o r m to the generalisations m a d e earlier. A l t h o u g h b o o k 3 d o e s

mainly c o n t a i n 82. H o w

p s a l m s o f crisis, t h e b o o k also c o n t a i n s Pss. 7 6 a n d

a r e all t h e s e e x c e p t i o n s t o b e e x p l a i n e d , a n d d o

they

m a k e the generalisations p u t f o r w a r d a b o v e too weak to be interesting? 3. T h e

so-called

promises

'message'

concerning

developing from books

the

Davidic

monarchy

1 a n d 2 , t o t h e crisis i n

3 , t o its r e s o l u t i o n i n b o o k s 4 a n d 5 -

m a y reflect n o t h i n g

and book more

t h a n the chronological o r d e r in which the Psalter was put together. Books 1 a n d 2 m a y b e the earliest (containing m a n y pieces f r o m p r e - e x i l i c t i m e s ) , b o o k 3 m a y c o n t a i n p s a l m s f r o m t h e exilic p e r i o d , a n d books 4 - 5 m a y consist p r e d o m i n a n t l y of post-exilic

psalms.

T r y i n g to detect a n "editorial m e s s a g e " m a y b e a n e x a m p l e overreading a simple chronological

of

fact.

4. B o o k 5, o f t e n a s s u m e d t o b e t h e latest b o o k o f t h e P s a l t e r (correctly, in m y view) a n d t h u s m o s t accessible to a p r o c e s s of editorial a d j u s t m e n t , b e a r s the least e v i d e n c e of t h e m a t i c s h a p i n g of a n y of the books, a n d c o n f o r m s in only the most w e a k w a y

to

the thematic development

in

put forward for books

1-4. Thus,

32 Wilson tries to tackle this point by an investigation of collections of Sumerian temple hymns. He does indeed find clear organisational criteria, but they are not of the thematic and even theological kind that is here being put forward for the Psalter. Wilson (1985), pp. 13-61.

t h e v e r y p l a c e w h e r e o n e w o u l d m o s t like t o s e e c o n f i r m a t i o n

of

a developing message within

is

m o s t c l e a r l y a w a r e o f its

the

Psalter (the

final

book), one

absence.

O n e of the mediating factors which m a y partially account for point t w o a b o v e is a n e d i t o r i a l c o n s e r v a t i s m c o n c e r n i n g a l r e a d y e s t a b l i s h e d groupings of psalms. the

Psalter have

It is a b u n d a n t l y e v i d e n t

kept

intact

previously

that the compilers

existing collections

the duplication of psalms, the c o l o p h o n

of 72, a n d

the

statistical d i s t r i b u t i o n o f stylistic f e a t u r e s ) . T h u s , w h i l e d e e m i n g

the

Asaph

collection of book

at the e n d

of

(witness

3, f o r e x a m p l e ,

to b e particularly

appro-

p r i a t e as a n e x p r e s s i o n o f t h e crisis a t t h e d i s s o l u t i o n o f t h e

monar-

c h y ( a m o n g s t o t h e r things), the editors m a y h a v e b e e n r e l u c t a n t

precisely

select only those p s a l m s t h a t

suited their t h e m e a n d

to

detach

t h e m f r o m o t h e r p s a l m s ( s u c h as 76) w h i c h m a y h a v e e x i s t e d as p a r t of a s e q u e n c e in a pre-existing collection. A study of the

organisa-

tion of the Psalter very quickly reveals the tension b e t w e e n

conser-

v a t i s m to p r e - e x i s t i n g collections o n o n e h a n d , a n d i n n o v a t i o n in t h e p l a c i n g o f p s a l m s a n d g r o u p i n g s o n t h e o t h e r . It is n o t e n o u g h to cite s u c h c o n s e r v a t i s m organisational however. such

pattern

More

editorial

work

as a p o t e n t i a l

might not needs

principles

why

the

merely

perceived

be quite as clear as w e m a y

to b e

might

reason

be

done

to illustrate

traced

in

the

like,

in detail

Psalter,

how

and

how

they h a v e i n t e r a c t e d with o n e a n o t h e r in specific instances.

Up

now

overall

the

work

carried

out

has

been

primarily

to

identify

t h e m e s . T h i s has b e e n d o n e with very b r o a d b r u s h strokes, but time

is n o w

ripe to p r o d u c e

detailed

evidence

(if it e x i s t s ) t o

to the cor-

r o b o r a t e w h a t h a s b e e n p r o p o s e d . T h i s m u s t b e d o n e b o t h at a lexical level ( i n d i c a t i n g t h e i n t e r c o n n e c t e d n e s s

of s e q u e n c e s of

psalms

to s h o w that deliberate organisation has taken place), a n d at a m a t i c level (the t h e m e s n e e d to b e i d e n t i f i e d a n d e s t a b l i s h e d precisely than

has hitherto been the

more

case).

T h e r e f o r e , a t t h e c u r r e n t s t a t e o f r e s e a r c h it s e e m s

questionable

w h e t h e r we can speak with any certainty about editorial ality

the-

that we can discern an editorial master-plan

intention-

for the

Psalter

such that w e c a n state that t h e editors w e r e deliberately giving us a p a r t i c u l a r m e s s a g e in t h e v e r y w a y in w h i c h t h e y o r d e r e d t h e i r m a t e rials. T h e r e

is n o t e n o u g h

evidence

to assert confidently a

ate theological s h a p i n g to the Psalter, even t h o u g h certain d o s e e m to b e

deliber-

tendencies

clear.

T h e s e considerations d o not require the a b a n d o n m e n t of w h a t

has

b e e n p u t f o r w a r d i n t h i s e s s a y , h o w e v e r . A l t h o u g h it r e m a i n s t o seen w h e t h e r

the general patterns a n d

shapes that have been

be

pro-

posed c a n be b o r n e out by closer study, the generalisations that h a v e been

made

as far as they go,

are sound

the kind of interpretation r e q u i r e it. W h a t

something

and

they are susceptible

to

b e i n g o f f e r e d h e r e , e v e n if t h e y m a y

not

h a s b e e n p u t f o r w a r d is o n e u s e f u l w a y o f s a y i n g

a b o u t t h e P s a l t e r a s a w h o l e w i t h i n a v e r y s h o r t c o m p a s s ; it

is a v a l i d w a y o f c h a r a c t e r i s i n g s o m e o f t h e t h e m e s o f t h e

whether or not the editors originally intended it that way.

Psalter

It c a n

scarcely

b e d i s p u t e d t h a t t h e Psalter d o e s i n d e e d b e g i n in o n e p l a c e (with p a r t i c u l a r set of themes), a n d generalisations about

t h a t it e n d s i n a n o t h e r . N o r c a n

the general

movement

from lament

to

a

the

praise

b e q u e s t i o n e d . W h a t c a n b e q u e s t i o n e d is w h e t h e r o r n o t o n e s h o u l d read the

significance into these facts -

whether

the start a n d

finish

P s a l t e r s h o u l d b e linked in s u c h a c o n s c i o u s m a n n e r ,

of

whether

the " l a m e n t to praise" generalisation has too m a n y exceptions to be interesting or not, whether

it is f a i r t o a s s i g n

to the

five

books

' m e s s a g e ' a n d l i n k t h e m all t o g e t h e r ( e v e n if it b e g r a n t e d t h a t do each have dominant

they

t h e m e s ) . T h e s e a r e o f c o u r s e all m a t t e r s

interpretation, h o w the data contained in the Psalter are

of (and,

in m y

view, w o r t h y

It

thus

emerges

r e g a r d e d as a

that

reading

what

but they are data

of) being assigned

pretation being put forward here, has

the

of

understood.

T h e y a r e n o t s u f f i c i e n t l y w e i g h t y , it s e e m s t o m e , t o s p e a k w i t h tainty about w h a t the editors p l a n n e d -

a

cer-

capable

sort of

inter-

of being read in that way. been

produced

here

should

o f t h e P s a l t e r . I t is a r e a d i n g w h i c h s o m e

be peo-

p i e will a c c e p t , a n d o t h e r s will n o t . A t t h e p r e s e n t s t a g e o f r e s e a r c h it s e e m s t o m e t h a t t h i s is h o w w e s h o u l d l o o k a t p r o p o s a l s ing the organisation of the Psalter. T a l k i n g a b o u t authorial

regard-

intention-

a l i t y is a s u s p i c i o u s e n t e r p r i s e a t t h e b e s t o f t i m e s ; w i t h t h e

present

a m o u n t o f e v i d e n c e it w o u l d s e e m u n w i s e t o a t t e m p t t o s p e c i f y p r e cisely t h e editorial i n t e n t i o n a l i t y of t h e

compilers.

I n c o n c l u s i o n , t h e n , to see t h e Psalter as a w h o l e in the

structural

a n d t h e m a t i c t e r m s o u t l i n e d in this essay c a n b e a g e n u i n e l y ful w a y

of c o m p r e h e n d i n g

it, o f s a y i n g

something m e a n i n g f u l

helpabout

t h e P s a l t e r w i t h i n a b r i e f c o m p a s s . It p r o v i d e s a w a y f o r r e a d e r s a p p r o a c h the w o r k a n d enables t h e m to take h o m e a message it a s a w h o l e . which

But

requires m o r e

whether detailed

it is a n y

more

than

further investigation

a p p e a r s to h a v e b e e n carried o u t thus far.

that than

is a that

to

from matter which

T H E W O L F SHALL LIVE W I T H T H E I A M B : R E A D I N G I S A I A H 11:6-9 T O D A Y BY R.E.

CLEMENTS Cambridge

I s a . 1 1 : 6 - 9 is w i d e l y u s e d i n C h r i s d a n c h u r c h e s a s a n A d v e n t ing a n t i c i p a t i n g the c o m i n g of Israel's messiah

read-

in t h e d a y s o f

the

O l d T e s t a m e n t a n d t h e r e b y e n c o u r a g i n g us to look f o r w a r d in

the

p r e s e n t t o a n e r a o f w o r l d p e a c e . I n t h i s n o t o n l y will h u m a n rations a n d expectations for h a r m o n y

between

nations be

aspi-

realised,

b u t a n e w o r d e r i n t h e n a t u r a l w o r l d will c o m e i n t o b e i n g . It b e l o n g s closely alongside the m o r e overtly political a s s u r a n c e of Isa. 2:4 a n d for m o d e r n

readers

it p o s s e s s e s a p o e t i c

quality which

enables

us

t o s e e i n it a n e l e m e n t o f h y p e r b o l e , a n d s o t o l i m i t its l i t e r a l

im-

plications.

the

modern

Nevertheless

its c o n t e n t

raises serious questions

for

mind.

T h e g e n e r a l r e a d e r is p r o b a b l y b e t t e r i n f o r m e d i n t h e p r e s e n t c o n cerning patterns of animal b e h a v i o u r t h a n a n y previous

generation

has b e e n t h r o u g h m o d e r n ecological researches a n d the

remarkable

visual expression

that

these

have enjoyed on

television. T h e

well-

m e r i t e d s u c c e s s o f s t u d i e s o f t h e n a t u r a l w o r l d in D a v i d A t t e n b o r o u g h ' s

The Trials of Life, Life in the Freezer a n d have

served

to b r i n g

home

to even

the

other

similar

most

programmes

unphilosophical

o b s e r v e r s a k n o w l e d g e t h a t t h e n a t u r a l w o r l d is f u l l o f v i o l e n c e prédation.

" I s it s u i t a b l e

for the

children?"

is a q u e s t i o n

q u i c k l y f o r c e d u p o n us. T h e reality o f this p a t t e r n o f a n i m a l i o u r is n o t e a s i l y i n t e l l i g i b l e t o t h o s e b r o u g h t

that

of and is

behav-

u p o n the stories

of

Beatrix P o t t e r a n d K e n n e t h G r a h a m e . M o r e o v e r such p r e d a t o r y viol e n c e is a n e c e s s a r y f e a t u r e , a n d

any concern

with protecting

the

h a b i t a t o f e n d a n g e r e d s p e c i e s d r a w s a t t e n t i o n t o it. V i t a l l i n k s i n t h e c h a i n of species survival a r e f o r m e d b y the availability to animals of their natural

food supply. T o

predatory

soften the i m p a c t of this

b e h a v i o u r b y a r g u i n g t h a t it is n e v e r f o r p l a y o r s p o r t , b u t f o r e s s e n t i a l f o o d , is itself o p e n t o s e r i o u s

solely

questioning.

A c q u a i n t a n c e with a recognition of the extent to w h i c h o n e species

relies u p o n

its e x p l o i t a t i o n

of other weaker

species in t h e

natural

o r d e r o f life r e v e a l s t o u s t h e p o s i t i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n f o r s u r v i v a l the impulse

to aggression

everywhere throughout

makes.

These

behavioural

traits

the natural w o r l d a n d h a v e rightly

that

appear become

the subject of close study.1 M o r e o v e r w e c a n see clearly t h a t

such

v i o l e n c e plays a n i m p o r t a n t role in t h e n a t u r a l o r d e r of a n i m a l

and

human

survival.

From

the

plains

of Serengeti

to the

ice-floes

of

A n t a r c t i c a t h e fact that survival of m a n y species rests o n their ability t o h u n t a n d c o n s u m e o t h e r s p e c i e s h i g h l i g h t s a f e a t u r e o f D a r w i n ' s argumentation

f o r t h e survival of t h e fittest w h i c h

has

persistently

a r o u s e d ethical d e b a t e . Stylised a n d c o n v e n t i o n a l p o r t r a y a l s of a p r i m itive p a r a d i s a l s t a t e w h i c h w e r e o n c e p o p u l a r a s a m y t h i c a l a n d i d e a l ised p i c t u r e of t h e w o r l d ' s b e g i n n i n g s r u n c o u n t e r to o u r

knowledge

o f t h e a c t u a l o r i g i n s o f life o n e a r t h . N o t s u r p r i s i n g l y J u r a s s i c

Park

h a s b e c o m e to t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y w o r l d a m o r e m e a n i n g f u l p o r t r a y a l of the primeval past t h a n the G a r d e n of Eden! H o w e v e r it is n o t o n l y t h e s t r o n g p o p u l a r a w a r e n e s s o f t h e e s s e n tial r o l e t h a t p r e d a t o r y b e h a v i o u r p l a y s i n e n s u r i n g t h e s u r v i v a l t h e v a r i e t y o f a n i m a l life i n t h e n a t u r a l w o r l d t h a t m a k e s I s a . a r a t h e r uncertain expression of future h o p e . S u c h a state o u r e n v i r o n m e n t a l c o n c e r n s s i n c e it w o u l d c l e a r l y m e a n

of

11:6-9

threatens the

aboli-

t i o n o f " t h e w i l d " i n t h e f o r m i n w h i c h w e h a v e c o m e t o k n o w it. It is n o t o n l y t h e g r o w i n g n u m b e r s o f e n t h u s i a s t i c

conservationists

w h o a r e a w a r e t h a t m u c h of i m m e n s e aesthetic a n d scientific w o r t h w o u l d t h e n b e lost to f u t u r e ages. T o

a significant degree w e

h a r d l y desire a literal fulfilment of t h e Isaianic

can

prophecy.

T h e c h a l l e n g i n g n e o - D a r w i n i s t p o r t r a y a l s o f t h e e v o l u t i o n o f life o n e a r t h h a v e served to s h o w h o w sharply the biblical p o r t r a y a l s of a f u t u r e state of n o n - v i o l e n c e within the a n i m a l modern

realm differ f r o m

scientific u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e r e a s o n s w h y things a r e

the

w a y they are. T h e aggression a n d p r e d a t o r y instincts w h i c h

abound

i n t h e n a t u r a l o r d e r o f a n i m a l life b e l o n g t o t h e r e a l i t y a n d

contin-

u a n c e o f its e x i s t e n c e . T h e y c a n n o t s i m p l y b e c a s t a s i d e t o

enable

t h e w o l f to live w i t h t h e l a m b w i t h o u t t h e w o l f c e a s i n g t o b e

what

it is, a n d q u i t e e v i d e n t l y c e a s i n g t o s u r v i v e . T h e s e m a y a p p e a r t o b e r a t h e r s p e c u l a t i v e a n d h y p o t h e t i c a l issues, g e n e r a t e d by wresting f r o m p o e t r y a n excessively f o r m a l a n d

1

literal

Compare R. Dawkins, The Selfish Gene (Oxford, 1989), pp. 6 6 8 7 "Aggression: stability and the selfish machine".

sense. T h e

new

relationships

between

animal

and

human

species

w h i c h a r e f o r e t o l d in t h e p r o p h e t i c vision o f Isa. 1 1 : 6 - 9 a r e i n t e n d e d to illustrate the c o m i n g of a n entirely n e w , a n d world

clearly

different,

order.

It is t h e e n d i n g o f v i o l e n c e i n all its f o r m s w h i c h e s t a b l i s h e s

the

p r i m a r y f o c u s o f t h e f u t u r e p r o m i s e . N o n e t h e l e s s its p r e s e n c e in t h e Bible d r a w s a t t e n t i o n to questions r e g a r d i n g the relationship b e t w e e n p r o p h e t i c vision, C h r i s t i a n theology a n d m o d e r n ecological

science.

In the past the chief theological i m p a c t of the Isaianic p r o m i s e

has

b e e n i n r e l a t i o n t o w h a t it i n f e r s a b o u t t h e p r e s e n t o r d e r o f t h e n a t u r a l w o r l d a n d its o r i g i n s . It p r o j e c t s i n t o t h e f u t u r e a p o r t r a y a l a v e r y d i s t i n c t i v e d i v i n e p a t t e r n o f life o n e a r t h , w h i c h i m p l i e s s o m e t h i n g is s e r i o u s l y w r o n g w i t h m a k i n g this contrast, a n d and

re-created

foretelling a new, completely

present

So

a recognition

this I s a i a n i c p i c t u r e

that

re-ordered become

"cursed".

on

By

the

and

it b u i l d s

that

s h a p e of things.

o r d e r is n o t in a c c o r d w i t h t h e d i v i n e will b u t h a s s o m e h o w disordered

world,

the present

of

fits in w i t h

the

b e l i e f t h a t t h e n a t u r a l w o r l d h a s itself b e e n s u b j e c t e d t o t h e e f f e c t s o f a d i v i n e " c u r s e " w h i c h d i s t o r t s its c o n f o r m i t y t o t h e o r i g i n a l d i v i n e i n t e n t i o n ( c o m p a r e 4 E z r a 7 : 1 0 - 1 2 ; R o m . 8 : 2 0 2 2 ‫ ) ־‬. O u r c o n c e r n in t h e p r e s e n t e s s a y , h o w e v e r , lies i n w h a t it h a s t o s a y r e g a r d i n g n a t u r e o f evil, o f h u m a n

the

r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e c r e a t e d o r d e r o f life

a n d for the kind of n e w world o r d e r for w h i c h the Christian

may

strive. T h e issue of w h a t k i n d of vision for t h e f u t u r e of t h e w o r l d b e set b e f o r e u s a s a g e n u i n e l y b i b l i c a l a n d C h r i s t i a n g o a l

may

remains

a n i m p o r t a n t f e a t u r e of the d r a w i n g of theological p a r a m e t e r s to the conception

of h o p e . 2 O n l y so c a n t h e o l o g y a d d r e s s basic

c o n c e r n i n g ecology, a n d the role of the e n v i r o n m e n t

questions

in

upholding

that

Christian

t h o u g h t a n d c o m m i t m e n t s h o u l d b e indifferent to m a t t e r s

regarding

a

Christian

the hunting,

quality

o f life. A l l t o o

farming and

b e e n allowed to

prevail.

often the

claim

g e n e r a l use (and abuse) of animals,

F r o m t h e p e r s p e c t i v e of t h e text of Isa. 1 1 : 6 9 ‫ ־‬t h e p r i m a r y is u p o n

2

has

3

an eschatological

new world

o r d e r in w h i c h t h e

focus

problems

Compare B.W. Anderson, "Creation and Ecology", Creation in the Old Testament, Issues in Religion and Theology 6 (London, 1984), pp. 152-171. 3 Compare especially A. Iinzey, Christianity and the Rights of Animals (London: SPCK, 1987); idem, Animal Theology (London, 1994).

o f v i o l e n c e a n d a g g r e s s i o n will b e o v e r c o m e a n d a n e w

relationship

established between h u m a n beings a n d the animals with which

they

s h a r e their planet. S u c h a h o p e h a s s o m e t i m e s b e e n taken in a

neg-

ative

fashion

as a

strong

disincentive

to

dealing

with

problems

e c o l o g i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e . If t h e o r d e r o f c r e a t i o n in a f u t u r e

end-time

is t o b e w h o l l y d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h a t w h i c h e x i s t s i n t h e p r e s e n t , t h e r e is l i t t l e p o i n t i n s e e k i n g t o p r e s e r v e t h i s o r i n d o i n g other than

e x p l o i t i n g it t o t h e p o i n t o f i t s

destruction.

of

then

anything

4

Y e t t h i s is n o t h o w t h e p a s s a g e h a s b e e n u n d e r s t o o d i n

Christian

t r a d i t i o n . R a t h e r it s e r v e s a s a r e c o g n i t i o n t h a t w e l i v e i n a w o r l d

of

potential w h i c h displays l i f e - e n h a n c i n g a n d life-enriching possibilities of i m m e n s e dangers

range. At the same

which

place

heavy

t i m e it a l s o c a r r i e s g r e a t

responsibilities

upon

risks

human

and

decision-

making. T h e s e reach far b e y o n d merely deciding to d o n o t h i n g

and

l e a v i n g t h i n g s a l o n e to t a k e t h e i r n a t u r a l c o u r s e . T h e y call f o r a c t i o n and

restraints in o r d e r

of Peace" which

to m o v e

towards

the Isaianic p r o p h e c y

the

ideal of a

T h i s offers a n envisioned portrayal of a n e w o f life w h i c h

will b e c o m e

able, universe.

A

new

possible

"Kingdom

holds o u t as a future

through

order of relationships

richness

an

in t h e

ordered,

between

hope. quality

and

man

peaceand

the

a n i m a l r e a l m will b e r e a l i s e d a n d t h e K i n g d o m o f C h r i s t will e m b r a c e m o r e t h a n a j u s t h u m a n society. It will e x t e n d a c r o s s t h e e n t i r e trum

of the living

world.

A s e c o n d issue that derives f r o m this Isaianic vision of a of Peace

which

concerning

the

spec-

will b e nature

radically of evil.

5

different f r o m

Since we

know

Kingdom

the present that

is

that

aggression

and

violence are necessary for survival in a n evolutionary world, the question

of h o w

aggressive

f a r it

and

is e v i l

violent

must

be

behavioural

reopened. strategies

To

what

represent

a

extent

do

manifesta-

t i o n o f n a t u r a l evil? F r o m a h u m a n ethical p e r s p e c t i v e , c a n w e

make

recognisable distinctions b e t w e e n necessary, a n d therefore justifiable, forms of aggression, a n d

illegitimate a n d

immoral

f o r m s o f it? I t is

the age-old d e b a t e c o n c e r n i n g a "just w a r " b r o u g h t into a new, wider,

and

perspective.

4 C o m p a r e P. Boyer, When Time Shall Be no More: Prophecy Belief in Modem American Culture ( C a m b r i d g e , Mass, 1992), especially pp. 301 2, 3 3 1 - 3 3 7 . T h e citation f r o m Billy G r a h a m (p. 442, note 18) is most revealing of prevalent attitudes. 5 C o m p a r e M . Midgely, Beast and Man: The Roots of Human Nature (London, 1980), especially pp. 2 5 - 4 9 "Animals and the Problem of Evil". Idem, Wickedness: A Philosophical Essay ( L o n d o n & N e w York, 1986), especially pp. 1 - 1 6 .

T r a d i t i o n a l C h r i s t i a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g of a p r i m o r d i a l Fall h a s

tended

t o w a r d s d e f i n i n g evil w i t h i n a n i m a g i n a t i v e a n d i n s t r u c t i v e f r a m e

of

reference, but has done

to

concepts amenable too

often

the

rather than mal

little t o r e l a t e this m y t h o l o g i c a l

to science, biology a n d

emphasis

has

been

complementarity.

behaviour

relate

to

upon

How

each

social a n t h r o p o l o g y .

contrast

and

d o patterns of h u m a n

other

and

how

order

of nature,

or

are

human

beings

All

contradiction,

far can

" w h a t is n a t u r a l " p r o v i d e a n e t h i c a l v a l u e - j u d g e m e n t ? of the

imagery

and

the

ani-

idea

Is evil a

responsible

for

"the

w a y t h i n g s a r e " ? T h e t r a d i t i o n a l C h r i s t i a n belief t h a t evil in t h e ural world

is t h e c o n s e q u e n c e

of h u m a n

evil calls f o r

of

part

nat-

considerable

modification. I t is n o t d i f f i c u l t t o s e e t h a t

the complex,

and

richly

instructive,

history of exegesis of t h e stories of t h e Fall in G e n e s i s 2 3 ‫ ־‬serves highlight the differences between understanding

of t h e m

o r i g i n o f life. D a r w i n

and posed

a traditional Jewish

modern

appear

seeking the

to

to b e

any

construct

problems

and

great

a

theological

Simply labelling the biblical

approach

by

these

material

u n t i l w h a t is i m p l i e d

by such a term

degree

therefore

vision

11:69

involves

the

questions

the natural world I t is a p p r o p r i a t e

and

of a

to

which

fails to

as mythological

the

biblical

at this stage to n o t e t h a t 11:6-9 requires

a g a i n s t its o w n

biblical, a n d

Only

more

then

can

its p l a c e i n a n y

evaluated.

We

must

therefore

first

a

nowhere significant

set o u t

the element

o f all t o b e

examining

in

Isa.

understanding

larger theological scene by

address

gets

narrowly prophetic,

start

by

interpretations.

is d e a l t w i t h . T o of peace

would

differences

traditional

kingdom

relating

these

the

historical,

the possibility of a divine revelation

p r o m i s e set o u t in Isa.

Isaianic

not simply a

of

tradition to address.6 T h e r e

profit in i g n o r i n g

issues raised

Christian

scientific interpretations

an ethical, a n d

d i l e m m a for the Jewish-Christian not

and

to

in of

of

it.‫׳‬ future

understood background. be

its p l a c e

usefully in

its

context.

6 C o m p a r e G . H i m m e l f a r b , Darwin and the Darwinian Revolution (New York, 1968), pp. 3 8 0 - 4 1 1 , " D a r w i n i s m , Religion a n d Morality". 7 T h e whole subject is most usefully raised by J a m e s Barr in Biblical Faith and Natural Theology (Oxford, 1993), especially pp. 5 9 - 7 5 , a n d also the same a u t h o r ' s The Garden of Eden and the Hope of Immortality ( L o n d o n , 1992), pp. 21 56.

1. Isaiah 11 and the Origin of Verses 6~9 The reads

passage

that

we

are

straightforwardly

unit with

the

five

primarily

and

has

verses which

concerned

frequently precede

with

been

in

Isa.

taken

it. Its m e s s a g e

11:6-9

to

form

is c l e a r

a

and

unequivocal: T h e w o l f shall live w i t h t h e l a m b , t h e l e o p a r d shall lie d o w n w i t h t h e k i d , t h e calf a n d t h e lion a n d t h e f a d i n g t o g e t h e r , a n d a little c h i l d shall l e a d t h e m . T h e c o w a n d t h e b e a r shall g r a z e , t h e i r y o u n g shall lie d o w n t o g e t h e r ; a n d t h e l i o n shall e a t s t r a w like t h e o x . T h e n u r s i n g c h i l d shall p l a y o v e r t h e h o l e o f t h e a s p , a n d t h e w e a n e d c h i l d shall p u t its h a n d o n t h e a d d e r ' s T h e y will n o t h u r t o r d e s t r o y o n all m y h o l y m o u n t a i n ; f o r t h e l a n d will b e full o f t h e k n o w l e d g e o f t h e L O R D as t h e w a t e r s c o v e r t h e s e a . Isa. S o f a r a s i t s l i t e r a r y s e t t i n g is c o n c e r n e d ,

we

may

den.

11:6-9

note

that

the

l a r g e r u n i t o f I s a . 1 1 : 1 - 9 o c c u p i e s a c e n t r a l p l a c e i n w h a t is u n d o u b t edly t h e e x t e n d e d structural u n i t of Isa. 1 0 : 5 - 1 2 . 6 . 8 I n l o o k i n g closely at the f o u r verses, 6 9 ‫ ־‬, the

first

question that needs to be

addressed

concerns their o w n integral unity. Verse 9 presents a b r o a d a n d eral s u m m a r y of the message c o n c e r n i n g the n e w relationship is t o a r i s e b e t w e e n w i l d a n d d o m e s t i c a n i m a l s a n d b e t w e e n creatures and

human

ences in verses 6 a n d

beings. T h e s e

all w i l d

latter are typified by the

8 to the d a n g e r s p o s e d b y snakes to

a n d u n s u s p e c t i n g , c h i l d r e n . T h e c o n c l u d i n g r e f r a i n o f v. 9

genwhich

refer-

unwary, reappears

i n H a b . 2 : 1 4 . W h e t h e r t h i s c a n b e t a k e n a s a n i n d i c a t i o n t h a t it h a s b e e n d r a w n f r o m a w i d e l y k n o w n m o t i f c u r r e n t in H e b r e w r e m a i n s an uncertain point, but a p p e a r s quite possible. J .

psalmody Vermeylen

8 For a structural analysis of Isa. 11 in its literary setting see n o w especially M . A . Sweeney, Isaiah 1~39: With an Introduction to Prophetic Literature, F O T L X V I ( G r a n d Rapids, 1996), pp. 1 9 6 - 2 1 1 . I find myself in disagreement with Sweeney , s conclusions regarding the date of the material in c h a p t e r 11, but his c o m m e n t s a n d insights regarding its structure serve to clarify the way in which the material has been develo p e d a r o u n d central themes. See also his study referred to in note 12 below. T h e material in R.E. C l e m e n t s Isaiah 1-39, N e w C e n t u r y Bible ( L o n d o n , 1980) is n o w in need of s o m e revision in the light of recent studies of the use a n d d e v e l o p m e n t of the Davidic tradition in the book of Isaiah.

follows a n u m b e r

of o t h e r s c h o l a r s in a r g u i n g t h a t v. 9 s h o u l d

cer-

tainly be r e g a r d e d as a late post-exilic addition to verses 6 - 8 . " a

conclusion

appears

quite

important

in

spite

of m y

Such

earlier

relue-

it.10

tance to c o u n t e n a n c e More

probable,

than

the separate

origin of verse 9, h o w e v e r ,

is

V e r m e y l e n ' s recognition that verses 6 - 8 have b e e n directly influenced f r o m Ps.

91:13: Y o u will t r e a d o u t h e lion a n d t h e the y o u n g lion a n d t h e s e r p e n t y o u will t r a m p l e u n d e r f o o t .

Such

a

recognition

reinforces the

conclusion

of divine protection

t h a t is a s s u r e d i n P s . 9 1

motif which

related

is h e r e

adder,

to the p r o m i s e

that

high

level

was primarily a

royal

in Isa.

the

11:1—5

concern-

ing the restoration of the dynasty f o u n d e d by Jesse's son. T h i s indicates

the

post-exilic

'messianic'

interpretation

of Psalm

both

91

and

reinforces the claim that w . 6 - 8 ( 9 ) w e r e intended to be taken

along

w i t h w . 1 5. T h e y f o r m a n a d d i t i o n t o t h e p r o m i s e c o n c e r n i n g t h e

new

scion of J u d a h ' s

sig-

r o y a l d y n a s t i c line set o u t in t h e s e verses a n d

nificantly reinterpret them. O u r next question therefore concerns their time of

origin.

Vermeylen," Isa.

is f o l l o w e d b y M a r v i n A . S w e e n e y 1 2 i n c l a i m i n g

11:1—5 p r o b a b l y d a t e s t o t h e t i m e o f j o s i a h ' s r e i g n , a n d

that

forms

a p a r t of t h e extensive r e w o r k i n g of t h e royal Z i o n t r a d i t i o n s in wake

of the

collapse

of Assyrian

control

over J u d a h

at

Y e t this conclusion r e g a r d i n g the t i m e of origin m u s t b e especially

if t h e p r o p h e c y

of Isa. 9 : 2 - 7

(Heb.

that

der

its h o p e

coronation

9

the promise

of 9:2

questionable.

oracle

7 after events had

Even

was intended

if t h e to

intention

transpired in

this

refer to H e z e k i a h ' s

time.

questioned,

1-6) belongs

J o s i a n i c p e r i o d . Isa. 1 1 : 1 - 5 s e e m s m o s t plausibly to h a v e b e e n to u p d a t e

the

to

this

intended to

ren-

celebrated

accession

in

J . V e r m e y l e n , Du Prophète Isaïe à l'apocalyptique: Isaïe, i-χχχυ miroir d'un demimillénaire d'expérience religieuse en Israël, 2 vols. Etudes bibliques (Paris: G a b a l d a , 1978), I, p. 276. 10 C l e m e n t s (1980), p. 124. 11 J . V e r m e y l e n (1978), pp. 2 6 9 . 2 7 5 ‫־‬ 12 Sweeney (1996), pp. 2 0 3 - 2 1 0 ; idem, "Jesse's N e w Shoot in Isaiah 1 1: A Josianic R e a d i n g of the P r o p h e t Isaiah", R . D . Weis & D . M . C a r r (eds.), A Gift of God in Due Season: Essays on Scripture and Community in Honor of James A. Sanders, J S O T S S 225 (Sheffield, 1996), pp. 103 118.

r e p l a c i n g t h e h a t e d A h a z , its J o s i a n i c t i m e o f o r i g i n a p p e a r s t h e m o s t likely.13 A p r i m a r y f e a t u r e r e g a r d i n g t h e origin a n d setting of Isa.

11:69)8‫)־‬

c o n c e r n s its r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h e p r e c e d i n g p r o m i s e o f a s h o o t

"from

11:1-5.14

t h e s t u m p o f J e s s e " w h i c h is t o b e f o u n d i n I s a .

F i r s t , a s r e g a r d s I s a . 11:1—5, t h e r e f e r e n c e t o " t h e s t u m p o f J e s s e " (Isa.

11:1) r e f l e c t s t h e f a c t t h a t

house

of D a v i d

had

been

the political situation

very seriously w e a k e n e d ,

of the but

royal

not

com-

p l e t e l y d e s t r o y e d . T h e m e t a p h o r is m o r e f u l l y e x p l i c a b l e if it r e f e r s t o t h e p o s t - 5 8 7 B . C . E . s i t u a t i o n , t h a n if it a r o s e e a r l i e r . T h e

inter-

p r e t a t i o n p l a c e d u p o n t h e h o p e s s u r r o u n d i n g J o s i a h a p p e a r to h a v e b e e n m o r e akin to a vindication the seceding n o r t h e r n weakness

and

o f t h e D a v i d i c t r a d i t i o n , vis à vis

tribes, r a t h e r t h a n a w a r n i n g c o n c e r n i n g

vulnerability.

With

the exiling of J e h o i a c h i n

in

its 598

a n d t h e d e p o s i t i o n o f Z e d e k i a h i n 5 8 7 t h e i m a g e o f a t r e e s t u m p is wholly a p p r o p r i a t e . T h e survival of the royal dynasty d e s c e n d e d f r o m Jesse's son w a s far f r o m certain

and

its r e s t o r a t i o n

to J e r u s a l e m ' s

throne was a bold assurance which was certainly not uniformly supported or

desired.

H o w e v e r , s o m e circles clearly did n u r t u r e s u c h a h o p e a n d

looked

f o r its f u l f i l m e n t , e i t h e r t h r o u g h J e h o i a c h i n h i m s e l f , o r h i s d e s c e n d a n t s w h o h a d survived in B a b y l o n ( c o m p a r e 2 Kgs. 2 5 : 2 7 - 3 0 ) . m u s t be the original intended

r e f e r e n c e of Isa.

This

11:1—5 w h i c h

can

t h e n b e d a t e d t o s o m e t i m e a r o u n d 5 5 0 B . C . E . T h i s is t h e p e r i o d i n w h i c h w e m u s t also place m u c h of t h e editorial activity w h i c h revised the story of the m o n a r c h y early as t h e

(Joshua -

2 Kings).

590's a royalist circle a t t a c h e d

dynasty contended

Probably

from

to the exiled

as

Davidic

t h a t J e h o i a c h i n r e m a i n e d t h e l e g i t i m a t e k i n g in

exile. T h i s d e v e l o p e d

into the h o p e

that he, a n d

his

w o u l d e v e n t u a l l y b e r e s t o r e d to t h e t h r o n e in J u d a h .

descendants, S o it

makes

sense for s o m e to h a v e c l a i m e d at this t i m e t h a t t h e r e w a s h o p e f o r the

'tree' of Jesse, e v e n w h e n

reduced

to a s t u m p

(cp. I s a .

Conflicts of interest relating to J u d a h ' s political f u t u r e b e t w e e n

13

6:13)! roy-

Compare R.E. Clements, " T h e Immanuel Prophecy of Isa. 7:10-17 and Its Messianic Interpretation", in E. Blum, C. Macholz and E.YV. Stegemann (eds.), Die Hebräische Bibel und ihre zweifache Machgeschichte. Festschrift R. Rendtorff (NeukirchenVluyn, 1990), pp. 225-240 [= R.E. Clements, Old Testament Ρrophecy. From Oracles to Canon (Louisville, 1996), pp. 65-77]. 14 T h e significance of the use of the metaphor of the stump of a tree for a royal family is dealt with extensively in K. Nielsen, There is Hope for a Tree: The Tree as Metaphor in Isaiah, J S O T S S 65 (Sheffield, 1989), pp. 123-144.

alist f a c t i o n s l o c a t e d

in J u d a h

and

the p r o p h e c i e s of b o t h J e r e m i a h The

remainder

of Isa.

Babylon

and

echo

through

many

of

that

of

Ezekiel.

11 a d d r e s s e s

a different t h e m e

the eventual return of J u d a h ' s citizens to their h o m e l a n d places of dispersion a n d exile (11:12-16). V e r s e s

10 a n d

from

their

11 t u r n

direction of interest o u t w a r d s to address the fate of those m a n y

the sur-

vivors f r o m the disasters of 5 9 8 a n d 587 B.C.E. a n d a h o p e of their r e t u r n is s u m m e d that

of the

u p in verses

ending

of the

1216

time

‫ ־‬.

The

of Israel's

theme has now

division

and

become

dispersion.

T h e gathering-in of these survivors to a reborn nation f r o m the

many

places to w h i c h

com-

they had

been

scattered

has become

p o n e n t of the h o p e of Israel's renewal. So verses

a basic

1016

‫־‬

represent

p o s t - 5 3 8 B . C . E . e x p r e s s i o n o f h o p e . I n all p r o b a b i l i t y this e x p e c t a t i o n of a great world-wide return of J e w s f r o m a m o n g the nations

derives

f r o m a c o n s i d e r a b l y later p e r i o d p r o b a b l y in t h e f o u r t h c e n t u r y

B.C.E.

S u c h a h o p e f o r m s a p r i m a r y structural e l e m e n t for the final shaping of the book (compare verses chapter

10-16

were

and

belong

the to

Isa. 6 0 : 1 - 2 2 ) . W e

latest the

additions final

to

phase

conclude therefore have

of the

been

made

composition

I s a i a h s c r o l l . S o t h e s e q u e n c e o f g r o w t h i n I s a . 11 still s h o w s with an early prophecy from soon after 587 B.C.E. (w.

that

to

the

of

the

through,

1-5) having

r e c e i v e d s u p p l e m e n t a t i o n a t v a r y i n g s t a g e s . W h e t h e r w . 6 - 8 (9) w e r e a d d e d b e f o r e ( 1 0 ) 1 1 - 1 6 is n o t w h o l l y c e r t a i n . A f t e r w . r a t e n e s s of t h e units, viz. 6

1

2

-

1

6,1 ,10,9,8‫־‬is q u i t e

1-5 the

noteworthy

as a r e the m a n y allusions b a c k to earlier scriptural passages, not from

sepa-

only

Isaiah.

2. The Wolf and the Lamb in the Context of the Isaiah Scroll An

explicit allusion b a c k to Isa.

o f it, is t h e n

11:6

to b e f o u n d later in Isa.

9 and

a summarising

citation

65:25:15

T h e w o l f a n d t h e l a m b shall f e e d t o g e t h e r , t h e l i o n shall e a t s t r a w like t h e o x ; b u t t h e s e r p e n t - its f o o d s h a l l b e d u s t ! T h e y shall n o t h u r t o r d e s t r o y o n all m y h o l y m o u n t a i n , says t h e L O R D .

15

For the role of Isa. 11:69‫ ־‬in the e m e r g e n c e of the Jewish eschatological tradition c o m p a r e n o w especially the studies by O . H . Steck, ". . . ein kleiner K n a b e

a

T h i s a s s u r a n c e c o m e s as t h e c o n c l u s i o n ( 6 5 : 1 7 - 2 5 ) to a p r o n o u n c e ment

of c o m i n g j u d g e m e n t

nation (65:11

16

.(16‫ ־‬A n

upon

important

wrongdoers

within

the

restored

m e d i a t i n g text b e t w e e n the

ear-

lier h o p e of t h e r e s t o r a t i o n o f t h e D a v i d i c d y n a s t y to a p o s i t i o n

of

power and

be

the expectation

f o u n d in Isa.

of a t r a n s f o r m e d world

o r d e r is t o

43:1821‫־‬: D o not r e m e m b e r t h e f o r m e r things, o r c o n s i d e r t h e things of old. I a m a b o u t to d o a n e w thing; n o w it springs f o r t h , d o y o u n o t p e r c e i v e it? I will m a k e a w a y in t h e w i l d e r n e s s a n d rivers in t h e d e s e r t . T h e wild a n i m a l s will h o n o r m e , the j a c k a l s a n d t h e ostriches; f o r I give w a t e r in t h e wilderness, rivers in t h e desert to give d r i n k to m y c h o s e n p e o p l e , the p e o p l e w h o m I f o r m e d for myself so t h a t they m i g h t d e c l a r e m y praise. Isa. 4 3 : 1 8 - 2 1

T h e contrast between "the former things" and "the new

things5'

o f v . 18 h a s a b e a r i n g o n t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f 1 1 : 6 9 t h r o u g h t o its f u r t h e r c o n n e c t i o n with 65:17. T h e reference to the role of the wild a n i m a l s in 4 3 : 2 0 i n b r i n g i n g h o n o u r t o t h e L O R D certainly given

rise

to the elaboration

G o d has almost

o f t h i s in I s a .

11:6-8. In

a

f u r t h e r d e v e l o p m e n t of this t h e s e n t e n c i n g in Isa. 6 5 : 2 5 of t h e serp e n t to the limitation of "eating d u s t " m a k e s a n allusion back to the c u r s e of G e n . 3:14. So, in a p r o c e s s of v e r b a l allusion a n d

interplay,

w e c a n see h o w Isa. 4 3 : 1 8 ; 1 1 : 6 - 9 a n d 6 5 : 1 7 f o r m a s e q u e n t i a l development. This phenomenon

of intertextuality, by which the

inter-

p r e t a t i o n of o n e text takes o n a g r e a t e r r a n g e in t h e light of o t h e r s , indicates a f u n d a m e n t a l t e c h n i q u e , b o t h of the f o r m a t i o n of p r o p h e t i c scrolls a n d also of t h e p r o c e s s of J e w i s h d o c t r i n a l d e v e l o p m e n t .

In

these t h r e e passages w e are f a c e d with m o r e t h a n m e r e c h a n c e similarities of l a n g u a g e a n d ideas. A c o n s c i o u s process of scribal allusion

kann sie leiten", Beobachtungen zum Tierfrieden in Jesaja 11,6-8 und 65,25", in J . Hausmann & H.J. Zobel (eds.), Alttestamentliche Glaube und Biblische Theologie: Festschrift H.D. Preuss (Stuttgart-Berlin-Cologne, 1992), pp. 104-113; idem, "Die neue Himmel und die neue Erde. Beobachtungen zur Rezeption von Gen. 1 - 3 i n j e s . 65, 16b25‫"־‬, J. Van Ruiten & M. Vervenne (eds.), Studies in the Book of Isaiah: Festschrift IV.A.M. Beuken (Leuven, 1997), pp. 349 365. 16 Compare Steck (1997), pp. 349 50.

h a s b e e n e m p l o y e d in o r d e r to c o n s t r u c t a t h e m a t i c outline of G o d ' s p l a n f o r t h e c r e a t e d o r d e r s o f life. B e s i d e s Isa. 4 3 : 1 8 a f u r t h e r s t e p in t h e rise o f a r a d i c a l e s c h a t o l o g y is t o b e s e e n i n I s a . 5 4 : 9

prophetic

17. T h e r a v a g e d a n d

desolate

c o n d i t i o n o f J e r u s a l e m i n t h e p r e s e n t is c o n t r a s t e d w i t h t h e

wholly

t r a n s f o r m e d portrayal of the splendour a n d wealth which the rebuilt c i t y will e n j o y i n t h e f u t u r e . L a n g u a g e

t h a t , in its o r i g i n a l

context

c o u l d b e u n d e r s t o o d as p o e t i c h y p e r b o l e , h a s b e c o m e a vehicle f o r a n e w u n d e r s t a n d i n g of universal world history. T h e rhetorical petus to exhort a n d e n c o u r a g e a dispirited a n d d e s p o n d e n t

im-

commu-

nity h a s ultimately led to a w o r l d - e n c o m p a s s i n g h o p e of a t r a n s f o r m e d f u t u r e f o r all c r e a t i o n . E x p e c t a t i o n s w h i c h w e r e i n i t i a l l y a n c h o r e d i n definable and

recognisable events h a v e b e e n e n l a r g e d to the

of e m b r a c i n g a radically different c o n c e p t i o n

of divine

point

providence

f r o m that which originally s h a p e d the prophetic preaching.

Prophecy

has given w a y to apocalyptic. In n o small m e a s u r e the written preservation

of p r o p h e c y , with

the possibility w h i c h

it o f f e r s f o r

revised

readings of earlier sayings, n a m e s a n d t h e m e s , has b e c o m e the instrum e n t for c o n s t r u c t i n g this r a d i c a l m e s s a g e of hope.17

3. Wild Animals as Seen in the Context of the Hebrew Bible W h e n we look m o r e widely across the doctrine of creation

presented

i n t h e H e b r e w s c r i p t u r e s it is e v i d e n t t h a t I s a . 1 1 : 6 - 9 s t a n d s o u t o n a c c o u n t o f its i m p l i c i t a s s u m p t i o n t h a t s o m e t h i n g is s e r i o u s l y with the p r e s e n t o r d e r of the world. O n l y in the n e w age

wrong

promised

b y t h e p r o p h e t will t h e v i o l e n c e w h i c h p e r m e a t e s t h e p r e s e n t mal kingdom be removed.

Currently

a g g r e s s i o n is t a k e n t o b e

o r d e r of t h e d a y , a n d this affects t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n wild

anithe ani-

m a i s a n d h u m a n s as well as b e t w e e n o n e species a n d a n o t h e r . In t h e a g e t o c o m e t h i s o r d e r will g i v e w a y t o o n e o f p e a c e a n d S u c h a d o c t r i n e is e c h o e d i n t h e c e l e b r a t e d

Pauline

harmony.

understanding

that the present world o r d e r has b e e n subjected to curse a n d r u p t i o n o n a c c o u n t of h u m a n wickedness ( R o m . 8:18

39).

cor-

18

17 Compare B.D. Sommer, "Allusions and Illusions: T h e Unity of the Book of Isaiah in Light of Deutero-Isaiah's Use of Prophetic Tradition", R.F. Melugin & M.A. Sweeney (eds.), New Visions of Isaiah, J S O T S S 214 (Sheffield, 1996), pp. 156-186. 18 Compare J . D . G . Dunn, Romans 1-8, Word Biblical Commentary 38 (Dallas, 1988), pp. 470-1.

S u c h a v i e w , h o w e v e r , is n o t t h a t w h i c h p r e v a i l s m o r e

generally

throughout the Old Testament. T h a t predatory animals obtain

their

f o o d b y t h e t a k i n g o f o t h e r a n i m a l life is n o t o n l y t a k e n t o b e

nor-

m a l , b u t is q u i t e o p e n l y p r e s e n t e d a s t h e d e s i g n e d p u r p o s e o f G o d : T h e y o u n g lions r o a r for t h e i r p r e y , seeking t h e i r f o o d f r o m G o d . Ps. 104:21 (cp. J o b 3 8 : 3 9 - 4 1 ) ( R S V ) E l s e w h e r e it is t a k e n f o r g r a n t e d t h a t f o r l i o n s a n d b e a r s t o kill y o u n g l a m b s is n o r m a l , a l t h o u g h G o d c o u l d i n t e r v e n e t o p r o t e c t

a

s h e p h e r d f r o m b e c o m i n g a victim of the p r e d a t o r y instincts of such creatures (compare 1 S a m . 17:34-37). Yet even for a person w h o has a n g e r e d G o d to b e killed b y a lion c o u l d b e c o n s t r u e d as a divinely w i l l e d a c t o f r e t r i b u t i o n (1 K g s . 1 3 : 2 4 - 2 5 ) . O v e r a l l t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f v i o l e n c e t h r o u g h o u t t h e n a t u r a l w o r l d , i n c l u d i n g s o m e t i m e s t h e killing o f h u m a n s b y a n i m a l s , is u n d e r s t o o d a s a f e a t u r e o f life w h i c h is t o b e a c c e p t e d as a f e a t u r e of the w a y t h e w o r l d h a s b e e n c r e a t e d , b u t which

may

call for special

theological

explanation

when

circum-

s t a n c e s w a r r a n t it ( c o m p a r e 2 K g s . 1 7 : 2 5 2 8 ‫ ) ־‬. T h e i n s t i n c t i v e f e a r a n d dislike of s n a k e s f o r m s t h e r e a d i l y intelligible

human

background

t o t h e c u r s e o f G e n . 3 : 1 4 - 1 5 ) . T h a t t h e s e r p e n t is s i m p l y t h e

repre-

s e n t a t i v e o f a l a r g e r s e g m e n t o f t h e a n i m a l k i n g d o m is n o t s p e l t o u t , a l t h o u g h t h i s c o u l d l a t e r b e i n f e r r e d . I n g e n e r a l it is a c c e p t e d

that

t h e r e a r e f o r m s of a n i m a l b e h a v i o u r w h i c h involve t h e killing of o n e species by a n o t h e r . T h e h u m a n d o m i n i o n over the a n i m a l (Gen.

1:28) is p r e s e n t e d a s a p a r a m o u n t

human

kingdom

prerogative

which

is n o t d e f i n e d b y a n y c l e a r l y p r e s c r i b e d l i m i t a t i o n s . Y e t t h e s e

were

u n d o u b t e d l y felt to exist, as t h e r u l i n g r e g a r d i n g t h e p r o t e c t i o n

of

b i r d s in D e u t . 2 2 : 6 - 7 s h o w s . W i t h i n a n d b e t w e e n t h e v a r i o u s living o r d e r s of the w o r l d a p a t t e r n of p r o p e r relationships w a s

assumed

to exist, b u t w h i c h c o u l d get o u t of h a n d w h e n excessive, o r

need-

less, v i o l e n c e a r o s e . B e c a u s e t h i s l i v i n g w o r l d w a s t h e p r o d u c t o f a n a c t o f d i v i n e c r e a t i o n it r e q u i r e d t o b e r e s p e c t e d a n d its e s s e n t i a l f e a tures

maintained.

When

suitable

reasons

for such

deeds

can

be

presented

by

a

p r o p h e t , t h e n violence in t h e a n i m a l k i n g d o m c o u l d e v e n b e r e g a r d e d as s e r v i n g a religious p u r p o s e in t h e e n f o r c e m e n t of d i v i n e a n d j u s t i c e (so e s p e c i a l l y

2 Kgs.

17:26). S u c h

perceptions

honour indicate

that there w e r e a s s u m e d to b e recognisable b o u n d a r i e s w h i c h belonged to the

hierarchy

o f life o n

earth.

In

certain

circumstances

these

b o u n d a r i e s c o u l d b e c r o s s e d , e i t h e r w i l f u l l y , o r a c c i d e n t a l l y . 1 9 It is this crossing of t h e b o u n d a r i e s of n o r m a l c o n d u c t w h i c h

indicated

t h e p r e s e n c e of ‫ חמם‬violence, or disorder, w h i c h d i s r u p t e d the ‫שלום‬ the peace and h a r m o n y

of the

-

world.

T h i s attitude to the world c a n lead at o n e m o m e n t

to praise

of

G o d for t h e g e n e r o u s p r o v i s i o n of p r e y for the lion to h u n t , a n d t h e n at a n o t h e r time to implicit c o n d e m n a t i o n of the taking of o n e species of a n i m a l f o r f o o d b y a n o t h e r , as in Isa.

1 1:6-9. This

inconsistency

a n d diversity of attitudes u n d o u b t e d l y reflects the u n c e r t a i n a n d p a r tial p e r c e p t i o n s t h a t s u r r o u n d t h e i d e a o f a d i v i n e l y g i v e n o r d e r t h e n a t u r a l w o r l d . It is a f e a t u r e o f t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t

t h a t s u c h a n o r d e r e x i s t s . It is t a k e n f o r g r a n t e d t h a t it w a s a n created

by

God

according

to a g r a n d

design

so t h a t

the

order

biblical

u n d e r s t a n d i n g of biological a n d zoological features of the w o r l d e s s e n t i a l l y t h e o l o g i c a l in c h a r a c t e r . T h e

question

to

world-view

" W h a t does

m e a n b y t h i s o r t h a t ? " is a p r i m a r y m a t t e r o f c o n c e r n w h e n ing a n i m a l behaviour, or v e n t u r i n g to e n c r o a c h on a n i m a l

is

God

observterritory.

It is b e c a u s e t h i s d i v i n e o r d e r t o life w a s b e l i e v e d t o e x i s t a n d trol relationships that recognisable distinctions w e r e u p h e l d

con-

between

v a r i o u s k i n d s of a n i m a l s w h i c h w e r e a l l o w e d to b e killed a n d e a t e n . 2 0 Y e t this p e r c e p t i o n of o r d e r d o e s n o t a p p e a r to h a v e b e e n

extended

to the p o i n t of f o r m i n g a c o m p l e t e system, leaving o p e n

contrasts

and

contradictions

which

might

then

call f o r f u r t h e r

explanation.

E v e n the a p p a r e n t carelessness of the female ostrich r e g a r d i n g motherly

duty of protecting

her

future young could

be

her

construed

moralistically as a failure to o b s e r v e t h e i n t e n d e d divine o r d e r

(Job

39:13-18). M u c h t h e s a m e m a y b e h e l d to b e t h e case in r e g a r d to t h e taki n g o f a n i m a l life b y h u m a n b e i n g s f o r f o o d . 2 1 A l t h o u g h G e n . clearly portrays

an

understanding

that

the original

human

1:2930‫־‬ beings

w e r e v e g e t a r i a n , t h i s is c a r e f u l l y m o d i f i e d a f t e r t h e G r e a t F l o o d

19

so

In Exod. 21:28 32 the question of culpability when an ox gores a man or woman to death raises several significant issues concerning the way in which the natural tendency of fierce animals was perceived and the extent to which ownership imposed acceptance of the risks which these tendencies brought. 20 So especially Deut. 14:i 21. Compare W.J. Houston, Purity and Monotheism: Clean and Unclean Animals in Biblical Law, J S O T S S 140 (Sheffield, 1996). 21 For the following see especially S.A. Reed, "Meat Eating and the Hebrew Bible", H.T.C. Sun & K.L. Eades (eds.), Problems in Biblical Theology: Essays in Honor of Rolf Knierim (Grand Rapids, 1997), pp. 281-294.

t h a t t h e k i l l i n g o f a n i m a l s f o r f o o d is a l l o w e d , s u b j e c t t o c e r t a i n

re-

s t r i c t i o n s ( G e n . 9 : 2 3 ‫ ) ־‬. It is n o t e w o r t h y t h a t t h e c a r e f u l p r o v i s o s i n r e g a r d to the disposal of the b l o o d , e v e n i n the m o s t e x t r e m e cases, r e c o g n i s e t h e s a n c t i t y o f all life, b o t h o f h u m a n s a n d a n i m a l s .

Since

life is t h e u n i q u e g i f t a n d c r e a t i o n o f G o d it is s a c r e d . Yet, because G o d ' s order regarding the protection a n d

preserva-

t i o n o f life i n t h e w o r l d is n o t w h o l l y d e f i n e d a n d f u l l y c l a s s i f i e d , its ambiguities a n d inconsistencies a r e r e g a r d e d as tolerable. F o r

cities

to b e r e t u r n e d to ruins w h e r e wild a n i m a l s r o a m c a n b e seen as a j u s t i f i e d p u n i s h m e n t o r d a i n e d b y G o d ( c o m p a r e I s a . 1 3 : 2 1 22‫)־‬. F o r d o m e s t i c a n i m a l s to b e s l a u g h t e r e d s o o n after birth as a

necessary

s a c r i f i c e t o G o d is n o t o n l y p e r m i t t e d , b u t d e m a n d e d ( E x o d . Deut.

1 5 : 1 9 2 0 ‫ ) ־‬. T h i s is a p p a r e n t l y

believed

ultimately

Hocks a n d

to p r o m o t e

herds. Nevertheless

because

such

an

the g r e a t e r vitality a n d life w a s n e v e r

22:30;

offering was fertility

to b e c o n f u s e d

of

with

death, which a p p e a r s to be the reasoning that underlies the

prohi-

b i t i o n o f b o i l i n g a k i d in its m o t h e r ' s m i l k ( E x o d . 2 3 : 1 9 ; D e u t .

14:21).

T h e r e is n o d o u b t t h a t m a n y o f t h e s e c o n t r a s t i n g , a n d o f t e n s e e m ingly c o n t r a d i c t o r y , rules a n d p e r c e p t i o n s r e g a r d i n g d e a t h a n d slaughter in the

animal

kingdom

were

the consequence

of the

together of a mixture of responses to the p h e n o m e n o n w a s a gift w h i c h

was shrouded

in m y s t e r y

and

which

drawing

o f life. T h i s could

ulti-

mately only be u n d e r s t o o d within a religious f r a m e of reference. The

natural

world

was

itself s e e n

to display

incongruities

and

tensions. C r e a t u r e s which, at o n e m o m e n t could be praised for their a w e s o m e b e a u t y , c o u l d , in o t h e r c o n t e x t s , b e r e g a r d e d as a

threat

d e l i b e r a t e l y u s e d b y G o d t o s e r v e a s w a r n i n g s a n d p u n i s h m e n t (2 K g s . 2:23-24;

1 7 : 2 5 - 2 8 ) . F o r G o d to stop t h e m o u t h s of lions w a s a sin-

g u l a r l y u n i q u e d i v i n e i n t e r v e n t i o n in t h e n a t u r a l o r d e r of t h e (Dan. 6:16-24; compare Heb.

wild

11:33).

It is n o t i n a p p r o p r i a t e t o c l a i m t h a t s i m i l a r c o n t r a d i c t i o n s

prevail

in r e g a r d to the biblical p e r c e p t i o n s of h u m a n warfare.22 T h e s e stretch between

a c c e p t i n g it a s a m e a n s o f a c c o m p l i s h i n g t h e d i v i n e

p o s e t o r e g a r d i n g it a s a r e g r e t t a b l e , b u t i n e v i t a b l e , h u m a n Only

its u l t i m a t e

abolition

could

truly fulfil t h e

pur-

tragedy.

divine plan

for

h u m a n k i n d (Isa. 2:4; b u t c o m p a r e J o e l 3 : 9 - 1 0 ) . T h e a t t i t u d e to w a r -

22

Compare. S. Niditch, War in the Hebrew Bible: A Study in the Ethics of Violence (New York-Oxford, 1993). T h e comment of p. 154 is a helpful summary: "In fact, the history of attitudes to war in ancient Israel is a complex one involving multiplicity, overlap, and self-contradiction".

fare presented those

which

in t h e scroll of Isaiah displays similar a m b i g u i t i e s

may

be

seen

in

regard

to b e h a v i o u r

among

the

to

wild

b e a s t s . P e a c e is t h e u l t i m a t e g o a l , b u t w a r f a r e m a y b e i n e v i t a b l e order that such a goal m a y between

nations

threatens

as a necessary p r e l u d e

be attained. T h e

a return

experience

to chaos, yet m a y

to the c o m i n g of w o r l d

in

of conflict

be

regarded

peace.

P r o b a b l y the O l d T e s t a m e n t p r o m i s e w h i c h c o m e s closest to sharing the s a m e expectation of a n ultimate e n d i n g of violence out

the animal

kingdom

as that

late p a s s a g e in t h e b o o k of

of Isa.

Hosea:

1 1 : 6 9 ‫ ־‬is t o b e

through-

f o u n d in

a

23

I will m a k e f o r y o u a c o v e n a n t o n t h a t d a y w i t h t h e w i l d a n i m a l s , t h e b i r d s o f t h e a i r , a n d t h e c r e e p i n g t h i n g s o f t h e g r o u n d ; a n d I will a b o l i s h t h e b o w , t h e s w o r d , a n d w a r in t h e l a n d ; a n d I will m a k e y o u lie d o w n in s a f e t y . Hos. 2:20 (English translation R o b e r t M u r r a y h a s d e s c r i b e d this p r o m i s e as t h a t of a " c o s m i c enant"

24

a n d it is n o t e w o r t h y t h a t , a s w i t h t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e

references,

the

warfare. T h e

primary ending

emphasis

an

of

years

threat

(Isa.

longed-for removal

to the p e a c e

54:14

17)

has

and

called

of the

Isaiah human of

future

removal

of

as

further military

the

abolition

threat

of this. T h e

and

the

cov-

p r e m a t u r e d e a t h f r o m t h e a n i m a l k i n g d o m is e s s e n t i a l l y r e g a r d e d illustration

of violence

is u p o n

18)

of a n y possibility

prosperity for

a

of J e r u s a l e m

comprehensive

in and

r a d i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f a l l t h a t is i m p l i e d i n t h e d e s c r i p t i o n o f J e r u salem

as " t h e city of p e a c e " ( c o m p a r e

also Lev.

26:6).

4. Animal Violence in the Context of Christian Ethics In Beatrix

Potter's stories of J e m i m a

Puddleduck,

Mrs.

Tiggywinkle

a n d o t h e r creatures, the radical divide b e t w e e n the status of

human

b e i n g s a n d o t h e r c r e a t u r e s o f t h e n a t u r a l w o r l d is c r o s s e d . N o t

only

is t h e a n i m a l w o r l d p o r t r a y e d i n t e r m s o f t h e h u m a n w o r l d , b u t c r e a t u r e s w h i c h i n h a b i t it a r e a s s u m e d

to be subject to basic

restraints a n d obligations. T h e wolf can indeed dwell with the since

they

them

to relate to e a c h o t h e r in a responsible m a n n e r .

23

have

acquired

the

moral

understanding

which Much

the

moral lamb, enables of

the

A.A. Macintosh, Hosea, I C C ( E d i n b u r g h , 1997), pp. 81 .2‫־‬ R. M u r r a y , The Cosmic Covenant: Bibticat Themes of Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation ( L o n d o n , 1992). 24

f u n o f t h e B e a t r i x P o t t e r s t o r i e s lies in t h e i r g e n t e e l h u m a n i s i n g

of

t h e a n i m a l w o r l d a n d c o n v e r t i n g it i n t o a p a l e , b u t c o m f o r t i n g , r e f l e c tion of h u m a n

society.

I t is, h o w e v e r , a m a t t e r o f m a x i m u m doctrine of creation

that the moral

importance

to the

biblical

responsibility of h u m a n

beings

is r e g a r d e d a s a f e a t u r e w h i c h s e p a r a t e s t h e m f r o m t h e r e s t o f e r e a t i o n , a s is e m p h a s i s e d i n t h e s t o r y o f t h e F a l l i n G e n . 3 .

Morality

is a h u m a n p h e n o m e n o n a n d t h e v a r i e d p a t t e r n s o f b e h a v i o u r w h i c h a r e to b e f o u n d in the a n i m a l w o r l d a r e n o t r e g a r d e d as reflecting u p o n t h e u n i q u e n e s s of this h u m a n privilege. H u m a n b e i n g s h a v e responsibility upon

towards

the

animal

realm

which

has

been

a

conferred

t h e m as a c o n s e q u e n c e of t h e d e s i g n of c r e a t i o n ( G e n .

1:28).

I t is a r g u a b l e t h a t t h e r e a r e e x c e p t i o n s t o t h i s i n t h e b i b l i c a l w i s dom

tradition w h e r e the a p p a r e n t e x e m p l a r y forms of c o n d u c t

played

by even

seemingly

unimportant

insects a n d

despised

dis-

forms

o f a n i m a l life a r e h e l d u p f o r s e r i o u s m o r a l r e f l e c t i o n (so e s p e c i a l l y in Prov. 30:24-31). Birds m a y b e c o m e G o d ' s agents to serve

moral

e n d s ( P r o v . 3 0 : 1 7 ) . Y e t it is f a r f r o m c l e a r t h a t s u c h u s e o f s p e c i f i c e x a m p l e s to serve a didactic p u r p o s e w a s seriously i n t e n d e d to i m p l y a m o r a l o r d e r p r e v a i l i n g t h r o u g h o u t all a n i m a l life. R a t h e r it is m o r e plausibly

the

desire

to

exploit

the

possibilities

of incongruity

and

h u m o u r in o r d e r to d r a w a t t e n t i o n to i m p o r t a n t m o r a l duties w h i c h has occasioned

the composition

of such

sayings. At

most

it is

desire of the sages to discern the presence of a p l a n n e d , a n d

morally

r e s o n a n t , o r d e r t o all life w h i c h h a s g i v e n r i s e t o s u c h s a y i n g s . c a n n o t be taken to imply too m u c h

regarding the sharp

When

They

distinction

b e t w e e n the m o r a l responsibilities of h u m a n beings a n d the of the a n i m a l

the

conduct

kingdom.

w e r e t u r n t h e r e f o r e t o t h e p r i m a r y q u e s t i o n o f t h e signifi-

c a n c e of the eschatological p r o m i s e of Isa. 1 1 : 6 - 9 for a n ing of the C h r i s t i a n d o c t r i n e of creation w e c a n

find

understand-

i n it a

number

of points that concern the relationship between a doctrine of creation a n d a C h r i s t i a n e t h i c o f n o n - v i o l e n c e . I n t h e first i n s t a n c e its a s s u m p t i o n t h a t t h e p r e s e n t o r d e r o f t h e l i v i n g w o r l d , w i t h its d a n g e r s violence, d e m a n d s tant. T h e r e

submission

is a s s u m e d

to be

t o w i d e r e t h i c a l r e s t r a i n t s , is a degree

of neutrality

impor-

regarding

e x p e r i e n c e d o r d e r o f t h e n a t u r a l w o r l d , w h i c h r e g a r d s it a s

and the

neither

i n n a t e l y evil, n o r y e t n a t u r a l l y g o o d . T h e n e c e s s i t y f o r t h e i m p o s i t i o n o f h u m a n c a r e a n d r e s t r a i n t s is f r a n k l y r e c o g n i s e d . T h e

envisioning

o f a r e - o r d e r e d a n d c o n s i s t e n t l y n o n - v i o l e n t p a t t e r n o f life t h r o u g h o u t the universe accepts that currently imperfections

exist.

We

d o n o t live in a f i n i s h e d a n d

rigidly o r d e r e d w o r l d , b u t

one

i n w h i c h m a n y d i s t o r t i o n s a n d i n c o n g r u i t i e s a r e t o b e f o u n d . I t is a w o r l d t h a t is b e c o m i n g ,

and

not simply a world

not therefore committed

to rigid p r e s e r v a t i o n

in b e i n g . W e

are

status quo,

of the

nor

y e t a r e w e b o u n d t o e n d o r s e a s n a t u r a l , a n d t h e r e f o r e d e s i r a b l e , all that h a p p e n s in the wild. T h e

n e e d to control aggression

in

estab-

l i s h i n g a n d s e c u r i n g h u m a n life d o e s n o t o u t l a w all v i o l e n c e , n o r y e t e n d o r s e it a s t h e n e c e s s a r y l a w o f life. T o l o o k f o r a n y w h o l l y f o r m rules of c o n d u c t , m o d e l l e d on " t h e survival of the

uni-

fittest"

is t o

m a k e one facet of the natural world into a n unjustifiable moral

im-

perative, regardless of the m a n y other factors w h i c h relate to

human

s o c i a l life. A s w i t h a w h o l e c l u s t e r o f i n s t i n c t i v e a n d n a t u r a l

aspects

o f b e h a v i o u r , b o t h i n a n i m a l s a n d h u m a n s , a g g r e s s i o n is s e e n t o b e part

of a m o r e

complex

whole.

The

balancing

the competing claims which

these innate

p a r t o f w h a t it m e a n s t o b e

human.

and

controlling

forces p r o m o t e

S o a n i m p o r t a n t legacy of the p r o m i s e of Isa.

is a

of

vital

11:6-9 towards

C h r i s t i a n d o c t r i n e o f c r e a t i o n is its h i g h l i g h t i n g o f t h e c o m p l e x i t y t h e e t h i c o f a g g r e s s i o n in its b i b l i c a l c o n t e x t . B i b l i c a l p e r c e p t i o n s the

natural

world

accept

that

aggression

may

serve goals that

ultimately beneficial to the n e e d s of specific animals, a m o n g t h e l i o n is t h e c h i e f e x a m p l e .

Yet there are m a n y

a of of

are

whom

indications

also

o f c o n c e r n s t o l i m i t v i o l e n c e t o s p e c i f i e d a r e a s s o a s t o m a k e it c o n f o r m to a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g of natural

order.

P e r h a p s the m o s t i m p o r t a n t legacy of Isa.

1 1 : 6 - 9 a n d its u s e

in

C h r i s t i a n l i t u r g y is its d r a w i n g a t t e n t i o n t o t h e p r e s e n c e o f " t h e w i l d " a s a f a c e t o f c r e a t i o n . Its r o l e i n t h e e c o l o g i c a l a n d e t h i c a l

scheme

of things can then be placed in perspective against the larger cal insights i n t o t h e n a t u r e of c r e a t i o n

and

bibli-

t h e p r e s e n c e o f life o n

e a r t h i n its g r e a t v a r i e t y o f f o r m s . T h e r e is u n d o u b t e d l y a n

element

of hyperbole

transla-

tion

in Isa.

11:6-9,

as also in H o s .

2:20 (English

18), w h i c h a p p e a r s t o h a v e a r i s e n o u t o f a c o n c e r n

to

outlaw

h u m a n w a r f a r e . T h e a g g r e s s i o n s h o w n in t h e n a t u r a l w o r l d w a s to

be

used

appears human

to

excuse

to prevail

the

predatory

so extensively

violence which

on

animal conduct are excluded

might

of the lion -

and

power

throughout

In

behaviour

these

target, a n d

which

passages

aggression.

the

ancient

domesticity.

it is

the examples

f r o m the picture so that they c a n

so widely e m p l o y e d

into the shelter of peaceful

violent

earth.

is t h e p r i m a r y

l o n g e r serve as a n excuse for h u m a n example

and

not

no

the

age-old

as a s y m b o l of

military

Near

Even

of

East

is

brought

GNATS,

GLOSSES

AND

ETERNITY:

ISAIAH

51:6

RECONSIDERED BY H.G.M.

WILLIAMSON Oxford

O v e r the course of m a n y years, D r . Gelston has p u b l i s h e d a n extens i v e s e r i e s o f a r t i c l e s o n t e x t u a l a n d t h e o l o g i c a l p r o b l e m s in

Isaiah

4 0 - 5 5 . S o m e have been on matters of m a j o r importance, others on relatively m i n o r issues. T h e

present

s t u d y falls

firmly

in t h e

latter

c a t e g o r y , b u t it is o f f e r e d o n t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g w h i c h G e l s t o n

has

h i m s e l f e x e m p l i f i e d so well t h a t s o m e t i m e s s c h o l a r s h i p a d v a n c e s

by

the a c c u m u l a t i o n of details. By c o m p a r i s o n with w h a t m a y be called a traditional English vers i o n o f t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t s u c h a s t h e Revised Bible

rendering

of Isaiah

Version, t h e New

51:6 differs in several

English

respects. T h e

two

translations a r e as follows, with the significant differences highlighted i n italics: Lift u p y o u r eyes to t h e h e a v e n s , a n d look u p o n t h e e a r t h b e n e a t h : for the h e a v e n s shall vanish a w a y like s m o k e , a n d t h e e a r t h shall w a x old like a g a r m e n t , a n d t h e y t h a t dwell t h e r e i n shall die in like m a n ner: b u t m y salvation shall b e f o r ever, a n d m y r i g h t e o u s n e s s shall n o t be abolished. Lift u p y o u r eyes to the h e a v e n s , look at the e a r t h b e n e a t h : t h e h e a v e n s grow murky as s m o k e ; t h e e a r t h w e a r s i n t o t a t t e r s like a g a r m e n t , a n d t h o s e w h o live o n it die like maggots‫׳‬, b u t m y d e l i v e r a n c e is e v e r l a s t i n g a n d m y saving power shall n e v e r wane. None

o f t h e s e d i f f e r e n c e s is t o b e e x p l a i n e d

critical j u d g e m e n t s

the

Masoretic

Text

o n the basis of

is p r e s u p p o s e d

in

textboth

cases;' r a t h e r , the c h a n g e s a r e d u e to s u p p o s e d i m p r o v e m e n t s in o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the m e a n i n g of Classical H e b r e w

words.

' For the .HEB, see the lack of any entry under this verse in L.H. Brockington,

A s is w e l l k n o w n ,

many

such

improvements

were proposed

dur-

ing the m i d d l e d e c a d e s of the present century, often o n the basis c o m p a r i s o n with c o g n a t e Semitic languages. T h i s p r o c e d u r e w a s jected

to a searching

critical

analysis by

Barr,2 w h o

sub-

of course

did

not reject the m e t h o d in principle, b u t w h o u r g e d c a u t i o n a n d g e s t e d g u i d e l i n e s f o r its p r o p e r a p p l i c a t i o n .

On

tures have been accepted, and the appearance

Bible

(1989) reflects this c h a n g e d

appropriately

atmosphere;

t h e w h o l e , his of

of

sugstric-

The Revised English

its r e n d e r i n g m a y

be

compared: Raise y o u r eyes h e a v e n w a r d s ; look o n the e a r t h b e n e a t h : t h o u g h t h e h e a v e n s b e d i s p e r s e d as s m o k e a n d t h e e a r t h w e a r o u t like a g a r m e n t a n d its i n h a b i t a n t s d i e like flies, m y d e l i v e r a n c e will b e e v e r l a s t i n g a n d m y s a v i n g p o w e r will r e m a i n u n b r o k e n .

T h i s r e n d e r i n g a c c e p t s t w o o f t h e c h a n g e s w h i c h t h e NEB by comparison

with

t h e RV

and

rejects the o t h e r two.

entered

Concerning

" s a v i n g p o w e r " as a n e q u i v a l e n t in c e r t a i n c o n t e x t s for H e b r e w t h i s is a m a t t e r o f s e m a n t i c s i n t e r n a l t o t h e c o r p u s o f c l a s s i c a l

‫צדקה‬,

Hebrew,

a n d w o u l d b e w i d e l y a c c e p t e d t o d a y . 3 I t is u n n e c e s s a r y t o d i s c u s s i t further The

here. t r a n s l a t i o n o f ‫ ת ח ת‬b y ' w a n e ' i n t h e NEB

g e s t i o n o f G . R . D r i v e r in 1935. nation

of

dismayed"

NRSV),

the

word

(hence

"yields

no

as

"be

an

4

goes b a c k to a

sug-

H e maintained that the usual expia-

imperfect

abolished"

in

satisfactory sense

qal RV,

of ‫ ח ת ת‬, "be

in t h e

"was

ended"

context"

in and

shattered, RSV

and

proposed

instead that the w o r d should be analysed as a n i m p e r f e c t qal of ‫נחת‬,

The Hebrew Text of the Old Testament: The Readings Adopted by the Translators of the New English Bible (Oxford a n d C a m b r i d g e , 1973), p. 194. 2 J . Barr, Comparative Philology and the Text of the Old Testament (Oxford, 1968). See too the discussion by J . A . E m e r t o n in his review of the first fascicule of the third edition of HAL in VT 22 (1972), pp. 5 0 2 - 1 1 , a n d L.L. G r a b b e , Comparative Philology and the Text of Job: A Study in Methodology S B L D S 34 (Missoula, 1977). 3 See most fully F.V. Reiterer, Gerechtigkeit ah Heil: ‫ צרק‬bei Deuterojesaja. Aussage und Vergleich mit der alttestamentlichen Tradition (Graz, 1976), a n d most recently J . N . Oswalt, "Righteousness in Isaiah: A Study of the Function of C h a p t e r s 5 6 - 6 6 in the Present Structure of the Book", in C . C . Broyles a n d C.A. Evans (eds.), Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah: Studies of an Interpretive Tradition S V T 70 (Leiden, 1997), 1, pp. 177-91. 4 G . R . Driver, "Linguistic a n d T e x t u a l Problems: Isaiah x H x v i " , JTS 36 (1935), pp. 3 9 6 - 4 0 6 , p. 402.

' d e s c e n d ' , w i t h t h e m e t a p h o r i c a l l y d e v e l o p e d s e n s e of " t o set, a b a t e " . He

o b s e r v e d in s u p p o r t of this t h a t in S y r i a c n o u n s d e r i v e d

the cognate verb demonstrate a comparable semantic

development,

a n d that the m e a n i n g p r o p o s e d p r o d u c e d a satisfactory On

from

parallelism.

t h e o t h e r h a n d , it s h o u l d b e o b s e r v e d t h a t i n t h e v e r y

verse we

find

next

t h e f o r m 1ΠΠΓΙ, a n d h e r e t h e c o n t e x t l e a v e s u s i n

d o u b t t h a t t h e m e a n i n g m u s t b e " b e d i s m a y e d " , a s t h e NEB

no

itself

accepts. W e should normally suppose that the singular f o r m of the s a m e w o r d i n t h e p r e v i o u s v e r s e w o u l d b e likely t o c o m e f r o m same

verb. This,

indeed,

was one

of the examples which

the

Torrey

a d d u c e d in s u p p o r t of his view t h a t p l a y i n g o n the d i f f e r e n t m e a n i n g s o f H e b r e w w o r d s w a s a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c stylistic d e v i c e o f D e u t e r o I s a i a h , 5 a n d P a y n e , w h o is g e n e r a l l y c r i t i c a l o f t h i s s u g g e s t i o n (as o f D r i v e r ' s d e v e l o p m e n t o f it in t e r m s o f p l a y o n h o m o n y m o u s agrees t h a t "this w o u l d s e e m to b e o n e of t h e weightiest in T o r r e y ' s

list".

roots)6

examples

7

M o r e s e r i o u s l y , h o w e v e r , it m u s t b e o b s e r v e d t h a t n o w h e r e e l s e i n the H e b r e w Bible does the v e r b ‫ נחת‬s h o w the m e t a p h o r i c a l

develop-

m e n t in m e a n i n g to w h i c h D r i v e r a p p e a l s . " W h i l e t h a t d o e s n o t rule o u t t h e p o s s i b i l i t y a b s o l u t e l y , it n e v e r t h e l e s s falls f o u l o f t h e g e n e r a l l y accepted point of m e t h o d that o n e should not import n e w

meanings

t o H e b r e w w o r d s f r o m t h e c o g n a t e l a n g u a g e s if a n a t t e s t e d

meaning

e l s e w h e r e i n H e b r e w itself is s a t i s f a c t o r y . T h u s , a l t h o u g h D r i v e r ' s s u g g e s t i o n , a n d t h e NEB

rendering which

is b a s e d u p o n it, a r e a t t r a c t i v e i n t h e i r i m m e d i a t e c o n t e x t , it is m o r e probable

that

the

usual

' e n d e d ' , as i n c l u d e d a n d NRSV

understanding

in t h e m o r e

r e c e n t REB

shattered", ("remain

and

hence

unbroken")

( " b e e n d e d " ) , is c o r r e c t . It is n o t c l e a r w h y D r i v e r s h o u l d

h a v e t h o u g h t t h a t this m a k e s n o

5

"be

sense.

C.C. Torrey, The Second Isaiah: A New Interpretation (Edinburgh, 1928), esp. pp. 199-203 and 398.9‫־‬ 6 It is somewhat surprising that Driver did not, in fact, include this verse in the list of passages at the end of his article (1935, p. 406) where he appeals to Torrey's observation in support of a number of the other solutions which he proposes for textual difficulties in these chapters. Whether or not the evidence is sufficiently strong to sustain Torrey's view, I certainly agree with Payne (see next note) that the evidence cannot justify Driver's development of the view to cover plays on homonymous roots or forms. 7 D.F. Payne, "Characteristic Word-Play in 'Second Isaiah': A Reappraisal", JSS 12 (1967), pp. 207-29, p. 221. Payne himself is inclined to favour emendation of verse 6 to avoid conceding even this example to Torrey. 8 His reference to the use of the verb in Isaiah 7:8 does not help his case here.

T h e s e c o n d p r o p o s a l in NEB to the translation

w h i c h is c h a n g e d i n t h e REB

relates

of ‫ נ מ ל ח ו‬in t h e m i d d l e line of t h e verse. T o

set

t h e s c e n e , let it b e r e m e m b e r e d t h a t t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l r e n d e r i n g s i n E n g l i s h (RV: hapax

" s h a l l v a n i s h a w a y " ; RSV:

legomenon,

listed as ‫מ ל ח‬

phers cited Arabic

and

I in B D B

Ethiopie

"will v a n i s h " ) p r e s u p p o s e and

to support

lexicogra-

the

meaning

" t e a r a w a y , fig. d i s s i p a t e " , a n d h e n c e f o r t h e n i p h ' a l " b e

dispersed

i n f r a g m e n t s , d i s s i p a t e d " , " z e r i s s e n w e r d e n " . I t is p r o b a b l e ,

however,

that they w e r e quite as m u c h

cognates

KB. These

a

influenced by the o c c u r r e n c e of the

plural n o u n ‫ ( מ ל ח י ם‬J e r . 38:11,12), w h e r e the c o n t e x t a n d close assod a t i o n with ‫ ס ח ב ו ת‬point unmistakably to the m e a n i n g 'rags'. T h o u g h poorly

attested

in classical

seemed to be mutually While

Hebrew,

the verb a n d

noun

will

have

self-supporting.

not disputing the comparative

evidence, a n d without

fur-

ther attention to the cognate n o u n ‫ מ ל ח י ב‬, Driver nevertheless objected t o this r e n d e r i n g o n t h e g r o u n d t h a t it " d o e s n o t a g r e e w i t h ‫"( " כ ע ש ן‬like smoke").9 H e urged instead that the w o r d was a denominative

from

t h e f a m i l i a r n o u n ‫ ' מ ל ח‬s a l t ' , 1 0 a n d t h a t its m e a n i n g w a s t o b e

com-

p a r e d with a similar d e v e l o p m e n t

i n A r a b i c o f maliha,

I,

"become

s a l t , w a s g r e y i s h , d u s t - c o l o u r e d " , a n d I X (imlahha), " w a s m i x e d b l a c k a n d w h i t e " . T h e e x p l a n a t i o n for this s e m a n t i c d e v e l o p m e n t was, of course, colour".

that

u n p u r i f i e d salt in a n c i e n t

Hence

times was

for our verse he proposed

"are

"of a dirty murky"

(cf.

grey NEB:

" g r o w murky"), with the explanation "in other words, darkness spreadi n g o v e r t h e h e a v e n s will b e a p o r t e n t o f t h e In evaluating

Driver's proposal,

F i r s t , it s h o u l d b e n o t e d

several

end".

points deserve

mention.

that the parallel half-line states that

"the

e a r t h s h a l l w e a r o u t a s a g a r m e n t " . W h i l e it is t r u e t h a t p a r a l l e l i s m

9 Driver (1935), pp. 401 2. He later repeated his argument, if anything with a more vehement objection to the traditional view - "une conjecture dépourvue de tout appui scientifique", which, in the light of the evidence already available to him, must be charitably regarded as a rhetorical exaggeration; cf. "L'Interprétation du texte masorétique à la lumière de la lexicographie hébraïque", ETL 26 (1950), pp. 3 3 7 - 5 3 (349-50). 10 For a discussion of why Aquila and Symmachus associate the verb with 'salt', and a conjectural emendation of the L X X (ηρεωθη = ήραιώθη for έστερεώθη, originally proposed by de Lagarde) which would conform the L X X closely with M T as traditionally understood, see P. Katz, "Two Kindred Corruptions in the Septuagint", F T 1 (1951), pp. 2 6 1 - 6 (262-5). Alternatively, and without reference to Katz, H . J a c o b s o n , "A Note on Isaiah 51:6‫ \ר‬JBL 114 (1995), p. 291, suggests that both the LXX and Jerome's comments on Aquila and Symmachus, together with his own translation (liquescent), can be explained on the basis that their text read ‫נמונו‬.

is n o t n e c e s s a r i l y a d e c i s i v e c l u e a s t o m e a n i n g , it is s t r i k i n g t h a t

no

o n e h a s c h a l l e n g e d the m e a n i n g of 'rags' for the n o u n ‫ מ ל ח י ם‬,

and

t h a t a verbal e q u i v a l e n t of this w o u l d b e highly suitable in context. Secondly,

and

against

Driver's

opinion

that

the comparison

"like

s m o k e " is i n a p p r o p r i a t e , it m a y b e s a i d t h a t o b s e r v a t i o n o f t h e d i s s i p a t i o n o f s m o k e a s it rises i n t o t h e a i r is n o t a t all u n s u i t a b l e a s a n i m a g e o f c l o t h t u r n i n g i n t o r a g s . A n d a s t h i s is p o s t u l a t e d

precisely

o f t h e sky, it is f u r t h e r p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e i m a g e w a s s u g g e s t e d b y t h e similar m a n n e r in m a n y

in w h i c h

ways, can

cloud

sometimes

formations, which tend

to break

resemble

apart

smoke

like c l o t h

r a g s . P u t t i n g t h e s e first t w o p o i n t s t o g e t h e r , it a p p e a r s t h a t rather

missed

claiming that tearing cloth

the force of the analogy. T h e

p o e t is n o t s o

smoke

as t h a t

can

be

"torn

asunder"

i n t o r a g s is c o m p a r a b l e

into

Driver much

the action

of

in effect to the b r e a k i n g

up

of a c o l u m n of s m o k e . " T h i r d l y , it m u s t b e q u e s t i o n e d w h e t h e r , c o n v e r s e l y , D r i v e r ' s

pro-

p o s a i is itself a p p r o p r i a t e t o t h e c o n t e x t . T h e p o i n t o f t h e v e r s e

as

a w h o l e is t o c o n t r a s t t h e t r a n s i t o r y n a t u r e o f t h e c r e a t e d o r d e r w i t h the

durability

of G o d ' s

salvation/deliverance

and

righteousness/

s a v i n g p o w e r . It is d i f f i c u l t t o s e e h o w a c h a n g e o f c o l o u r i n t h e sky (even as " a p o r t e n t of t h e e n d " ) c a n c o n t r i b u t e to this c o n t r a s t .

As

with the w e a r i n g o u t of the e a r t h , so a r e f e r e n c e to the e n d i n g

or

d e s t r u c t i o n o f t h e sky is c l e a r l y d e m a n d e d .

F o u r t h l y , a n d in

exten-

sion of this p o i n t , s m o k e o c c u r s e l s e w h e r e t o o as a n i m a g e for t r a n sitoriness, for instance at H o s .

1 3 : 3 ; Ps. 3 7 : 2 0 ; 6 8 : 3 ;

102:4. T o

the

e x t e n t t h a t it m a y b e r e g a r d e d a s a s t e r e o t y p i c a l i m a g e , its u s e i n Isa. 5 1 : 6 helps to r e i n f o r c e t h e m a i n p o i n t of t h e verse. F o r r e a s o n s , I c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e REB d e r i n g o f t h i s l i n e i n t h e NEB r e t u r n i n g to the m o r e tion

which

w a s justified in r e j e c t i n g t h e

these ren-

(which clearly follows Driver) a n d

traditional

specifically i n c l u d e d

understanding, a reference

though

a

to rags m i g h t

in

translabe

less

o p e n to m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d would m a k e clearer the i n t e n d e d p a r allelism: " t h o u g h

t h e s k y b e t o r n t o r a g s like s m o k e " m a y b e

ten-

t a t i v e l y p r o p o s e d . F i n a l l y i n t h i s c o n n e c t i o n , it is w o r t h o b s e r v i n g i n passing that the comparative evidence on which the older w a s b a s e d c a n n o w b e s t r e n g t h e n e d by r e f e r e n c e to A k k a d i a n

rendering

malahu.12

" For the so-called pregnant use of the preposition ‫כ‬, see, for instance, J M §133/;. 12 Cf. CAD 10, pp. 152-3, which includes "tear apart" and IV "be t o r n ' o u t " . The Concise Dictionary of Akkadian (in preparation) suggests for its malāhu IV "to tear

T h u s far, t h e n , w e h a v e seen that of the f o u r differences in translation

between

NEB

and

RV,

REB

accepts

one

and

rejects

two.

Clearly, the revisers w e r e thinking i n d e p e n d e n t l y ,

and

furthermore

w e h a v e n o t e d reasons to a p p r o v e their decisions in e a c h case. T h i s suggests that

they must

have been

strongly

impressed

d e n c e f o r t h e f o u r t h c h a n g e , " l i k e m a g g o t s " (REB,

by the

"like

evi-

flies"),

by

c o m p a r i s o n w i t h t h e R F ' s " i n like m a n n e r " . A n d i n t h i s , o f c o u r s e , they h a v e the s u p p o r t of the m a j o r i t y of m o d e r n T h e translation of ρ

commentators.

‫ כ מ ו‬b y " i n like m a n n e r " , t h o u g h

supported

b y all t h e a n c i e n t a u t h o r i t i e s , h a s l o n g b e e n r e g a r d e d a s w e a k ; first

the

p a r t of t h e line leads us to e x p e c t s o m e m o r e specific p o i n t

of

c o m p a r i s o n . B e c a u s e o f t h i s , it w a s a l r e a d y c o m m o n i n t h e l a s t c e n tury13 to associate ]5 r a t h e r w i t h t h e ‫כ ״ ם‬ 105:31, h e n c e "like gnats".

14

of Exod. 8 : 1 2 - 1 4 a n d

Ps.

H o w e v e r , t h e r e a r e t w o difficulties with

t h i s v i e w . F i r s t , it is u n l i k e l y t h a t t h e s i n g u l a r o f ‫ כ ב י ם‬is ] 5 , 1 5 f o r t h e only evidence which we have, namely, post-Biblical H e b r e w , t o a s i n g u l a r ‫ כ נ ה‬. A n d s e c o n d l y , e v e n if t h e r e w e r e a s i n g u l a r

points form

‫ כ ן‬, it w o u l d b e n e c e s s a r y t o u n d e r s t a n d it a s a c o l l e c t i v e , " s w a r m

of

g n a t s " . T h e r e is n o e v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t t h i s , a n d o n e w i d e l y - a d o p t e d explanation of the variant form ‫( כ נ ם‬Exod. 8:12, collective

16

r a t h e r tells a g a i n s t it. T o

13) a s j u s t s u c h

avoid such problems, a

ber of older c o m m e n t a t o r s therefore e m e n d e d p

a

num-

to ‫ כ נ י ם‬in Isa. 51:6.'7

T h i s is a d m i t t e d l y o n l y a s m a l l t e x t u a l c h a n g e , a n d t h e

corruption

out", D "reduce to fibres, shred", Ν "be torn out". HAL, p. 556, also adduces Ugaritic mill, but the meaning of this word is still disputed. 13 F. Delitzsch, Commentât über das Buch Jesaia (Leipzig, 18894), p. 500 = Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah (Edinburgh, 1894), II, p. 262, cites Hitzig, Meier, Ewald, Knobel, Umbreit, Stier, H a h n and Orclli among those who adopted this solution. R. Lowth too, we may add, offered the translation "like the vilest insect", but without making any comment upon it; see Isaiah: A New Translation; with Preliminary Dissertation, and Notes, Critical, Philological, and Explanatory (2 vols.; London, 1824), p. 164. 14 T h e precise identification of the insects in question is inevitably uncertain. Among the main suggestions arc 'gnats' (LXX, V and Philo), 'lice' (Pesh. and TO), 'mosquitoes', "sand flies", 'fleas', and 'maggots' (so various modern versions). For discussion, see, for instance, J.P. Hyatt, Commentary on Exodus (London, 1971), p. 110, and B.S. Childs, Exodus: A Commentary (London, 1974), p. 129, who observes that "the evidence is indecisive". 15 Despite D u h m ' s proposal to find this form in Num. 13:33; see B. Duhm, Das Buch Jesaia (Göttingen, 1892), p. 356. It is noteworthy that Duhm himself later dropped this proposal; see p. 384 of the 4th edition of the commentary (1922). 16 So A. Dillmann, Die Bücher Exodus und Leviticus (Leipzig, 1880), pp. 77 8; cf. C K §85Λ 17 E.g. Κ. Marti, Das Buch Jesaja (Tübingen, 1900), p. 338; Duhm (1922, 4th edn.), p. 384.

could

easily b e

explained

as a h a p l o g r a p h y

remains a purely conjectural emendation

b e f o r e (‫ימ)ותון‬, b u t

it

nonetheless.

In 1935 R e i d e r suggested a n alternative w a y of achieving the s a m e result w i t h o u t the n e e d to c h a n g e the c o n s o n a n t a l text. H e took the p h r a s e as a single w o r d , p ] D 3 , a n d b y c o m p a r i s o n with the r o o t m-k-n

arrived at a translation

"like locusts".18 T h e

Arabic

subsequent

l Q I s a b , w h i c h is r e m a r k a b l y c l o s e t o t h e M T

for the

m o s t p a r t , writes the c o n s o n a n t s as a single w o r d 1 9 has b e e n

thought

discovery that

to give this p r o p o s a l a d d i t i o n a l a n d w e i g h t y One

support.20

w a y o r a n o t h e r , t h e r e f o r e , v i r t u a l l y all m o d e r n

and commentaries

21

translations

a g r e e t h a t t h e p o i n t of c o m p a r i s o n in o u r clause

is w i t h s o m e k i n d o f i n s e c t , a n d a c r o s s - r e f e r e n c e t o I s a . 4 0 : 2 2 , w h e r e t h e e a r t h ' s i n h a b i t a n t s (‫ ישביה‬a g a i n ) a r e said to b e "like g r a s s h o p p e r s " , is t h o u g h t

to

furnish an

adequate

comment.

Taking

each

phrase

of the verse o n e by one, a n d given the attraction of solving textual problems

by the comparative

in the m i d d l e stand

how

philological

method

which

prevailed

d e c a d e s o f t h i s c e n t u r y , it is n o t d i f f i c u l t t o

such

a consensus

o f o p i n i o n , it is p e r h a p s

could

have

emerged.

not surprising that

In

t h e REB

under-

this

climate

should

have

seen n o reason to dissent. Despite such s t r e n g t h of o p i n i o n , h o w e v e r , several i m p o r t a n t

con-

siderations necessary for t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the verse as a

whole

s e e m t o h a v e b e e n c o m p l e t e l y o v e r l o o k e d . I r o n i c a l l y , t h e REB

itself

s h o w s a w a r e n e s s of o n e of these, b u t a p p e a r s n o t to h a v e it t h r o u g h t o its l o g i c a l The

first

followed

consequence.

p o i n t c o n c e r n s s y n t a x , a n d in p a r t i c u l a r t h e f u n c t i o n of

18 J . Reider, "Contributions to the Hebrew Lexicon", £ A W 53 (1935), pp. 270‫־‬ 77 (270 1). C.R. North, The Second Isaiah: Introduction, Translation and Commentary to Chapters xl~b (Oxford, 1964), p. 207, reports that the same suggestion was made to him by G.R. Driver "in a private communication". There is no way of knowing whether Driver derived this from Reider or whether he hit upon the idea independently. 19 See E.L. Sukenik, 'wsr hmgylwt hgnwzwt šbydy h'wnybrsyth h'biyt (Jerusalem, 1954), pi. 9, line 17. lQIsa" attests the division into two words. T h e passage is not preserved in any of the other fragments of Isaiah from Q p m r a n ; cf. Ε. Ulrich, "An Index to the Contents of the Isaiah Manuscripts from t h e j u d e a n Desert 5 ', in Broyles and Evans (1997), pp. 477-80. For the substantial, but secondary, deviation of lQIsa" earlier in the line, see J . Koenig, L'Herméneutique analogique du Judaïsme antique d'après les témoins textuels d'Isaïe (Leiden, 1982), pp. 261-2. 20 See BHS, and R.N. Whybray, Isaiah 40-66 (London, 1975), p. 157. 21 Among the very few who still explicitly prefer the older rendering, I have noted only Torrey (1928), p. 398; I. Knabenbauer-F. Zorrell, Commentarius in Isaiam Prophetam, 2 (Paris, 1923), p. 288, and A. Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah (Leicester, 1993), p. 406.

‫ כ י‬at t h e start of t h e s e c o n d line. T h e c o m m o n e s t , causal sense

of

‫ כ י‬, " f o r , b e c a u s e " , is c l e a r l y i n a p p r o p r i a t e h e r e , d e s p i t e t h e f a c t t h a t it is c o n v e n t i o n a l i n o l d e r t r a n s l a t i o n s : it m a k e s n o s e n s e t o

adduce

t h e dispersal a n d w e a r i n g out of the h e a v e n s a n d e a r t h as a g r o u n d for looking at t h e m . ducing a concessive waw

Rather, ‫כי‬

h e r e s h o u l d b e r e g a r d e d as

sentence, with

its a p o d o s i s i n t r o d u c e d

introby

the

at t h e start of t h e f o l l o w i n g line: " E v e n i f . . . yet".22 I n d e e d ,

a

w e l l - r e c o g n i z e d e x a m p l e o f t h i s v e r y c o n s t r u c t i o n c o m e s a little l a t e r w i t h i n D e u t e r o - I s a i a h itself, a t 5 4 : 1 0 , t o g i v e e x p r e s s i o n t o a s e n t i m e n t w h i c h is s t r i k i n g l y s i m i l a r t o 5 1 : 6 : " T h o u g h (‫ )כי‬t h e

mountains

d e p a r t a n d t h e hills b e r e m o v e d , y e t (1) m y s t e a d f a s t l o v e s h a l l d e p a r t f r o m y o u , a n d m y c o v e n a n t of p e a c e shall n o t b e W e m a y t h u s r e a d i l y a g r e e t h a t t h e REB as ' t h o u g h ' in

not

removed".

is c o r r e c t i n t r a n s l a t i n g ‫כ י‬

51:6.

S e c o n d l y a n d in c o n s e q u e n c e of this, w e n e e d to i n q u i r e a f t e r t h e f o r c e o f t h i s c o n c e s s i o n . T h e p o i n t is o b v i o u s : t h e p r o p h e t t a k e s w h a t h e r e g a r d s as t h e m o s t d u r a b l e order

to m a k e

the

rhetorical

things k n o w n

point

that

even

to his a u d i e n c e 2 3 if t h e y

should

in

pass

a w a y , G o d ' s s a l v a t i o n will n o t . J u s t a s a t 5 4 : 1 0 , t h e p r o p h e t is s t r e s s i n g t h a t G o d ' s s a l v a t i o n is u t t e r l y s e c u r e a n d

enduring.

It f o l l o w s , t h i r d l y , t h a t i n t h i s s e t t i n g p r e c i s e l y w h a t

the

earth's

i n h a b i t a n t s a r e c o m p a r e d w i t h is m u c h less i m p o r t a n t t h a n t h e f a c t t h a t a r e f e r e n c e t o t h e m is o u t o f p l a c e a l t o g e t h e r . I n t h e Bible generally, b u t in D e u t e r o - I s a i a h

Hebrew

e s p e c i a l l y , h u m a n i t y is c h a r -

acterised by weakness a n d transitoriness. At 40:6, for instance,

one

of t h e d i a l o g u e p a r t n e r s in t h e h e a v e n l y c o u r t l a m e n t s t h a t "all

flesh

is g r a s s , a n d all t h e g o o d l i n e s s t h e r e o f ( ‫ ) ח כ ר ו‬is a s t h e field:

22

the grass withereth,

the

flower

flower

of the

fadeth; because the breath

of

For this construction, sec J M §171, and, more cautiously, A. Aejmelaeus, "Function and Interpretation of ‫ כ ׳‬in Biblical Hebrew", JBL 105 (1986), pp.'193-209. Her condition that the concessive force of ‫ כ״‬is impossible where the clause it introduces follows the main clause is fully satisfied here, of course. O n p. 199, n. 18, she proposes a different analysis of our verse, but for the reasons given above it seems improbable to me. T h . C. Vriezen, "Einige Notizen zur Übersetzung des Bindewortes Ai," in J . Hempel and L. Rost (eds.), Von Ugarit nach Qumran: Beiträge zur alttestamentlichen und altorientalischen Forschung (Festschrift Otto Eissfeldt; Berlin, 1958), pp. 266-73, also discusses the concessive use of ‫ כ י‬at length, with particular reference to Isa. 51:6 by comparison with 54:10 on p. 268. 23 T h e enduring nature of heaven and earth is found in a number of passages in the Hebrew Bible; for discussion, see C. Houtman, Der Himmel im Alten Testament: Israels Weltbild und Weltanschauung (Leiden, 1993), pp. 177-81. His discussion of the syntax of Isa. 51:6 on p. 179 with its consequence for the main point of the verse coincides with mine.

the Lord bloweth

4

u p o n it" ( R V ) f

at 4 0 : 1 5 a n d

17 t h e n a t i o n s

are

said to b e "like a d r o p f r o m a b u c k e t " a n d " a s n o t h i n g " ; at 40:223‫־־‬, as w e

have

hoppers" people

already

and

noted,

the

earth's

inhabitants

their rulers "as nothing", while

"will faint a n d b e w e a r y " a n d

are

"like

in 4 0 : 3 0 e v e n

in c h a p t e r 40, recurs time a n d

different forms throughout

Deutero-Isaiah,

shall

51

die,

itself: " w h o and

of the

art

son

thou,

that

of m a n

young

"fall e x h a u s t e d " . T h i s

so e m p h a t i c a l l y i n t r o d u c e d

chapter

grass-

again

art

shall

afraid of m a n be

made

as

(51:12). I n v i e w of this, a r e f e r e n c e to t h e e a r t h ' s m o r t a l

positive

emphasis

grass?"

inhabitants

the

prophet

is c o n c e r n e d

ruins

to

convey.

O n l y those e l e m e n t s w h i c h m a y be t h o u g h t of as completely

durable

serve the purpose

which

in

that

alongside the heavens a n d the earth within the rhetoric of 51:6 the

in

including very clearly

thou

which

theme,

of u n d e r l i n i n g the even greater p e r m a n e n c e

reliability of G o d ' s salvation. T h e conclusion m u s t b e t h a t the clause gloss.

"and

they

that

dwell

therein

shall

and

whole

die

in like m a n n e r "

this

conclusion.

is

Two

other

arguments

further

line of the verse e n c o u r a g e s the earth, and

The

first

the r e a d e r to look at the heavens

support

and

these t w o e l e m e n t s a r e t h e n p i c k e d u p in t h e

prota-

sis o f t h e c o n c e s s i v e s e n t e n c e f o l l o w i n g . H a d h u m a n i t y b e e n a n inal

part

of the

latter, w e

should

object of the opening exhortation

have

expected

to look a n d

it a l s o

to

be m a d e

for

t h e clause o n this g r o u n d , b u t r e j e c t e d t h e a r g u m e n t b e c a u s e

extra, added.

deleting Deutero-

I s a i a h " d e n d r e i f a c h e n P a r a l l e l i s m u s l i e b t " . W h i l e it is t r u e t h a t argument

is n o t d e c i s i v e i n i t s e l f , it is n o t e w o r t h y

t h a t this

l a r p a s s a g e ( 5 1 : 1 - 8 ) is m o s t l y , if n o t e n t i r e l y , 2 7 m a d e u p o f lines of t w o stichs, so t h a t

the point

a conclusion based primarily on

other

an

consider.

third stich, w h i c h raises the suspicion t h a t s o m e t h i n g h a s b e e n Volz26 was evidently a w a r e that a case might

orig-

be

S e c o n d l y , i t is c l e a r t h a t t h e s e c o n d l i n e o f t h e v e r s e h a s a n

24

a

25

adds some

this

particubalanced

further support

to

arguments.

T h e r e are well-known textual a n d philological problems here, but they d o not affect the m a i n point at issue. For some preliminary discussion, see my The Book Called Isaiah: Deutero-Isaiah's Role in Composition and Redaction (Oxford, 1994), p p . 2 5 4 - 6 . 25 T h i s conclusion has occasionally been m a i n t a i n e d previously, but it has never been taken seriously to the extent of w a r r a n t i n g m e n t i o n in any of the m a j o r c o m mentaries; cf. A.B. Ehrlich, Randglossen zur hebräischen Bibel, 4 (Leipzig, 1912), p. 184, a n d J . Skinner, The Book of the Prophet Isaiah Chapters xhlxvi (Cambridge, 1917), p. 120. 2( '‫׳‬P. Volz, Jesaia II (Leipzig, 1932), p. 109. D u h m ' s a t t e m p t (1892, p. 356) to avoid the p r o b l e m by conjecturally lengthening the line has not f o u n d favour. 27 T h e only exception m a y be the e n d of v. 4 a n d the first line of v. 5. T h e r e

The

identification

of the

last clause

of 5 1 : 6 6 as a gloss

suggests

t h a t t h e t r a d i t i o n a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f ‫ כ מ ו ־ ק‬as " i n like m a n n e r " a f t e r all, b e

correct.

Commenting

on

the possibility that

the

heav-

ens a n d e a r t h m i g h t c o m e to a n e n d in the light of (Deutero-) view

of h u m a n i t y

generally

glossator felt m o v e d would

to a d d

(and

40:22

perhaps

the remark

similarly pass a w a y -

a gloomy

in

Isaiah's

particular),

that the earth's observation

it n o t

the fact that G o d ' s deliverance a n d saving power, which are

of the h u m a n The

book

attempt

race within of Isaiah

explicitly to i n c o r p o r a t e

God's ultimate purposes for

as a w h o l e ,

and

chapters

the

inhabitants

were

p r i m a r i l y t o w a r d s p e o p l e , w o u l d e n d u r e . T h e g l o s s is t h u s not pessimistic, b u t a n

may,

for

directed

ultimately the

destiny

good.

40-55

in

particu-

lar, m a k e s f r e q u e n t use of the w o r d - p a i r h e a v e n a n d earth. In

Deutero-

I s a i a h , i t s p r e d o m i n a n t f o c u s is t o e m p h a s i s e G o d ' s p o w e r a s c r e a t o r (e.g. 4 0 : 1 2 ; 4 2 : 5 ; 4 5 : 1 8 ; 4 8 : 1 3 ) , w h i c h o n t h e o n e h a n d d r a w s

atten-

t i o n t o t h e i n s i g n i f i c a n c e o f h u m a n i t y (e.g. 4 0 : 2 1 - 4 ; 4 5 : 1 2 ) w h i l e

on

the

by

other

it s t r e s s e s

that

there

is a s u r e g r o u n d

for confidence

I s r a e l i n G o d ' s a b i l i t y t o r e v e r s e t h e i r f o r t u n e s ( e . g . 5 1 : 1 3 , 16). F u r t h e r afield in t h e b o o k , a n d in t h o s e p a r t s w h i c h a r e c e r t a i n l y in

date,

we

find

that

God's judgement,

which

had

post-exilic

earlier

been

directed towards particular individuals, groups or nations, n o w acquires wonder

cosmic to

what

confidence. T h e where

the

dimensions extent answer,

tension

(e.g. 2 4 : 4 ,

the

cosmos

it s e e m s ,

is r e s o l v e d

by

21), so t h a t

really

comes

gives

at the

the promise

a reader

grounds

for

then, becomes

such

close of t h e

that

God

book,

will

n e w h e a v e n s a n d e a r t h (65:17) a n d t h a t t h e y will t r u l y e n d u r e This,

also might

create (66:22).

the basis for the book's c o n c l u d i n g g r o u n d

c o n f i d e n c e t h a t t h e r i g h t e o u s t o o will e n d u r e : " F o r a s t h e n e w ens a n d the n e w earth, which

heav-

I will m a k e , shall r e m a i n b e f o r e

saith t h e L o r d , so shall y o u r s e e d a n d y o u r n a m e

of

me,

remain".28

It m a y b e s u g g e s t e d in c o n c l u s i o n , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t t h e g l o s s a t o r

at

5 1 : 6 r e a d his text in t h e light of these w i d e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n s .

Whereas

Deutero-Isaiah

order

probably

pointed

to

heaven

use his r e a d e r s ' u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e m

and

earth

as p e r m a n e n t

in

and

to

enduring

are textual p r o b l e m s here, however, as shown by the proposal in BHS to alter the Masoretic verse division. In view of this uncertainty, it would be unwise to allow it to override a conclusion based u p o n w h a t is so clear everywhere else. 28 For an a p p r o a c h to these texts f r o m a very different critical perspective, see P.D. Miscall, "Isaiah: N e w Heavens, N e w Earth, N e w Book", in D . N . Fewell (ed.), Reading Between Texts: lntertextuality and the Hebrew Bible (Louisville, 1992), pp. 4 1 - 5 6 .

as a

means

of e m p h a s i s i n g

the

utter

durability

and

reliability

of

G o d ' s salvation, the later glossator lived at a t i m e w h e n e v e n

these

e l e m e n t s w e r e r e g a r d e d as s u b j e c t to j u d g e m e n t a n d so liable

them-

selves to p a s s a w a y . E a r t h ' s i n h a b i t a n t s c o u l d t h e r e f o r e n o w b e legitimately

ephemeral,

and

t h e n b e p o i n t e d f o r w a r d to G o d ' s saving w o r k in establishing a

new

heaven be

included and

a

alongside

new

earth

them where

as b e i n g equally true

and

lasting salvation

was

to

found. It r e m a i n s a g r o u n d o f c o n f i d e n c e t o o at t h e start o f a n e w

l e n n i u m w h e r e t h e p a c e of c h a n g e in n a t u r e a n d in society,

mil-

though

differently c o n c e i v e d a n d u n d e r s t o o d , gives m a n y e q u a l cause to fear. any

way

d i m i n i s h its v a l u e o r s i g n i f i c a n c e . O n t h e c o n t r a r y , it p o i n t s t h e

Identifying our

clause

as a

gloss,

therefore,

does

not

in

way

f o r w a r d i n its o w n s m a l l w a y t o w a r d s a n i n t e g r a t i v e r e a d i n g o f t h e b o o k as a w h o l e , so t h a t w h a t s t a r t e d as a h i s t o r i c a l l y - b o u n d !‫׳‬nation b e c a m e in d u e c o u r s e a literary w o r k of timeless

procla-

relevance.

A LAND FULL OF VIOLENCE: T H E VALUE OF HUMAN LIFE IN T H E B O O K OF THE PROPHET EZEKIEL BY PJ.

HARLAND Cambridge

T h e twentieth century has seen m o r e violence than any other. as m a n y

as

persecution

100 million p e o p l e since

1900. As

have died

the

century

Perhaps

as a result of w a r f a r e

draws

t o a c l o s e , it

would

s e e m a p p r o p r i a t e to t u r n to the p r o p h e t Ezekiel w h o m o r e t h a n contemporaries which

were

22:Iff.,

devotes

committed

24:6ff.,

33:25ff.

special

attention

by

people

the

and

36:18).'

to

the

crimes

of J u d a h essay

will

his

murder

7:23,

9:9,

examine

how

Ezekiel confronts the bloodshed p e r p e t r a t e d by the people a n d

how

he understands the ethical question

This

of

(Ezek.

or

of the value of h u m a n

life.

1. The Sin of the People T h e b o o k of Ezekiel h a s t w o foci: t h e inevitability of j u d g e m e n t the

hope

sense

for future restoration.2

of the

exile; to e x p l a i n

The

why

book

the

is a n

people

attempt

had

lost

to

and make

everything,

b e e n sent to a foreign land, a n d yet at t h e s a m e t i m e to offer for the

future to those

who

were

in

Babylon.

The

reason

hope

for

this

p u n i s h m e n t w a s t h e p e o p l e ' s p e r s i s t e n t w i c k e d n e s s . Israel's sins m a n y , including idolatry, robbery, a n d sexual immorality, but perhaps

more

than

the m u r d e r which seen

other

prophets,

particularly

had been committed

by comparing

i n g lions; h e r j u d g e s

Zeph.

3:3ff. " H e r

draws

attention

to

by the people. This can

be

officials within

are evening wolves

were

Ezekiel,

her

are

that leave nothing

roar-

till

the

m o r n i n g . H e r p r o p h e t s a r e w a n t o n , faithless m e n ; h e r priests p r o f a n e

1 Y. K a u f m a n n , The Religion of Israel: From its Beginnings to the Babylonian ( L o n d o n , 1961), p. 433. 2 H . M c K e a t i n g , Ezekiel (Sheffield, 1993), pp. 7 4 - 7 7 .

Exile

w h a t is s a c r e d , t h e y d o v i o l e n c e t o t h e l a w " ( R S V ) , a n d E z e k . 2 2 : 2 6 f F . , "Her

priests h a v e d o n e violence to m y

holy the

things; common,

unclean that

they

and

I am

have

neither

made have

distinction

they

the clean, a n d

profaned

no

law and

taught

the

have profaned

between

them.

Her

holy

and

difference between

they have disregarded

among

the

my

princes

my

the

Sabbaths,

in t h e

midst

so

of

her

a r e like w o l v e s t e a r i n g t h e p r e y , s h e d d i n g b l o o d , d e s t r o y i n g lives get

dishonest

gain"

(RSV).

3

By

adapting

the

text

from

to

Zephaniah

a n d a d d i n g that the princes shed blood, Ezekiel emphasises that people w e r e especially culpable In

Ezek.

7:2327‫־‬

the

for disregarding h u m a n

reason

for the

specifically attributed

to bloody

land

crimes and

is f u l l o f b l o o d y

crimes

punishment and

violence:

profaned. W h e n

of the

exile

"Because

t h e c i t y is f u l l o f v i o l e n c e ,

bring the worst of the nations to take possession will p u t a n e n d to t h e i r p r o u d

I am

a n g u i s h c o m e s , t h e y will seek p e a c e , b u t t h e r e

the

LORD"

is i n f l i c t e d b y

(RSV).

God

the

of their houses;

Similarly in 8:17ff. the

is a d i r e c t

accord-

s o n o f m a n ? I s it t o o s l i g h t a

thing

for the house of J u d a h to c o m m i t the a b o m i n a t i o n s which they

com-

they should

fill

filling

punishment with

mit here, that

of

know

the land

violence, " H a v e y o u s e e n this, Ο

result

I be

shall

i n g t o t h e i r o w n j u d g e m e n t s I will j u d g e t h e m ; a n d t h e y shall that

is

I will

m i g h t , a n d their holy places shall

b e n o n e . . . . A c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r w a y I will d o to t h e m , a n d

which

the

life.

the land with violence, a n d

provoke

m e f u r t h e r to a n g e r ? Lo, they p u t the b r a n c h to their nose. T h e r e f o r e I will d e a l in w r a t h ; m y e y e will n o t s p a r e , n o r will I h a v e pity; t h o u g h t h e y c r y i n m y e a r s w i t h a l o u d v o i c e , I will n o t h e a r (RSV).

4

and

them"

In 9:9 Ezekiel writes, " T h e guilt of the h o u s e of Israel

and

J u d a h is e x c e e d i n g l y g r e a t ; t h e l a n d is f u l l o f b l o o d , a n d t h e c i t y f u l l

3 See M . Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford, 1985), pp. 4 6 1 - 4 6 3 . For a discussion of Ezek. 22:26 see P.J. H a r l a n d , " W h a t K i n d of Violence in Ezekiel 22", E T 108 (1997), pp. 111-114. 4 T h e p h r a s e ‫ את הזמורה א ל אפש‬is unclear. N . M . S a r n a has suggested that ‫זמורה‬ be translated as " b a n d of strong m e n " . H e argues that the Semitic root dmr m e a n ing 'strong' has been used in its H e b r e w form of ‫זמר‬. T h i s would m e a n that the rich are attacking the p o o r t h r o u g h the use of strong m e n (cf. Hos. 6:9, J e r . 18:2 Iff.): N . S a r n a , "Ezekiel 8:17: a Fresh E x a m i n a t i o n " , HTR 57 (1964), p p . 3 4 7 3 5 2 ‫ ־‬. Naturally this interpretation fits in well with the violence referred to in 8:17, 22:2, 24:6, 9, but it c a n n o t be proved, a n d c o m p a r a t i v e philology is not always a suitable way of interpreting words in the H e b r e w context. ‫ זמורה‬is usually r e n d e r e d ' b r a n c h ' , as in its only o t h e r occurrence in Ezekiel in 15:2 w h e r e it c a n n o t refer to strong m e n (see with the same m e a n i n g for the w o r d N u m . 13:23 a n d Isa. 17:10, B D B p. 274) a n d here in 8:17 it could refer to a f o r m of idolatrous worship.

o f i n j u s t i c e " ( R S V ) . C l e a r l y t h e t a k i n g o f life w a s a c e n t r a l of

Ezekiel.

concern

5

I t is i m p o r t a n t t o n o t e t h a t E z e k i e l u s e s t h e w o r d ‫ ח מ ס‬t o t h e sin of t h e p e o p l e :

7:11,23,

8:17,

28:16, 45:9. T h e

mOst

s u i t a b l e t r a n s l a t i o n o f t h i s w o r d is ' v i o l e n c e ' , b u t t h i s is n o t a n

exact

r e n d e r i n g b e c a u s e the w o r d refers to violence to p e o p l e r a t h e r

than

t o o b j e c t s , in p a r t i c u l a r

bloodshed

Judg.

(2,

9:24,

Ps.

Hebrew) and

140:1,4

Hab.

5

12:19,

describe

and

oppression

Hebrew),

1:2,3). H e b r e w

Isa.

49:5,

3:19

(4:19

has a separate w o r d for violence

13:6, 22:4).6 W h a t

t o p r o p e r t y ‫( ש ד‬e.g. Isa.

(e.g. G e n .

59:6, J o e l

E z e k i e l is t h e r e f o r e

con-

d e m n i n g w a s n o t v i o l e n c e i n g e n e r a l b u t t h e t a k i n g o f h u m a n life i n particular. T h e the worth

people

of J u d a h

of other people

and

had

shown

this h a d

a callous disregard

brought

the wrath

of

for God

u p o n t h e m . T h e t a k i n g o f h u m a n life w a s n o trivial m a t t e r ; t h e w i d e spread, persistent violence to p e o p l e could only result in the punishment

of the exile a n d

the

death

and

destruction

drastic

which

that

entailed. E z e k i e l e m p h a s i s e s h i s c o n c e r n f o r t h e t a k i n g o f life b y

frequently

r e f e r r i n g t o t h e spilling o f b l o o d in t h e l a n d (e.g. 2 2 : 3 f f . , 2 3 : 4 5 , T h e p e o p l e w h o u s e t h e s w o r d t o spill b l o o d ( 3 3 : 2 6 ) will fall b y t h e s a m e w e a p o n

the people

have become

a central theme The

parable

of the

themselves

(33:27), so t h a t t h e l a n d b e c o m e s a

lation (33:28). In Ezek. 22:2 J e r u s a l e m and

33:25).

deso-

is d e s c r i b e d a s a b l o o d y

guilty t h r o u g h

the shedding of

city

blood,

chapter.

of the pot

in E z e k .

2 4 is a g o o d

illustration

of

this

a s p e c t o f E z e k i e l ' s t h o u g h t . I n t h e s e v e r s e s J e r u s a l e m is l i k e n e d t o boiling pot

which

has

rusted

the deliberate corruption

(24:6). T h e

pot

depicts

and violence have m a d e

a

city

God's

judgement

inevitable a n d the people are d o o m e d by the blood which they shed

there.'

that

they

bare

rock

vengeance

5

did

The not

people even

were cover

so up

unashamed the

f o r all t o s e e (24:7ff.). S u c h

blood, blood

(24:8, cf. G e n . 4 : 1 0 , 9 : 5 - 6 , J o b

when so G o d

a

where

they

have

took

life,

l e f t it o n

the

cried out

to G o d

16:18, Isa. 26:21).

8

for

A s it

S a r n a (1964), p. 348. For a discussion of ‫ חמס‬see P.J. H a r l a n d , The Value of Human Life: A Study of the Story of the Flood (Genesis 6-9) S V T 6 4 (Leiden, 1996), pp. 3 2 - 4 0 ' a n d H . H a a g , "‫"חמם‬, TWAT 2 (1977), p p . 1 0 5 0 - 1 0 6 1 = TDOT 4 (1980), pp. 4 7 8 487. 7 E.F. Davis, Swallowing the Scroll: Textuality and the Dynamics of Discourse in Ezekiel's Prophecy, J S O T S S 78 (Sheffield, 1989), pp. 9 1 - 2 . 8 W . Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1-24 (Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1969), p. 565 = A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel, Chapters 1-24 (Philadelphia, 1979), p. 500. 6

is e x p o s e d ,

it will a r o u s e

God's

anger

and

bring suitable

reprisal.

T h e spilling of b l o o d s h o u l d h a v e i n d u c e d a sense of fear ( c o m p a r e the ritual of a t o n e m e n t in D e u t . 21:19‫)־‬, at the terrible c o n s e q u e n c e s which ensue, but instead the people displayed an unabashed

attitude

w h i c h could only provoke G o d to intervene a n d punish. I n d e e d evil w e r e

they

that

they

may

even

have

indulged

in

so

cannibalism

( 5 : 1 0 ; cf. 3 6 : 1 3 ) . T h e r u s t - r i d d e n c a u l d r o n w h i c h r e p r e s e n t s t h e c i t y c a n o n l y r e c e i v e t h e full w r a t h o f G o d , a n d w h e n t h e b l a z e not only are the rust a n d the corruption destroyed but the

starts,

cauldron

as well (24:11). W h o l e s a l e c o r r u p t i o n l e a d s to total d e s t r u c t i o n ; is t h e o n l y w a y i n w h i c h t h e c i t y c a n b e t r e a t e d . T h e

that

stubbornness

of the p e o p l e led to G o d c o m i n g as j u d g e to b r i n g ruthless p u n i s h m e n t ( 2 4 : 1 3 9 . ( 1 4 ‫ ־‬T h e o n l y w a y in w h i c h this b l e m i s h of s h e d b l o o d could be r e m o v e d was by the purifying w r a t h of G o d . T h e tion of the p e o p l e h a d led to their o w n

corrup-

demise.10

T h e r e is a n o t h e r a s p e c t o f t h i s s h e d d i n g o f b l o o d w h i c h is w o r t h noting. In Lev.

17:4 w e r e a d : ‫דם יחשב לאיש ההוא ד ם ש פ ך‬, since

non-

c u l t i c s l a u g h t e r is c o n s i d e r e d a s s h e d d i n g o f b l o o d . N o t o n l y w a s t h e s h e d d i n g of h u m a n b l o o d w r o n g , b u t also the b l o o d of a n i m a l s

had

to be disposed of correctly ( c o m p a r e G e n . 9:4, Lev.

Al-

17:10-16).

t h o u g h E z e k i e l is p r i m a r i l y t h i n k i n g o f t h e s p i l l i n g o f h u m a n

blood

b e c a u s e h e speaks of ‫חמם‬, h e m i g h t also b e referring to the

incor-

rect s l a u g h t e r of a n i m a l s for sacrifice w h i c h c o u l d likewise h a v e

a

polluting effect." T h i s d i s r e g a r d f o r t h e v a l u e o f h u m a n life w a s s h o w n i n striking way. T h e p e o p l e w e r e so wicked that t h e y e v e n

another sacrificed

children ( 1 6 : 2 0 - 2 1 , 20:26). T h e m o s t v u l n e r a b l e in society w e r e cruelly k i l l e d . E v e n t h o u g h E x o d . 3 4 : 1 9 f f . s a y s t h a t all t h e

firstborn

were

t o b e l o n g t o G o d , it w a s o n l y a n i m a l s , n o t h u m a n s , w h o w e r e t o b e sacrificed. N o w h e r e d o e s the O l d T e s t a m e n t a p p r o v e of h u m a n sacrifice,

a n d its p r a c t i c e is s e e n a s a s i g n o f d e p r a v i t y (see 2 K g s .

16:3,

2 1 : 6 ) . It w a s s t a m p e d o u t b y j o s i a h (2 K g s . 2 3 : 1 0 ) a n d w a s f o r b i d d e n by Lev.

18:21 a n d D e u t .

12:31 a n d

18:10.

W h a t m a y s e e m h o r r i f i c t o u s is t h a t E z e k i e l s a y s t h a t G o d the people

sacrifice children

so t h a t h e c o u l d e x e c u t e

made

punishment

‫ יי‬W. Eichrodt, Der Prophet Hezekiel Kapitel 19-48 übersetzt und erklärt (Gottingen, 1966), pp. 226-228 = Ezekiel: A Commentary (London, 1970), pp. 337-339. 10 L.C. Allen, Ezekiel 20-48 (Dallas, 1990), pp. 5 9 - 6 0 , and "Ezekiel 24:3-14: a Rhetorical Perspective", CBQ 49 (1987), pp. 4 0 4 - 4 1 4 . 11 Zimmerli (1969), p. 409 = (1979), p. 383.

(20:26). H o w

could G o d

b e s o c r u e l ? I t is i m p o r t a n t

to notice

E z e k i e l d o e s n o t c l a i m t h a t s a c r i f i c i n g first b o r n c h i l d r e n w a s by

God,

because

(16:20-21, and

he

20:31).

always

Rather,

condemns

Ezek.

their punishment. T h e

the

sacrifice

2 0 is a b o u t

laws of G o d

ordered

of

children

the infidelity

were good, but

that

Ūf

the

Israel people

h a d p r o f a n e d t h e m ( 2 0 : 1 1 - 1 3 , 21), a n d G o d p u n i s h e s t h e m b y w h i c h w e r e n o t g o o d , i.e. s a c r i f i c e o f c h i l d r e n ( 2 0 : 2 5

the

action

of G o d

h e a r t in E x o d . 9:7, of A h a b

in

here

recalls

before sinners and 2 0 : 8 ) is t h e s a m e firstborn.

the

hardening

of

Pharaoh's

1 0 : 1 (cf. t h e p l a c i n g o f a l y i n g s p i r i t i n t h e

1 Kgs. 22:22ff., a n d

Isa. 6:10 w h e r e

is h a r d e n e d ) . E z e k i e l s p e a k s o f G o d

the

26). T h e l a w of

2 9 ( 2 9 - 3 0 ) w a s g o o d b u t t h e p e o p l e h a v e m a d e it b a d . 1 2

Exod. 22:28 Yet

laws

the people's for t h e m

heart

setting a stumbling block

(3:20)

refusal to listen to G o d

a s it w a s f o r P h a r a o h

and

(2:5,7,

b r o u g h t on the

final

and

Aaron,

which

in

p l a g u e ( E x o d . 7:35‫)־‬, so his

3:7,

the death

"As Y a h w e h ' s h a r d e n i n g of P h a r a o h ' s heart once

his failure to listen to M o s e s

heart

the people's

turn

of

caused

eventually

"not-good/not-life-

g i v i n g " laws c o n f i r m e d Israel in their rebellion a n d led a g a i n to

the

death

the

of the

rebels".

13

firstborn-

only

this

time

at

the

willing

hands

W h a t h a s h a p p e n e d i n E z e k . 2 0 is t h a t t h e l a w h a s

of

become

a s t u m b l i n g b l o c k s o t h a t it c a n b e p e r v e r t e d i n t o c h i l d s a c r i f i c e .

In

o r d e r for Israel to b e c o m e a w a r e of the holiness of G o d , she h a d

to

find As

out the

how

wrong

people

have

she

had

made

been

in h e r

themselves

attitude.14

over-confident

unclean

by

idolatry

(20:30,

31), so G o d a d d s to t h e i r u n c l e a n n e s s b y m a k i n g t h e m sacrifice children. nation

God

is p r e p a r e d

would

perish

to

bring

for their

he was the Lord.15 W h a t

sins a n d

their

evil,

is n o t t h a t G o d

thereby

as

well that

as

good

they

bringing

punishment.

have

know

The point

R a t h e r , t h e p u r p o s e o f t h e v e r s e is t o d e m o n s t r a t e become

so h a r d e n e d

that

are

demonof

for h u m a n

the d e e p

the that

the people

adds to their wickedness to

is c r u e l o r t h a t h e s h o w s c o n t e m p t

ness of the people w h o

so

would

E z e k i e l is s t r e s s i n g is t h a t

so t h o r o u g h l y wicked that G o d strate

evil

20:26 life.

wicked-

to sin t h a t

they

12 R. de V a u x , Les Sacrifices de l'Ancien Testament (Paris, 1964), pp. 65fF. = Studies in Old Testament Sacrifice (Cardiff, 1964), pp. 7 I f f 13 G . C . Heider, "A F u r t h e r T u r n on Ezekiel's B a r o q u e Twist in Ezek. 2 0 : 2 5 - 2 6 " , JBL 107 (1988), pp. 7 2 1 - 7 2 4 , p. 724. 14 Eichrodt (1966), pp. 1 7 5 - 1 7 8 = (1970), p p . 270 -272. 15 G.A. Cooke, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Ezekiel (Edinburgh, 1936), pp. 2 1 8 - 2 1 9 .

commit

atrocious

acts without

any

shame

or resistance,

and

only

a f t e r f u r t h e r sin a n d p u n i s h m e n t , c a n t h e y r e p e n t a n d k n o w When

people no longer know God,

God.

he does not c o m e with

bless-

ing, b u t w i t h c a l a m i t y . C a u s i n g t h e p e o p l e to sin in this w a y

was

p a r t o f t h e p u n i s h m e n t . B y c a u s i n g sin G o d s h o w s t h e d e p r a v i t y o f h u m a n w r o n g . O n e is r e m i n d e d o f P s . 1 8 : 2 6 , " W i t h t h e p u r e

thou

dost s h o w thyself p u r e ; a n d with the c r o o k e d t h o u dost s h o w

thy-

(RSV).16

self p e r v e r s e "

2 . Murder

and

Impurity

H a v i n g noted that Ezekiel attacks the people for the c r i m e of m u r d e r , it is n o w

appropriate

to e x p l o r e

why

h e is p a r t i c u l a r l y

c e r n e d a b o u t the question of the value of h u m a n

life. F o r

con-

Ezekiel

c r i m e s of t h e cult a n d the social o r d e r w e r e closely linked; the

law

w a s a n i n t e g r a l w h o l e . G o d ' s will a n d j u d g e m e n t e n t e r e d e v e r y p a r t o f life. C r i m e s like m u r d e r h a d c u l t i c a s w e l l a s s o c i a l In G e n .

9:4 the c o n s u m p t i o n

of blood

prohibition of m u r d e r (9:56‫)־‬. T h e

is p r o h i b i t e d

implications. alongside

the

cultic b a n n i n g of the eating

of

b l o o d w a s l i n k e d t o t h e c r i m e o f m u r d e r t h e r e b y v i e w i n g life a s a totality a n d n o t s e p a r a t i n g social a n d cultic w r o n g . 1 7 I n Ezek. t h e p e r v e r s i o n o f t h e c u l t a n d t h e t a k i n g o f life a r e c l o s e l y idolatry a n d

bloodshed

affect each

other. W h e r e

G o d is l o s t , r e v e r e n c e f o r life d i s a p p e a r s . worshipped Human

18

When

a proper fear G o d is n o

o r given d u e respect, his c r e a t u r e s a r e o p e n

life is u n d e r m i n e d w h e n

22:3

linked;

to

of

longer abuse.

t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h G o d is b r o -

k e n . T h e c o m m u n i t y w h i c h l o s e s its h o l d o n G o d , t h e s o u r c e o f all life, d o w n g r a d e s t h e life o f its f e l l o w Given

this c o n n e c t i o n

between

humans.19

ritual

and

social crimes,

it

c o m e as n o surprise that Ezekiel, w h o v i e w e d e v e r y t h i n g f r o m

can the

p e r s p e c t i v e o f a p r i e s t (1:3), s h o u l d b e p a r t i c u l a r l y c o n c e r n e d w i t h p o l lution a n d impurity. H e was p r e o c c u p i e d with the holiness of which

required

t h e will o f G o d ,

obedience

to t h e law. G o d ' s

but concerned

God

holiness was not just

his e s s e n c e , his s p l e n d o u r .

It

was

that holiness which f o u n d the uncleanness caused by the taking of

16 17 18 19

Eichrodt (1966), p. 177 = (1970), p. 272. See Harland (1996), pp. 1 5 4 . 1 6 7 ‫״‬ Zimmerli (1969), pp. 507ff. = (1979), p. 456. Eichrodt (1966), pp. 203ff. = (1970), pp. 308-9.

life i n t o l e r a b l e . S u c h h o l i n e s s c a n n o t t o l e r a t e r i t u a l d e f i l e m e n t jeopardises

the

relationship

between

man

and

God.

which

Consequently

G o d c a n n o t a b i d e the c o r r u p t i o n caused by the s h e d d i n g of blood.20 Hence

Ezekiel gives special e m p h a s i s to t h e sin of d e f i l e m e n t

the people had committed, the sacral order. C e n t r a l and

the maintenance

Many

of

which

a n d w h i c h o f f e n d e d the Priestly view

to his m i n i s t r y w a s faithfulness t o t h e

(e.g. 5:11).21 T h e

nations ‫תועבות‬, people

were

people's

a word

transgressions against

which

condemned

offences are

occurs

referred

forty limes in

for profaning the

Sabbath

to as

the

33).22 T h e this w a s

land

ritual cleansing because

which

caused

in

should

a large

have

part

by

shown the

sane-

abomi-

book.

The

‫) ח ל ל‬

(36:20-23).

of the pollution purity was

shedding

(36:25,

unclean

of b l o o d

and

(33:25).

T h e land should have been treated with reverence because that where

God

had

chosen

to dwell. Instead

object of loathing b e c a u s e

the

( 2 2 : 8

s a n c t u a r y (23:39), a n d t h e r e b y p r o f a n i n g t h e n a m e of G o d All this d e m a n d e d

law

purity.

e x a m p l e s of sins in Ezekiel w e r e

s a c r e d o r d e r ; Israel h a d f a i l e d i n this a r e a b y d e f i l i n g (‫ )טמא‬t h e tuary

of

was

the place had b e c o m e

of t h e sin of t h e p e o p l e .

Such

o f p u r i t y w e r e f u n d a m e n t a l t o t h e life o f I s r a e l , a n d t h e

an

concepts

priesthood,

of w h i c h Ezekiel w a s a m e m b e r , w a s e n t r u s t e d with the task of m a i n taining the cleanliness of the land. T h e pollution a n d corruption so b a d

that

the people

had

to be destroyed

and

was

sent into exile.

w a s this u n c l e a n n e s s w h i c h w a s t h e c a u s e o f t h e exile (e.g. 36:17ff.). The ment

profanation

of the s a n c t u a r y w a s

from the reverence due

Given

this e m p h a s i s o n

to

him.

an

insult to G o d ,

a

detach-

24

the defilement of the holy by the

people

o f J u d a h , it c a n b e s e e n w h y E z e k i e l is s o c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e of m u r d e r .

20

Time

and

again

he

It 23

stresses

that

shedding

blood

crime is

a

W . Brueggemann, Hopeful Imagination: Prophetic Voices in Exile (Philadelphia, 1986), pp. 7 1 - 7 2 . 21 G . von R a d , Theologie des Alten Testaments Band 2 Die Theologie der prophetischen Überlieferungen Israels ( M u n i c h , 1961), p. 237 = Old Testament Theology 2 The Theology of Israel's Prophetic Traditions (London, 1975), p. 224. 22 M c K e a t i n g (1993), pp. 86ff. 23 T . Frymer-Kensky, "Pollution, Purification a n d Purgation in Biblical Israel", in C . Meyers a n d M . O ' C o n n o r (eds.), The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth: Essays in Honor of DJ\f. Freedman Celebrating his Sixtieth Birthday ( W i n o n a Lake, 1983), pp. 3 9 9 - 4 1 4 , esp. pp. 4 0 9 - 4 1 2 . 24 W . Eichrodt, Der Prophet Iiezekiel Kapitel 1 18 übersetzt und erklärt (Gottingen, 1959), pp. 6 2 - 6 3 = (1970), p. 128.

c r i m e , n o t j u s t b e c a u s e o f t h e t a k i n g o f life, b u t b e c a u s e t h e s p i l l e d b l o o d p o l l u t e s a n d d e f i l e s (‫ )טמא‬t h e l a n d ( 3 6 : 1 7 , 1 8 ; cf. N u m . and

the

sanctuary

in p a r t i c u l a r

(23:39). J e r u s a l e m

had

35:33),

become

a

b l o o d y city (22:2) w h i c h i n s t e a d o f b e i n g c l e a n w a s full o f v i o l e n c e (7:23, 8:17). N o o n e w h o h a d s h e d b l o o d c o u l d b e a l l o w e d to p a r take of the worship of the T e m p l e

since e v e n spilling b l o o d

t e n t i o n a l l y d e f i l e d a m a n (cf. N u m .

3 5 w h e r e t h e r e is p r o v i s i o n

a killer to

flee

to a city of refuge).

25

What

unin-

E z e k i e l s t r e s s e s is

for that

m u r d e r w a s n o t j u s t a s o c i a l c r i m e b u t t h a t it s e p a r a t e d p e o p l e f r o m God. Those who

had shed blood could have no relationship

G o d because of their

with

impurity.

3. Punishment The

punishment

which

God

b r i n g s is i n d u e

measure

for the

sin

w h i c h h a d b e e n c o m m i t t e d . G o d p o u r s o u t his w r a t h f o r t h e

blood

w h i c h h a d b e e n shed in the land. T h o s e w h o c o m m i t violent

deeds

h a v e v i o l e n c e b r o u g h t u p o n t h e m ; t h e p u n i s h m e n t is t h e r e f o r e j u s t . T h e p e n a l t y seems to b e related to the Priestly legislation w h e r e

the

murderer

life

is t o b e e x e c u t e d . V i o l e n t d e e d s h a d

to be requited

f o r life ( G e n . 9 : 5 f f . ) . I n t h e P r i e s t l y l a w o n l y t h e b l o o d o f t h e d e r e r c o u l d a t o n e f o r t h e t a k i n g o f life. T h i s w a s n o t j u s t murder

defiled, since

that was

true

also of sexual

mur-

because

offences

which

only led to e x c o m m u n i c a t i o n (Lev. 18:24-30). M u r d e r d e p r i v e d of w h a t

was

rightfully

his p r o p e r t y :

the blood

of the d e a d

God which

h a d g o n e to the control of the m u r d e r e r . H e n c e the death

penalty

was the only m e a n s of m a k i n g expiation for the crime ( N u m .

35:33),

a n d this w a s t h e sole w a y t h e c o n t r o l of t h e b l o o d c o u l d g o b a c k to G o d ( G e n . 9 : 5 f f . ) . G o d s e e k s t h e b l o o d o f t h e s l a i n (cf. G e n .

42:22,

Ps. 9 : 1 2 (13)). T h e r e w a s n o w a y t h a t a m u r d e r e r c o u l d r a n s o m o w n life.

his

26

G i v e n t h i s b a c k g r o u n d i n P r i e s t l y t h o u g h t , it c a n b e s e e n t h a t t h e punishment

which

God

brings on

I s r a e l is a p p r o p r i a t e .

The

pun-

i s h m e n t of the exile a n d t h e d e a t h , d e s t r u c t i o n , w a r a n d siege w h i c h p r e c e d e d it w e r e e n t i r e l y a p p r o p r i a t e f o r a n a t i o n w h i c h h a d

become

full o f v i o l e n c e . T h e p u n i s h m e n t w a s i n a l a r g e p a r t c a u s e d b y I s r a e l ' s 25

A. Phillips, Ancient Israel's Criminal Law: A New Approach to the Decalogue (Oxford, 1970), pp. 107-9. 26 Phillips (1970), pp. 86, 95ff.

disregard for life. Although idolatry, sexual immorality and cultic wrong were widespread, Ezekiel does give special emphasis to the crime of murder. 7:1 Off. explicitly connects the forthcoming punishment to the violence which had been perpetrated. Doom comes because ‫ חמס‬has sprouted into a rod of wickedness. The punishment is directly linked to violence and the filling of the land with bloody crimes (7:23). 7:27 speaks of God doing to the people according to their own way which suggests that as they have taken life, so God will remove their life in accord with the principles of Gen. 9:5ff. and Num. 3 5 : 3 0 3 4 ‫ ־‬, life for life. God seeks the blood of the slain (Ezek. 3:18,20, 33:6,8). Similarly in 22:31 punishment is seen as a direct outworking of the blood shed in Jerusalem in 22:27. Those who take up the sword will perish by the sword: 33:2629‫־‬. The sword, plague and wild animals evoke Lev. 26:21,22,25. 27 As the people have taken life so God destroys them by the exile as a means of making expiation for the crimes and returning the control of the blood back to God. In Ezek. 9 executioners are summoned to kill all those in the city of Jerusalem who do not sigh or groan over the abominations. It was not just those who committed the crimes who were to be punished but, also those who acquiesced without complaint at these terrible deeds. There was to be no pity or mercy; even little children were to die. The house of God was to be filled with the blood of the slain (9:7). Those who take life are destroyed as a just, fair punishment. The punishment of the exile is also seen as a means of cleansing the land from the bloodshed. In Ezek. 22 where the city is described as being full of bloodshed (22:2), and has become defiled by the blood of the slain (22:4), Judah is to be scattered so that her filthiness can be consumed from out of her (22:15, cf. 24:11,12). God would rather make the land a clean desert than see it become impure by bloodshed and idolatry (33:2329‫)־‬. Because of the abominations the land will be a desolation (33:28). This punishment should not be seen as an automatic cause and effect which works according to its own autonomous rules, like the laws of Lev. 18:25,28, 20:22, where the land vomits out its inhabitants or refuses to yield its produce (Deut. 28:38ff.). In Ezekiel there is a much more personal reaction from God in place of this impersonal process. God himself brings the punishment because the crime 27

Allen (1990), p. 153.

is d i r e c t e d a g a i n s t h i m . W r a t h is p o u r e d o u t a n d I s r a e l is s c a t t e r e d a m o n g the nations (36:18-19), thereby causing G o d ' s n a m e to be p u t to s h a m e

a m o n g the heathen

(36:20ff.). Israel's k n o w l e d g e

of

s h o u l d h a v e b e e n a witness to t h e rest of t h e w o r l d , b u t

God

profana-

t i o n h a d t a k e n t h e p l a c e o f s a n c t i f i c a t i o n . G o d is n o t g o i n g t o i n d u l g e Israel.28 W h a t must be remembered

is t h a t t h e c r i m e s c o m m i t t e d b y

people were not just wrongs against humanity, but involved ing the

name

of G o d .

eignty over h u m a n

Killing showed

contempt

the

profan-

for G o d ' s

sover-

life. I s r a e l ' s i m m o r a l i t y h a d l e d t o G o d ' s

b e i n g p r o f a n e d a n d p u t to c o n t e m p t in t h e w o r l d ( 3 6 : 2 2 3 ‫ ) ־‬.

name Israel's

sin c a u s e d G o d e m b a r r a s s m e n t a n d h e d e s t r o y e d J e r u s a l e m t o r e s t o r e name.29

t h e holiness of his The

punishment

which

the world order. In G e n . t o r u l e it.

30

the people

bring on themselves

disrupts

l : 2 6 f f . m a n is g i v e n a u t h o r i t y i n

creation

W h e r e t h a t a u t h o r i t y is a b u s e d b y s i n s u c h a s t h e

tak-

i n g o f life, t h e r e a r e c o n s e q u e n c e s f o r t h e c r e a t e d o r d e r . M a n

was

c r e a t e d to rule over the a n i m a l s , b u t by exercising oppression

over

his fellows, t h a t d o m i n i o n c a n g o b a d l y w r o n g . In Ezek. 5:17

and

33:27

are

instead

of h u m a n s

ruling over

the

animal

world,

they

a t t a c k e d b y b e a s t s w h o h a v e t h e u p p e r h a n d (cf. L e v . 2 6 : 2 2 ) .

When

people have polluted the land by the s h e d d i n g of blood, the created o r d e r is s o d i s t u r b e d t h a t a n i m a l s o v e r p o w e r h u m a n s . S i n u p s e t s t h e b a l a n c e of creation. As the p e o p l e of J u d a h a b u s e d the

sovereignty

o f G o d g i v e n t o h u m a n s , s o t h e i r a u t h o r i t y i n c r e a t i o n is e r o d e d . B y t h i s s t a g e t h e sin o f t h e p e o p l e

had

become

so serious

t h e r e c o u l d b e n o c h a n c e o f f o r g i v e n e s s . It w a s t o o l a t e t o

that

repent.

T h e t o n e o f u r g e n c y i n E z e k i e l ' s p r o p h e c y is l a c k i n g ; p u n i s h m e n t is announced

in a cool m a t t e r

h a v e pity. T h e r e

of fact way.

is n o h o p e f o r J u d a h

God

will n o t s p a r e

to a v o i d t h e exile as

h a v e r e j e c t e d all p r e a c h i n g ( 2 : 7 , 3 : 7 , 1 2 : 2 , 2 4 : 1 3 - 1 4 ) . destruction

is p r o c l a i m e d

in

uncompromising

terms.31

1 - 2 4 t h e r e is a n a b s e n c e o f c a l l s t o r e p e n t a n c e .

nor they

Consequently In

Ezekiel

chapters proclaims

t h a t G o d will n o t b e m e r c i f u l ( 5 : 1 0 - 1 2 , 7 : 4 , 8 : 1 8 ) . T h e p r i m a r y c o n -

2

‫ ״‬Eichrodt (1966), pp. 345-347 = (1970), pp. 494-7. Brueggemann (1986), pp. 76ff. 3(1 Harland (1996), pp. 177-209 and see also D. Clines, " T h e Image of God in M a n " , TB 19 (1968), pp. 53-103. 31 T . M . Raitt, A Theology of the Exile: Judgement/Deliverance in Jeremiah and Ezekiel (Philadelphia, 1977), p. 47. 29

c e r n o f Ezekiel w a s n o t t o call p e o p l e t o r e p e n t a n c e , b u t to e x p l a i n G o d ' s justice

to t h e exiles. T h e i r

fate was sealed.

d o u b t s a b o u t the justice of G o d ' s decision.

32

Ezekiel

has

no

T h i s is s i m i l a r t o

the

story of t h e flood in G e n . 6 - 9 w h e r e t h e w i c k e d g e n e r a t i o n a r e given n o o p p o r t u n i t y to repent; they are i r r e d e e m a b l y wicked. Like Ezekiel c a n only p r e p a r e for the c o m i n g

Noah,

punishment.

T h e o n l y s m a l l p o s s i b i l i t y o f h o p e is f o u n d i n t h e c a l l i n g o f E z e k i e l to be a w a t c h m a n ( 3 : 1 6 9 ‫ ־‬2 1 ,

33:1‫)־‬.

If t h e w a t c h m a n fails t o w

t h e g u i l t y , t h e b l o o d will b e r e q u i r e d a t h i s h a n d s ( 3 : 1 8 ) , a n d

God

will a c t a s t h e a v e n g e r o f b l o o d ( 3 3 : 7 9). T h e p r o h i b i t i o n o f

mur-

d e r is e x t e n d e d t o i n c l u d e n o t j u s t t h e t a k i n g life, b u t g e n e r a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r a n o t h e r p e r s o n ' s d e a t h . T o fail t o w a r n s o m e o n e o f d o o m w a s e q u i v a l e n t t o t a k i n g h i s life, a n d w o u l d h a v e t h e s a m e

conse-

q u e n c e s for the p r o p h e t . A n y indirect act which could lead to h a r m o f a n o t h e r is r u l e d 33:12

16 e m p h a s i s e s t h a t t h e r i g h t e o u s a n d

locked into a simple determinism. God

the

out. the wicked

are

not

H o w p e o p l e b e h a v e affects h o w

reacts to t h e m . T h e p e o p l e a r e n o t to b e c o n f i n e d to a false

sense of security o r m o r a l i n d i f f e r e n c e . 3 3 By e m p l o y i n g t h e

watch-

man

judge-

God

leaves o p e n

t h e possibility of f r u s t r a t i n g his o w n

m e n t ; h i s will is f o r life, f o r t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n m a n a n d to continue.

A

new

call to r e p e n t a n c e

is o f f e r e d i n t h e

God

midst

of

j u d g e m e n t . T h i s is n o t j u s t a c a l l t o life b u t is a s u m m o n s t o

God

himself.34 G o d ' s j u d g e m e n t

God

will d e p e n d

on

human

response.

takes n o p l e a s u r e in killing p e o p l e ; h e p r e f e r s to see s i n n e r s

repent-

i n g a n d l i v i n g r a t h e r t h a n d y i n g ( 3 3 : 1 0 2 0 ‫ ) ־‬. T h a t life w h i c h is o f f e r e d is n o t j u s t p h y s i c a l e x i s t e n c e , b u t life l i v e d in t h e p r e s e n c e o f as a faithful m e m b e r

of his c o v e n a n t

people.35 While

the

God

punish-

m e n t of t h e exile h a d a l r e a d y b e e n d e c i d e d b e f o r e Ezekiel b e g a n his p r e a c h i n g a n d was therefore not going to be reversed, w h a t the p a r a b l e o f t h e w a t c h m a n tells u s is t h a t t h i s d e s t r u c t i o n w a s n o t

God's

32 M. Fishbane, "Sin and Judgement in the Prophecies of Ezekiel", Interpretation 38 (1984), pp. 131-150, 147ff, and see B. Uffenheimer, "Theodicy and Ethics in the Prophecy of Ezekiel", in H.G. Reventlow and Y. Hoffman, Justice and Righteousness: Biblical Themes and thár Influence, J S O T S S 137 (Sheffield, 1992), pp. 200-227,' esp. 201. 33 Allen (1990), pp. 145-146. 34 W. Zimmerli, Ezekiel 25-48 (Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1969), pp. 800ff, 808ff. = A Commentaiy on the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel Chapters 25-48 (Philadelphia, 1983), pp. 185, 190" 35 W.E. Lemche, "Life in the Present and Hope for the Future", Interpretation 38 (1984), pp. 165-180, 168ff.

d e s i r e f o r Israel b u t t h e c o n s e q u e n c e o f t h e p e o p l e ' s o w n folly. T h e small opportunity for repentance which vanishes; the end has c o m e The

sin

of the people

destruction

of b o t h

is o f f e r e d i n E z e k . 3

soon

(7:2).

was

so severe

that

there

the wicked

was

wholesale

(21:3,4

(Hebrew

21:89‫))־‬. T h i s s e e m s to c o n t r a d i c t o t h e r a r e a s of Ezekiel's

teaching

(9:4-6,

but

14:12 20,

the righteous and

18) w h e r e o n l y t h e g u i l t y a r e p u n i s h e d

r i g h t e o u s a r e s p a r e d . I n d e e d in E z e k . the tradition of N o a h

the

14:14, 20 the p r o p h e t

adapts

a n d the flood to emphasise that only

Noah,

n o t his s o n s w o u l d b e s a v e d b y his

righteousness,

in contrast to G e n .

6 - 9 w h e r e N o a h saves his f a m i l y as well as h i m s e l f b y b e i n g

right-

eous.36 F o r Ezekiel the p r o b l e m could not b e s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d , as h e preserves the f r e e d o m of G o d ' s retribution w h i c h c a n n o t be restricted b y a n y s i m p l e s y s t e m . All h u m a n p r e t e n s i o n s will b e s i l e n c e d i n t h e f a c e o f G o d ' s w r a t h . 3 7 T h e p o i n t is t h a t t h e w h o l e p e o p l e is i n j e o p ardy. Ezekiel w a s seeking to rule o u t a n y c h a n c e of reprieve in 21:3ff. ( H e b r e w 2 1 : 8 f f . ) o r o p t i m i s m . It w a s t o o l a t e f o r t h e e x i l e s t o b a r t e r with

G o d ; the disaster of 587 was inevitable a n d

pulled the

righteous

severe

and

widespread

into catastrophe.

caught

u p in t h e h o r r o r

that

both

(Hebrew

Ezekiel

judgement people who

the

o n Israel a n d committed

the wicked

righteous

and

is c o n c e r n e d

were The

innocent whole

the wicked

to declare

the

h e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r it ( 2 4 : 1 3 murder

had

T h e sin o f t h e p e o p l e w a s s o

those w h o

of the p u n i s h m e n t .

under judgement, 21:8-9).

even

38

deserved

were

nation in

is

21:3-4

impending 39

.(14

‫־‬

to die f o r t h e i r sin,

and

b e c a u s e t h e l a n d w a s full o f b l o o d s h e d t h e w h o l e n a t i o n h a d t o s u f f e r . A b o v e all E z e k i e l t e a c h e s t h a t G o d is s o v e r e i g n o v e r h u m a n

life

a n d h e wills a r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h p e o p l e . H e h a s t h e r i g h t t o g i v e a n d t a k e life. G o d ' s will w a s t o h a v e a b l e s s e d p e o p l e o f h i s o w n , would

lead

the

other

nations

to a p p r o a c h

God

with

awe.

who Israel

should have sanctified G o d ' s n a m e by obedience, but instead fanation had come.

Israel h a d

to learn

that she could not go

o w n w a y b u t h a d to acknowledge G o d as Lord.

36

40

proher

Life w a s n o t just

For a discussion of Noah's righteousness, see Harland (1996), pp. 45-69. Eichrodt (1966), pp. 189ff. = (1970), p. 289. 38 Allen (1990), pp. 25ff. 35 P. Joyce, Divine Initiative and Human Response in EzekieÎ, J S O T S S 51 (Sheffield, 1989), p p . ' 7 6 - 7 7 . 40 Eichrodt (1966), p. 346 = (1970), pp. 495ff. 37

T

bare

existence,

ing him Ezek.

and

but

it i n v o l v e d

d o i n g his will.

1 8 is m u c h

more

41

communion

The

than

with

God

(18:9),

p r o m i s e o f life w h i c h

the promise

of material

obey-

is g i v e n

in

existence.

It

includes c o m m u n i o n with G o d , forgiveness a n d obedience. T h e life w h i c h ment

is p r o m i s e d

of exile m e a n s

is o n e that

where

God

sins a r e forgiven. T h e

can

turn

to his p e o p l e 42

a n d give t h e m a fresh start in his service.

once

more,

T h e value of h u m a n

f o r E z e k i e l is n o t f o u n d i n m e r e e x i s t e n c e b u t i n p e r s o n a l with

new

punish-

life

fellowship

God.

T h e b o o k o f E z e k i e l d o e s n o t e n d w i t h j u d g e m e n t . H o p e is g i v e n for a b e t t e r f u t u r e after the exile. Ezekiel p r o p h e s i e d that t h e r e

would

be a n e w ceremonial system which would prevent the pollution

which

h a d b e e n c a u s e d b y the sins of the p e o p l e , especially b y the

taking

o f life. E z e k . 4 0 - 4 8 s e e k s t o p r o v i d e a n e w o r d e r w h e r e b y t h e lier p o l l u t i o n w o u l d b e p r e v e n t e d , be

suitable

be cleansed change be

for G o d ' s

glory

43

to create a temple w h i c h

(43:4,7). A n y

from impurity caused

place

fit

for G o d

ear-

would had

by the shedding of blood. Yet

to buildings or land was not e n o u g h ; the people n e e d e d

transformed.

heart whereby (36:25-27,

This

cleansing

they had

37:21-23).

involved

obcdience

to

and

giving

the

people

ritual purity given

F o r g i v e n e s s o f s i n s is s e t o u t

a to

a to

new them

in t e r m s o f rit-

ual purity; o n c e the p e o p l e a r e cleansed they c a n be forgiven:

36:25

"I will s p r i n k l e c l e a n w a t e r u p o n y o u , a n d y o u shall b e c l e a n

from

all y o u r

u n c l e a n n e s s e s . . ." ( R S V ) .

b e c o m e full of violence, G o d

To

rectify the

land

which

f u n d a m e n t a l l y alters h u m a n

had

nature

by

giving a n e w h e a r t , a n e w o u t l o o k to the p e o p l e . By giving this spirit to t h e p e o p l e t h e y will w a l k in his s t a t u t e s , o b e y his o r d i n a n c e s b e c l e a n s e d f r o m all u n c l e a n n e s s , e v e n t h e s p i l l i n g o f b l o o d Such

a c h a n g e will b r i n g p r o s p e r i t y ( 3 6 : 2 9 b ,

Again

and

(36:26-29).

30).

this m a k e s a n interesting c o n t r a s t to the story of the

flood

in G e n e s i s 6 9 ‫ ־‬. T h e r e in b o t h t h e J a h w i s t i c a n d Priestly a c c o u n t s , as well as in t h e c a n o n i c a l c h a n g e in h u m a n after as b e f o r e the

f o r m o f t h e t e x t , t h e r e is n o

nature. G e n . 8:21 assumes that m a n flood,

is a s

wicked

a n d the c o m m a n d s of G e n . 9 are given

c u r b a h u m a n i t y w h i c h is still p r o n e

41

post-diluvian

to evil.

T h e r e is n o t a l k

to

there

J.W. Wevers, Ezekiel{London, 1969), p. 143. Eichrodt (1959), p. 153 = (1970), pp. 2 4 3 - 4 . 43 S.R. Driver, An Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament ( E d i n b u r g h , 9th edition 1913), pp. 292, 295ff. 42

of heart.44 Ezekiel a p p e a r s to b e m o r e

of a c h a n g e I t is w o r t h

hopeful.

noting that there seems to be a difference b e t w e e n

p r e - a n d p o s t - S i n a i c o n t e x t in t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t . I n G e n . 6 - 9 is n o

explicit reference to ritual purity despite the writer's

about

the

taking of h u m a n

of the story of the

flood

life ( G e n .

6:11-13,

concern

9:5-6). T h e

author

might have implied that the ‫ חמם‬of G e n .

m a d e the e a r t h i m p u r e , b u t h e d o e s n o t e m p h a s i s e this b e c a u s e w a s n o cult before Sinai a n d h e n c e n o ritual impurity.45 In

p e o p l e ' s sin, especially b y p o l l u t i o n t h r o u g h may

be

found

in

embryo

in

Gen.

blood. T h e

6-9

but

there

same

the prin-

it is n o t

made

explicit. Ezekiel stresses t h e n e e d f o r p u r i t y a n d cleanliness in a which from

is n o t the

found

perspective

in

the

of a

Primeval priest

History

after the

because

founding

he

6

contrast

E z e k i e l l a y s g r e a t e m p h a s i s o n t h e i m p u r i t y w h i c h is c a u s e d b y

ciple

a

there

is

way

writing

of the

cult

at

Sinai.

4. Conclusion E z e k i e l t a c k l e s t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e v a l u e o f h u m a n life f r o m t h e spective

of a priest.

He

condemns

the land

which

is f u l l o f

s h e d a n d violence b e c a u s e that results in i m p u r i t y a n d For him respects

m u r d e r defiled the land a n d he

blood-

uncleanness.

the p e o p l e . I n this a n d

is p r o f o u n d l y i n f l u e n c e d b y

per-

Priestly thought.

other

Yet

there

are not only i m p o r t a n t parallels to the law, b u t also to the story the

flood

in G e n .

6-9.

There

are

similarities in the w a y

in

which

t h e t w o stories c o n f r o n t a w o r l d o r a l a n d full o f ‫ ח מ ם‬. O f c o u r s e p e r s p e c t i v e is d i f f e r e n t b e c a u s e o f t h e p r e - a n d p o s t - S i n a i

History.

Nevertheless

both

confront

the

same

the

contexts.

E z e k i e l is m o r e p r e o c c u p i e d w i t h p u r i t y a n d c u l t i c m a t t e r s t h a n Primeval

of

sin of

the vio-

lence ( G e n . 6 : 1 1 - 1 3 ) , see a link b e t w e e n w i c k e d o r u p r i g h t

behaviour

a n d p u n i s h m e n t o r d e l i v e r a n c e ( G e n . 6:9), e m p h a s i s e t h e

sacredness

o f b l o o d ( G e n . 9:4), a n d e n d o r s e t h e p r i n c i p l e o f life f o r life a s i s h m e n t ( G e n . 9:56‫)־‬. G i v e n t h e r e f e r e n c e to N o a h in Ezek.

pun-

14:14-20,

is it t o o m u c h t o s a y t h a t t h e s t o r y o f G e n . 6 9 ‫ ־‬a t l e a s t i n i t s P r i e s d y form has influenced

44

Ezekiel?

See H a r l a n d (1996), pp. 114-124, 136, 170 a n d R . W . L . Moberly, At the Mountain of God: Story and Theology in Exodus 32-34, J S O T S S 22 (Sheffield, 1983), pp. 113-115. 45 H a r l a n d (1996), pp. 3 9 - 4 0 .

As w e a p p r o a c h the m i l l e n n i u m , Ezekiel's message seems as a p p r o priate as ever. W e

look back

on

a century

of u n p r e c e d e n t e d

vio-

l e n c e a n d w o n d e r w h a t t h e n e x t 1 0 0 y e a r s will b r i n g . F o r t h e p e o p l e of J u d a h

t h e r e w a s o n l y h o p e if t h e y r e c e i v e d a n e w h e a r t . A s

enter the next century, the only h o p e for humanity of a n e w h e a r t a n d spirit (Ezek.

is G o d ' s

we

offer

36:26).

It is w i t h g r e a t p l e a s u r e t h a t I d e d i c a t e t h i s e s s a y w i t h t h a n k s

to

the R e v e r e n d D r . A. G e l s t o n w h o t a u g h t m e in m y y e a r s at D u r h a m , 1985-1992.

THREE CHRISTIAN COMMENTATORS ON

HOSEA

BY GRAHAM

DAVIES

Cambridge The interpretation of the p r o p h e t s u n d e r w e n t

a massive change

the late n i n e t e e n t h a n d early twentieth centuries.

1

T h e most

t a n t a s p e c t of this c h a n g e w a s n o t t h e literary-critical

in

impor-

approach

a l t h o u g h it w a s o v e r q u e s t i o n s o f a u t h o r s h i p a n d d a t e t h a t s o m e the biggest battles w e r e fought

b u t t h e shift in t h e o l o g i c a l

of

evalu-

a t i o n o f t h e p r o p h e t s . T h e c h a n g e is a b o v e all o n e f r o m s e e i n g t h e i m p o r t a n c e of the p r o p h e t s for C h r i s t i a n faith a n d theology as lying p r i m a r i l y in t h e i r p r e d i c t i o n s of t h e c o m i n g of C h r i s t a n d t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t of the C h u r c h to a m o r e historical view w h i c h

emphasises

t h e i r religious ideas, t h e ethical e l e m e n t in t h e i r t e a c h i n g a n d

their

critique of their c o n t e m p o r a r i e s for failing to m a t c h the d e m a n d

of

G o d . T h i s c h a n g e was not reversed, but only softened, by the fact that

subsequent

studies of the p r o p h e t s

represent

something

of

a

swing back towards the traditional pre-critical viewpoint. A Christian u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e p r o p h e t s i n t h e first d e c a d e o f t h e n e w ennium

will q u i t e

rightly

be

shaped

by developments

in

mill-

biblical

s c h o l a r s h i p a t t h e p r e s e n t t i m e . B u t it will a l s o b e n e f i t f r o m a d i s c r i m i n a t i n g s t u d y of earlier i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , for m a n y of t h e old issues r e m a i n w i t h u s . T h i s e s s a y is a s m a l l c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h a t t a s k w h i c h I h o p e will b r i n g p l e a s u r e

to an

Old

Testament

scholar w h o

has

l o n g c o u n t e d t h e C h r i s t i a n l i t e r a t u r e of t h e p a s t a m o n g his interests. The

primary

purpose

o f t h i s e s s a y is t o g a i n

a more

detailed

p e r s p e c t i v e o n this c h a n g e in t h e o l o g i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n b y

examin-

i n g t h r e e m a j o r figures in C h r i s t i a n

interpretation

of the book

Hosea: J o h n Calvin, E d w a r d Beuverie Pusey a n d G e o r g e A d a m T h e y are of course a small sample f r o m the m u c h

larger

of

Smith. number

of c o m m e n t a t o r s w h o wrote on H o s e a , a n d even the study of t h e m could have benefited f r o m m o r e comparison with their predecessors,

1

See, e.g., R.E. Clements, A Centu1y 0J Old Testament Study (Guildford and London, 1976), pp. 51-75.

contemporaries

and

senting a variety

successors.

But

of a p p r o a c h e s

they

have

to biblical

the

merit

interpretation

of

repre-

and

of t h e m c a n fairly b e d e s c r i b e d as a n i m p o r t a n t a n d influential entator,

as

the

reprinting

(and

in

Calvin's

case

the

each

comm-

translation)

t h e i r w o r k s i n d i c a t e s . C a l v i n is a n o b v i o u s c h o i c e f o r a n

w h o l i v e d l o n g b e f o r e t h e p e r i o d o f c h a n g e t h a t is i n q u e s t i o n w h i l e yet b e i n g , t h r o u g h his setting in t h e w o r l d of t h e and

the

of his

R e f o r m a t i o n , closer to the

near-contemporaries.

because most

of the fact that

of his biblical

t h e first t i m e pretation

and

His

inclusion

it w a s i n t h e

commentaries

annotated

still h a d

modern

much

by

to say

world

has

mid

were

to

the

than

additional

translated

those w h o

Church.

some

relevance

century

into

believed

here,

Renaissance

even

nineteenth

that

English

that

Pusey

his

for

inter-

and

Smith,

while s e p a r a t e d in t i m e b y only a few d e c a d e s , s t a n d o n either of the

"great

insight

into

divide"

the

changes

e v e r , it w i l l b e c o m e more

and

as such

in

a particularly

that

were

taking

(and

i n s o m e w a y s t h e s a m e is

Calvin)

the late n i n e t e e n t h

that

place.

With

by no

century. T o

them,

means

how-

illustrate the

chapters of Hosea, chapters 9 a n d

character

10.

2

m i g h t be said a b o u t

Calvin's c o m m e n t a r y was

a

transcript

Geneva,

in t h e

on

of lectures

Auditoire

these c o m m e n t a t o r s '

which

he

had

given

church

little

work.

H o s e a w a s p u b l i s h e d early in

a d j a c e n t to the

from

It will,

of course, in the space available b e possible to p r e s e n t only a of w h a t

even

everything

of the three c o m m e n t a r i e s I have chosen most of m y examples t w o less w e l l - k n o w n

side

revealing

apparent

strikingly the case with

changed

provide

of

interpreter

in

the

1557

and

school

of St. Pierre.3

in The

e x a c t d a t e s of t h e thirty-eight lectures a r e u n k n o w n , b u t in v i e w w h a t is k n o w n

or can be deduced

about Calvin's lecturing

of

practice

2 For a m u c h m o r e c o m p r e h e n s i v e study of the history of interpretation of H o s e a 13‫ ־‬see S. Bitter, Die Ehe des Propheten Hosea. Eine ausUgungsgeschichtliche Untersuchung (Göttingen, 1975). 3 T h e Latin text appears in G. B a u m et al. (ed.), Ioannis Calvini Opera Quae Supersunt Omnia (Corpus R e f o r m a t o r u m : Brunswick, 1863ff.), vol. 42, cols. 1 9 7 - 5 1 4 , hereafter abbreviated as OC 42. For a n English translation sponsored by the Calvin Translation Society see Commentaries on the Twelve Minor Prophets by John Calvin (tr. J . Owen), vol. 1 ( E d i n b u r g h , 1846), hereafter abbreviated as G T S Hos. O n the general b a c k g r o u n d see T . H . L . Parker, Cabin's Old Testament Commentaries ( E d i n b u r g h , 1986), pp. 13-29. I have m a d e m y own translations f r o m the Latin in view of Parker's observations o n the English translation (1986) pp. 2 3 ‫ ־‬, but give p a g e references to the latter for those w h o m a y wish to consult the context of the passages q u o t e d . For the use of the Auditoire for the H o s e a lectures see OC 42, cols. ' 1 8 3 - 8 4 ' ( C T S Hos, p. xxii, mistranslates "in auditorio" as "of my hearers").

a n d the g e n e r a l r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n his lectures a n d their p u b l i c a t i o n it is likely t h a t t h e y w e r e d e l i v e r e d i n a l t e r n a t e w e e k s , t h r e e week, over a period that

the

original

of a b o u t

Preface

six m o n t h s

to the

Hosea

in

1556.

4

It s o

commentary,

by

happens Joannes

B u d a e u s , a n d the P r e f a c e to the M i n o r P r o p h e t s as a w h o l e 1559), b y C r i s p i n ,

provide

some

of the m o s t

detailed

a

(dated

information

a b o u t the delivery of Calvin's lectures a n d the great care that taken over their transcription. T h e lectures were extemporary,

was given

w i t h o u t notes: C a l v i n b r o u g h t with h i m only a H e b r e w Bible,5 f r o m w h i c h h e w o u l d r e a d a v e r s e a n d t h e n t r a n s l a t e it i n t o L a t i n ,

with

e x p l a n a t o r y glosses as h e w e n t a l o n g . F o r e x a m p l e , h e p r e s e n t s

Hos.

9:9 as follows: T h e y h a v e d e e p e n e d (so literally: o t h e r s t r a n s l a t e " t h e y h a v e multip l i e d " , b u t this is w r o n g ; o t h e r s " t h e y h a v e t h o u g h t c u n n i n g l y " , w h i c h I d o n o t like c i t h e r . But since t h e w o r d w h i c h I h a v e p u t [ ' p r o f u n d a v e r u n t ' ] is n o t L a t i n , a n d w o u l d b e u n c l e a r , let us t r a n s l a t e : " t h e y a r e p r o f o u n d l y , o r d e e p l y , held fast, t h e y h a v e c o r r u p t e d as in t h e d a y s of G i b e a h . H e will r e m e m b e r t h e i r i n i q u i t y a n d p u n i s h t h e i r wrongdoings".6 Calvin's c o n c e r n for a precise r e n d e r i n g of the H e b r e w here and often elsewhere.' t h e o r i g i n a l (e.g. o n

He

is e v i d e n t

also frequentiy n o t e d w o r d - p l a y s

Hos. 9:3, 6 a n d

15) a n d h e s h o w s h i m s e l f

b e alive t o t h e g r a m m a t i c a l s t r u c t u r e o f H e b r e w (on 9:7) a n d t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e M a s o r e t i c a c c e n t u a t i o n (ibid., in his tion of t h e verse). H e

in to

even

transla-

k n o w s s o m e t h i n g of H e b r e w i d i o m : in

Hos.

9 : 1 0 h e t r a n s l a t e s ‫ ב א ו‬as " w e n t i n " in a sexual sense, a n d in

10:5

h e is a b l e t o g i v e ‫ י ד ל ו‬its r e g u l a r s e n s e o f ' r e j o i c e ' b y p r e s u m i n g t h a t a

relative

pronoun

is t o b e

supplied

b e f o r e it, a l t h o u g h

it is

e x p r e s s e d ( a n d n e e d n o t b e , especially in p o e t r y ) in t h e H e b r e w .

4

not In

T h e kind of evidence referred to by Parker, (1986) pp. 18 20, is only partially available for the lectures on Hosea 9 and 10: from this it is clear that lectures 25 and 26 and lectures 28 and 29 respectively were delivered on consecutive days. 5 Cf. the Preface to the Commentary on Daniel, OC 40, pp. 23-24; C T S Dan 1, p. lxii. 6 OC 42, col. 396; C T S Hos, p. 330. 7 For recent reviews of Calvin's use of Hebrew (and rabbinic interpretation) see D.L. Puckett, John Cabin's Exegesis of the Old Testament (Columbia Series in Reformed Theology: Louisville, 1995), pp. 56 66 and M. Engammare, "Joannes Calvinus trium linguarum perdus? La question de l'hébreu", Bibliothèque d'Humanisme et de la Renaissance 58 (1996), pp. 35-60.

10:15

he

knows

that

others render ‫ר ע ת כ ם‬

‫רעת‬

as equivalent

to

s u p e r l a t i v e , " a s is o f t e n t h e m e a n i n g o f t h e g e n i t i v e i n H e b r e w " ,

but

o n this occasion h e prefers a m o r e s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n the p h r a s e as a case of repetition for the sake of e m p h a s i s :

a of

"(because

o f ) wickedness, y o u r wickedness" (an interpretation w h i c h of course overlooks

the fact that ‫ר ע ת‬

is i n t h e c o n s t r u c t

state). I n

the

same

verse h e s h o w s a rare interest in a v a r i a n t r e a d i n g , n o t i n g that

some

r e a d ‫ כ ש ח ר‬, "like t h e d a w n " , in p l a c e of ‫ ב ש ח ר‬, "in (one) d a w n " , suddenly. But h e retains the latter as b o t h the b e t t e r attested per magis recepta") a n d the truer ("verior") reading -

by the

h e s e e m s to m e a n b o t h t r u e r to H o s e a ' s t e a c h i n g a n d m o r e ble as a n

i.e.

("semlatter proba-

idiom.

H o w does C a l v i n u n d e r s t a n d the role of a p r o p h e t , a n d w h a t t e m p o r a r y a p p l i c a t i o n d o e s h e find f o r H o s e a ' s w o r d s ? T . H . L .

con-

Parker

has given a n invaluable a c c o u n t of Calvin's u n d e r s t a n d i n g of prophecy.8 T h e p r o p h e t s a r e s e e n b y C a l v i n i n t h e first p l a c e a s i n t e r p r e t e r s

of

the L a w (Institutes 4.8.6; P r e f a c e to Isaiah). T h e y also focus o n

the

u n i o n b e t w e e n G o d a n d Israel by virtue of election a n d the covenant, s o t h a t I s r a e l ' s s i n is f u n d a m e n t a l l y r e b e l l i o n a n d

treachery

against

h e r G o d . T h e y p r o c l a i m the w o r d of G o d , t h r o u g h the Spirit, n o t j u s t in t h e s e c o n d a r y sense of b e i n g i n t e r p r e t e r s of a

t e x t . C a l v i n d o e s n o t find p r e d i c t i o n s o f C h r i s t a n d t h e C h u r c h c r i m i n a t e l y in t h e p r o p h e t s a n d criticises o t h e r C h r i s t i a n the future to refer to later O l d

avoid ridicule f r o m the Jews. T o

Testament

chronological

information

statements

history, so as

t h i s e n d h e is i n t e r e s t e d t o

w h e n a p r o p h e t spoke a n d to w h o m , a n d he spends time ing the

indis-

interpreters

f o r d o i n g so.9 O n t h e w h o l e h e u n d e r s t a n d s t h e p r o p h e t s ' about

and

God-given

which

the

Old

to

know

élucidât-

Testament

pro-

vides.10 T h e p r o p h e t s ' visions n e e d special c a r e a n d m u s t b e u n d e r s t o o d in the light of their t e a c h i n g .

On

occasion

a text which

looks

a n o r d i n a r y n a r r a t i v e is u n d e r s t o o d b y C a l v i n t o b e a v i s i o n , o r least to h a v e than

been

presented

as a factual a c c o u n t

Gomer: woman).

to his c o n t e m p o r a r i e s

(as i n t h e c a s e o f H o s e a ' s

H o s e a c o u l d not, as a p r o p h e t , Although

as such

have married

he does n o t see the p r o p h e t s

at

rather

'marriage' an

like

to

immoral

as p r e d i c t i n g

the

events of his o w n times, C a l v i n c o n s t a n t l y applies w h a t t h e y say to

8 9 10

Parker (1986) pp. 176-224. Cf. Puckett, (1995) pp. 5 3 - 5 6 . Cf. Puckett, (1995) pp. 67-72.

his c o n t e m p o r a r i e s , especially to t h e 'Papists' a n d their e x a l t a t i o n tradition over

of

scripture.

H o w far a r e these g e n e r a l f e a t u r e s e v i d e n t in C a l v i n ' s lectures Hosea

9

and

10? A r e

there

other

important

features

there

on

which

should be noted? T h e basic p e r c e p t i o n of the p r o p h e t s as interpreters o f t h e L a w is r e a f f i r m e d i n C a l v i n ' s i n t r o d u c t i o n mentary." adoption

This

perception

seems,

of a very ancient J e w i s h

pel a n y such suspicion, Calvin him

the

at

Law

embraces

and

first

sight,

approach.

12

begins

to

be

com-

the

simple

But, p e r h a p s

at o n c e goes o n

indeed

to his H o s e a

to

dis-

to indicate that

with

a

promise:

for

"Now

there are two parts to the L a w , n a m e l y the promise of salvation e t e r n a l life a n d comes

to

then

the rule of a devout

summarise

the

prophets'

L a w , it is l i n e w i t h t h i s d u a l

and

teaching

and

h o l y life". W h e n

as

interpreters

he

of

the

character:

So the p r o p h e t s u n d e r s c o r e the c o m m a n d m e n t s of the L a w a b o u t true a n d p u r e w o r s h i p of G o d a n d a b o u t love, t h e n they instruct the p e o p i e in a d e v o u t a n d h o l y life, a n d finally t h e y set f o r t h t h e g r a c e o f G o d . A n d b e c a u s e t h e r e is n o h o p e o f r e c o n c i l i a t i o n w i t h G o d e x c e p t through the Mediator, they constantly proclaim that Messiah w h o m the Lord had already promised before them. Our the

chapters Messiah

did and

not in

afford Calvin

10:12, at

much

the one

opportunity

point

where

to speak

he

might

i n t r o d u c e d a C h r i s t o l o g i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n (as o t h e r s , i n c l u d i n g did),

he

takes

Prophet

here

the

promise

shows

that,

in

a

quite

whenever

general

God

way:

is s o u g h t

Pusey,

"Finally,

from

the

a n d in sincerity by sinners, he c o m e s to m e e t t h e m a n d s h o w s self to where

be

kind

Calvin

10:8, w h e r e

and

merciful".13 T h e

one

place

does allow a clear reference he

sees t h e

final

judgement

in

these

to C h r i s t i a n

of the

of

have

world

the heart him-

chapters

b e l i e f is as a n

in

addi-

tional fulfilment of H o s e a ' s w o r d s ("iterum tunc") in c o n j u n c t i o n with their citation in L u k e 23:30 a n d sign

that

Calvin

tends

to limit

Revelation 6:15 Christian

1 6 . T h e r e is

interpretation

T e s t a m e n t to p a s s a g e s w h i c h a r e a c t u a l l y citcd in t h e N e w I t is n o t a b l e tent

11

of chaptcr

(though

scarcely

9 in particular)

surprising that

in

Calvin's

the

of the

Old

Testament.14

light of the

detailed

some

exegesis

conhas

OC 42, 0 1 9 8.1‫;פ‬C T S Hos, p. 36. Cf. 2 Kings 17:13 a n d , J . Barton, Oracles of God: Perceptions of Ancient Prophecy in Israel after the Exile (London, 1986), pp. 154 78. 13 OC 42, col. 428; C T S Hos, pp. 3 8 0 - 8 1 . 14 Cf. Parker, (1986) p p . 2 0 2 - 2 0 5 , on Christological interpretation of the Psalms. 12

m u c h to say a b o u t true a n d false worship. For example, the reference to a "prostitute's hire" in Hos. 9:1 leads him first to a general statement " T h e r e f o r e , w h e n we a b a n d o n the o n e G o d a n d fashion for ourselves n e w gods to nourish us a n d provide us with food a n d clothing, we are like prostitutes . . ." T h i s is then specifically applied to c o n t e m p o r a r y R o m a n practices (presumably of p r a y e r to saints a n d angels): Now the majority, despising God's blessing, flies off to another place and fashions false gods for itself, as we see happening within the realm of the Pope. For who are the nurses from whom they beg sustenance, if drought or any other time of trouble threatens barrenness and want? They have a crowd of gods without number, to whom they flee for refuge. So they are prostitutes. 15 But as well as finding in the text warnings a b o u t false worship for the C h u r c h of his own time, Calvin also d r e w attention to the positive value of the o r d a i n e d practices of worship. In the following verses he observes that the cessation of n o r m a l worship a n d pollution by unclean food is p a r t of the t h r e a t e n e d j u d g e m e n t of exile, which presupposes that the ordinances in question are p a r t of G o d ' s blessings for his people. O n this basis, w h e n c o m m e n t i n g on 9:5, he c o m m e n d s the value of the o u t w a r d ordinances of religion: they are the "sign . . . by which the L o r d gathers us to himself", "the exercises of devodon by which the Lord as it were holds us in his b o s o m " , a n d the C h u r c h should be in fear of any time " w h e n , namely, the L o r d deprives us of o u r festival days, that is, he takes away all the supports of o u r devotion, by which he holds us within his house a n d shows that we are p a r t of his C h u r c h " . 1 6 An indication of Calvin's concern, in his interpretation of prophecy, with the wider practical teachings of the L a w a p p e a r s in connection with his t r e a t m e n t of r e p e n t a n c e in his c o m m e n t s on Hos. 1 0 : 1 2 1 3 The Prophet declaims only about the duties prescribed by the second table, as the Prophets when urging men to repentance often begin from the second table of the Law, because in that domain the wickedness of men is more gross and they can more easily be convinced. O n e senses that Calvin f o u n d such concentration on social duties s o m e w h a t surprising, p e r h a p s in conflict with his o w n perception

15

OC 42, col. 382; C T S Hos, p. 310.

16

OC 42, col. 389; C T S Hos, pp. 319-20.

‫ ־‬:

that

the

that

is i n f a c t n o t

root

prophet will

o f s i n is r e b e l l i o n foreign

did not m o r e

appear

later,

example

George

has

Hosea

9:15, a

9 and

Adam

already

17; 1 0 : 2 , 8).

number

on

9:4,

10:3,

on

Calvin

where

11;

and

given

is r e f e r r i n g

The

to

the

himself.

make

a

As

more

and

application his

of

comments

i n s t a n c e s o f this (see

are

the

references

denounced

elaborate

on

(explicitly

description

of

it t u r n s

Hosea's

out

original

that

in e a c h

hearers

and

application

of these

cases

it is n o t

clear

he m a y have

had

f a c t t h a t h e r e f e r s t o t h i s f a u l t so f r e q u e n t l y (see

to the C T S

translation

as well as t h a t in t h e worthy

to

why

1 0 : 4 , w h e r e t h e w o r d i t s e l f is n o t u s e d ) .

w h a t (if a n y ) p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e m p o r a r y

Index

able

of Calvin's

'hypocrites' compare

closer e x a m i n a t i o n

in m i n d .

to G o d

contemporaries,

several m o r e

hypocrisy in the c o m m e n t o n But

was

perception

to explain

I t is t e m p t i n g t o a d d t o t h e s e e x p l i c i t

of passages

16;

Smith

been

10 c o n t a i n 17

h i m s e l f (a

had

passage.

H o s e a ' s t e a c h i n g to his R o m a n on

God

and

d i r e c t l y call f o r a r e t u r n

constructive use of this An

against

to Hosea),

1567

edition

of further study, w h i c h

its p r o m i n e n c e .

of the M i n o r

I t is p o s s i b l e ,

on

might

Prophets, for

which shed

for example,

i t is b a s e d )

light o n that

the

his o w n

makes

reason

on

it for

Genevan

c o n g r e g a t i o n is i n v i e w , a s h e d i d n o t s p a r e t h e m f r o m s t e r n tation, as in the c o m m e n t

the

example,

exhor-

9:10:

O u r s i t u a t i o n t o d a y is s i m i l a r . F o r G o d d o e s n o t d e e m all w o r t h y o f this g r a c e w h i c h h a s b e e n o f f e r e d to us, f o r h e h a s s h o n e u p o n us t h r o u g h his G o s p e l . O t h e r p e o p l e s w a n d e r in d a r k n e s s , t h e l i g h t o f G o d d w e l l s o n l y a m o n g us: d o e s n o t G o d s h o w b y t h i s t h a t w e a r e his s p e c i a l d e l i g h t ? If w e n o w r e m a i n in o u r n a t u r a l s t a t e a n d r e j e c t h i m a n d t u r n o u r a f f e c t i o n s e l s e w h e r e , o r r a t h e r d e s i r e s n a t c h e s us a w a y , is t h a t n o t a d e t e s t a b l e w i c k e d n e s s a n d p e r v e r s i o n ? Another

example

of

the

R e f o r m a t i o n a p p e a r s in t h e c o m m e n t o n t h e r e f e r e n c e in H o s e a

9:3

to eating unclean be

right

midst,

to

a s it w e r e

a n s w e r is theoretical

17

adopt

firmly

of

Calvin

criticising

f o o d in exile in Assyria. the

rituals

"when and

in

of idolaters

Rome

to do

fellow

He

adherents

asks w h e t h e r

when as the

one

it

lives in

Romans

do".

can their His

s e v e r e l y n e g a t i v e , b u t it w a s c l e a r l y n o t j u s t

a

issue:

T h i s seems to have been a m a j o r reason w h y the c o m m e n t a r i e s appealed to the Calvin Translation Society in the mid nineteenth century: see C T S Hos, pp. vi, xi.

So also today, those w h o deviate f r o m a sincere profession of their f a i t h a n d e n t e r f e l l o w s h i p w i t h t h e P a p i s t s r e n o u n c e w h a t is i n t h e m of the g r a c e of G o d a n d expose themselves to S a t a n ' s desires. N o d o u b t t h e r e w e r e o f t e n situations in t h e R e f o r m a t i o n p e r i o d individuals or congregations were

isolated within a region

when

that

was

p r e d o m i n a n t l y R o m a n i n its a l l e g i a n c e ( o n e t h i n k s i n d e e d o f E n g l a n d u n d e r M a r y at the very time w h e n Calvin w a s giving these

lectures)

a n d f o u n d t h e p r e s s u r e to c o n f o r m t o o g r e a t to resist. B u t in

France

there had

been

"Nico-

demism",

of people

Reformation and

the particular problem

but

who

professed

continued

to

for the R e f o r m e r s of

loyalty

attend

Calvin's words would have had

to

the

Roman

principles

services

of

of

the

worship, them.18

especial relevance to

T h e c o m m e n t a r y on the M i n o r Prophets by E.B. Pusey, the Tractarian leader w h o to

was

Regius

Professor of H e b r e w

1882, originally a p p e a r e d

1828

1860

and and

1861

(including of course the

other

the

Hosea

three, after a gap,

'gap' c a m e the publication of

in

Parts between

from

1877.'‫ יי‬I n f a c t t h r e e P a r t s a p p e a r e d in q u i c k s u c c e s s i o n in 1 8 6 0

and

in six q u a r t o

at O x f o r d

commentary 1871,

1875

Essays and Reviews

in t h e first and

and the

1877.

Part)

In

the

controversy

w h i c h f o l l o w e d it, t o w h i c h P u s e y ' s m o s t s u b s t a n t i a l c o n t r i b u t i o n the O x f o r d lectures w h i c h w e r e p u b l i s h e d as 2nd ed.

1 8 6 8 w i t h a d d i t i o n s ) , a n d it w o u l d b e a n i n t e r e s t i n g

for future research to consider w h e t h e r the later Parts were written in the late

1860s a n d

the

subject actually

1870s or were substantially

pleted earlier, a n d in c o n s e q u e n c e to w h a t extent they b e a r the of Pusey's even

more 20

Essays and Reviews.

18

polemical

stance

was

Daniel the Prophet ( 1 8 6 4 ;

commarks

following the publication

of

T h e H o s e a c o m m e n t a r y at a n y rate clearly ante-

T h i s possibility was pointed out to m e by A.N.S. Lane, Senior Lecturer in Christian Doctrine at L o n d o n Bible College, to w h o m I a m also grateful for his expert c o m m e n t s on o t h e r aspects of the section of this article which deals with Calvin. See C . M . N . Eire, War Against Idols: the Reformation of Worship from Erasmus to Calvin (Cambridge, 1986), p p . 2 3 4 - 7 5 . 19 The Minor Prophets with a commentary, explanatory and practical, and introductions to the several books (Oxford, C a m b r i d g e a n d L o n d o n , 1860-77). A new edition, in eight octavo volumes, was p r o d u c e d in 1906 (London), with a c o m m e n d a t o r y Preface by W . Lock, but it o m i t t e d the i m p o r t a n t (and h a r d l y out of date) " I n t r o d u c t o r y S t a t e m e n t " of Pusey on p p . vii-viii of the original edition (on which see below). I give references t h r o u g h o u t to the original edition. 20 T h e answer is not evident f r o m the s t a n d a r d Life of Edward Bouverie Pusey by H.P. Liddon (4 vols.: L o n d o n , 1893-97), which shows very little interest in the actual writing of the c o m m e n t a r y , but n o d o u b t research in Pusey's voluminous

d a t e s this p a r t i c u l a r c o n t r o v e r s y a n d t h e d e c l a r e d a i m s of the mentary

in

Pusey's

"Introductory

O b j e c t of the C o m m e n t a r y "

are

Statement

on

rather pastoral

the

very

simply

at

the

beginning

as

being

principles

than

far as the t w o c a n b e distinguished in Pusey's work). is p u t

"to

com-

21

The

h e will p a s s b y " a l l s h e w o f l e a r n i n g o r

discussion, which to

a

commentary

b e l o n g to the dictionary on

Holy

Scripture".

[i.e.

Pusey

rather

discussions

than

of

renderings of the Ancient Versions a n d controversies with other ern

commentators

have

no

to

embarrassing

or g r a m m a r

Likewise

(so

"object"

evolve

uncover] s o m e portion of the m e a n i n g of the W o r d of G o d " . declares that

and

polemical

p l a c e , still l e s s c o n j e c t u r a l

the

mod-

emendations

o r e x e r c i s e s i n c o m p a r a t i v e S e m i t i c p h i l o l o g y . P u s e y ' s a i m is " t o g i v e the

results r a t h e r

than

the process by which

to exhibit the building, not the

they were

arrived

at;

scaffolding".

M y i d e a l h a s b e e n . . . t o l e a v e n o t h i n g u n e x p l a i n e d as f a r as I c o u l d e x p l a i n it; a n d if a n y v e r s e s h o u l d g i v e o c c a s i o n t o e n t e r u p o n a n y s u b j e c t , h i s t o r i c a l , m o r a l , d o c t r i n a l , o r d e v o t i o n a l , t o e x p l a i n this, a s f a r as t h e p l a c e r e q u i r e d o r s u g g e s t e d . T h e n , if a n y t h o u g h t f u l w r i t ers with w h o m I a m a c q u a i n t e d , a n d to w h o m m o s t English r e a d e r s h a v e little o r n o a c c e s s , h a v e e x p a n d e d t h e m e a n i n g o f a n y t e x t in a w a y w h i c h I t h o u g h t w o u l d b e useful to a n English r e a d e r , I h a v e t r a n s l a t e d t h e m , p l a c i n g t h e m mostly at the e n d of the c o m m e n t o n e a c h v e r s e , so t h a t t h e m i n d m i g h t rest u p o n t h e m , a n d y e t n o t b e s e n s i b l e o f a b r e a k o r j a r , in p a s s i n g o n t o o t h e r t h o u g h t s in t h e foll o w i n g verse.22 The

" t h o u g h t f u l w r i t e r s " t u r n o u t in p r a c t i c e to b e t h e

tors

of past

centuries, Jewish

sometimes

as well

as

commenta-

Christian,

P u s e y picks o u t t h e c o m p e n d i o u s e x p o s i t i o n of H o s e a b y his cessor in t h e O x f o r d c h a i r E d w a r d

Pococke for particular

and

prede-

praise.21

surviving correspondence, as well as careful study of the later Parts of the c o m m e n t a r y themselves, would provide the necessary information. An indication that at least Part 4 was close to c o m p l e t i o n is given by the r e f e r e n c e in the first Advertisement to the intention of publishing the c o m m e n t a r y in quarterly Parts. 21 For the linkage of the pastoral a n d the polemical see e.g. Liddon (1893 1897) vol. 4 p. 19 note a n d the passage f r o m a n 1847 article cited below. Although the H o s e a c o m m e n t a r y lacks a strongly polemical note, this is not the case with the c o m m e n t a r y on J o n a h in the third Part (1861), w h e r e the historicity of the n a r r a tive is d e f e n d e d against "so-called C h r i s t i a n s " with a v e h e m e n c e which almost matches that of the lectures on Daniel. I a m grateful to the Archdeacon of Huntingdon, the Venerable J . S . Beer, for d r a w i n g my attention to Pusey's interpretation of Jonah. 22 Pusey (1860-1877) p. viii. 23 E. Pococke, A Commentary on the Prophecy of Hosea (Oxford, 1685). It m a y be significant that Pusey's f a v o u r e d predecessor b e l o n g e d to the same seventeenth

T h e conception of the c o m m e n t a r y was neither an isolated n o r new

enterprise.

to the

"many

In

his " I n t r o d u c t o r y

years" during which

a n d to his h o p e t h a t his

Statement"

the idea

Minor Prophets

Pusey

had

refers

been

both

in his

mind

would form but a portion

a c o m p r e h e n s i v e c o m m e n t a r y on the w h o l e Bible b a s e d o n the principles.

Although

he

states

here

that

"the

Commentary

M a t t h e w is n e a r l y r e a d y f o r t h e p r e s s " a n d h e w r o t e o n 1862 that he anticipated Keble,24

John gins

of the

no

plan

a commentary

other volumes went

back

to

were 1846,

on

St. J o h n ' s

12

where

But

it f o r m e d

a

book

for the

the work

commentary.

Already

was clearly defined. T h e

at this p o i n t

exegesis of the

from

the

ori-

frequent

h e t r i e d , w i t h little s u c c e s s , t o p e r s u a d e t o t a k e o n a 25

St.

October

t h e m e of Pusey's c o r r e s p o n d e n c e with K e b l e , as well as with whom

of

same

on

Gospel

ever published.

a

others biblical

the character Church

of

Fathers

w a s to b e d r a w n o n extensively a n d Christian application was explicitly r e q u i r e d .

But the

exposition

s h o u l d be c o n f i n e d to o n e o r t w o spiritual i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s (where these a r e c a l l e d for) r e l a t i n g t o C h r i s t a n d H i s B o d y t h e C h u r c h , o r t h e soul of e a c h individual m e m b e r of Christ's mystical b o d y , r a t h e r t h a n give m a n i f o l d spiritual m e a n i n g s . . . In a t t e m p t i n g this t h e writers w o u l d h o p e (following t h e Fathers) to take as their guides, leading i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s in H o l y S c r i p t u r e itself. 2 6 T h e y [sc. t h e c o n t r i b u t o r s ] a r e a l s o c o n v i n c e d , t h a t t h e g r e a t b u l w a r k a g a i n s t m o d e r n s c e p t i c i s m lies i n t h e r e v e r e n t s t u d y a n d u n f o l d i n g o f t h e m e a n i n g o f H o l y S c r i p t u r e itself; t h a t H o l y S c r i p t u r e s o s t u d i e d d o e s c a r r y w i t h it t h e c o n v i c t i o n o f its o w n D i v i n i t y ; a n d t h a t t h e r e b y a l o n e (with c o r r e s p o n d i n g life) c a n t h e F a i t h b e m a i n t a i n e d a g a i n s t t h e u n b e l i e f o f " t h e last d a y s " . 2 7

To

one

hoped

potential

contributor

to the series ( T . E .

to enlist for Genesis) P u s e y w r o t e early in

Morris,

whom

he

1847:

O u r p l a n is t o r e a d all w e c a n o f t h e F a t h e r s o r o l d w r i t e r s o n it. O n G e n e s i s t h e r e is g o o d s t o r e ; o u r i d e a is t o c o n d e n s e a n d r e w r i t e , in s h o r t s e n t e n c e s if w e c a n , g i v i n g t h e c r e a m , o r w h a t s e e m s m o s t e d i -

century to which it is often said that the T r a c t a r i a n s were seeking to return in their wider designs of c h u r c h polity. 24 See Liddon (1893-7) vol. 4, p. 19 note. 25 Liddon (1893-7) vol. 3, pp. 1 4 9 - 5 8 . 26 Cited in Liddon (1893-7) vol. 3, p. 150, a p p a r e n t l y f r o m the Guardian, 26 M a y 1847, p. 336. 27 Guardian, 26 M a y 1847, p. 336 (cited in Liddon (1893-7) vol. 3, p. 150).

fying, d r a w i n g it o u t of the text itself a n d t h e n dwelling u p o n it, o r e x p a n d i n g it, as s e e m s best. 2 8 Pusey offered to lend M o r r i s s o m e

of the volumes

that he

would

in the

Bible,

need. What

was Pusey's general conception

of p r o p h e c y

a n d h o w d o e s it c o m e t o e x p r e s s i o n in h i s c o m m e n t s o n H o s e a and

10? T h e " I n t r o d u c t o r y S t a t e m e n t " r e c o g n i s e s

9

that

T h e p r o p h e t s a r e p a r t l y t e a c h e r s of r i g h t e o u s n e s s a n d r e b u k e r s of u n r i g h t e o u s n e s s ; p a r t l y t h e y d e c l a r e d things t h e n to c o m e , a n e a r e r a n d a m o r e distant f u t u r e , G o d ' s j u d g m e n t s o n unrighteousness, w h e t h e r of his o w n sinful p e o p l e o r of the n a t i o n s w h o u n r i g h t e o u s l y e x e c u t e d G o d ' s r i g h t e o u s j u d g m e n t s u p o n t h e m , a n d t h e everlasting righteousness w h i c h H e willed to b r i n g in t h r o u g h t h e C o m i n g of C h r i s t . . . T h e f u l f i l m e n t s of these p r o p h e c i e s , as t h e y c o m e b e f o r e us in the several p r o p h e t s , it lies w i t h i n the design of the p r e s e n t w o r k , G o d giving us s t r e n g t h , to v i n d i c a t e against t h e u n b e l i e f rife in t h e p r e s e n t d a y (p. viii). Pusey believed that for m o d e r n r e a d e r s the evident fulfilment of the p r o p h e c i e s of Christ a n d the C h u r c h could a n d s h o u l d bolster belief in t h e a c c u r a c y w h i c h t h e p r o p h e t s h a d s h o w n in r e l a t i o n to own

their

times: T o us . . . t h e t h e n m o r e d i s t a n t f u t u r e , t h e p r o p h e c i e s as to C h r i s t , w h i c h a r e b e f o r e us in the Gospels, o r of the C h u r c h a m o n g all nations, w h o s e f u l f i l m e n t is a r o u n d us, a c c r e d i t t h e earlier, (ibid.)

T h e p r o m i n e n c e of the t h e m e s of prediction a n d fulfilment, with the reference

to c o n t e m p o r a r y

unbelief, suggests that

c a m e so l o u d l y to e x p r e s s i o n in ing shape

Daniel the Prophet

the ideas

which

were already

tak-

here.

T h e r e is a n o t i c e a b l e c o n t r a s t b e t w e e n P u s e y ' s a p p r o a c h d i c t i o n h e r e a n d t h e o n e w h i c h h e t o o k in s o m e l e c t u r e s o n

to

a n d P r o p h e c y " w h i c h h e d e l i v e r e d in O x f o r d in 1836.29 T h e s e n e v e r p u b l i s h e d a n d , as D a v i d J a s p e r h a s n o t e d , they a r e i g n o r e d i n L i d d o n ' s Life.3°

pre-

"Types were

virtually

I n t h e m P u s e y s k e t c h e d o u t (to j u d g e f r o m

the studies of t h e m w h i c h h a v e b e e n published) a view of p r o p h e c y w h i c h w a s a t o n c e m o r e a n c i e n t ( b e c a u s e h e f o u n d it i n t h e F a t h e r s )

28

Cited in Liddon (1893-7) vol. 3, p. 156. D.YV.F. Forrester, Young Doctor Pusey (London, 1989), pp. 99 107. T h e manuscript of the Lectures is now in the archives of Pusey House, Oxford. 30 D. Jasper, "Pusey's Lectures on Types and Prophecies of the Old Testament", in P. Butler (ed.), Pusey Rediscovered (London, 1983), pp. 51 70, esp. p. 51. 29

and

more

modern

(almost R o m a n t i c

in s o m e ways) t h a n

the

then

s t a n d a r d ' o r t h o d o x i s m ' w h i c h relied o n the a c c u r a c y of the p r o p h e t s ' specific p r e d i c t i o n s as a n e x a m p l e of the m i r a c u l o u s w h i c h c o u l d b e used to p r o v e the truth of Christianity. H o l y S c r i p t u r e d o e s n o t f a v o u r o u r m e c h a n i c a l views of p r o p h e c y , as c o n t a i n i n g so m a n y items, as it w e r e , as t h e r e a r e striking passages; as t h o u g h p r o p h e c i e s a d m i t t e d of b e i n g c o u n t e d u p , a n d t h e e n t i r e e v i d e n c e of p r o p h e c y w a s to b e w e i g h e d a c c o r d i n g to the n u m b e r a n d c o n t e n t s a n d tangibleness of these several p r e d i c t i o n s . R a t h e r the w h o l e p r e v i o u s d i s p e n s a t i o n of t h e O . T . , its p e o p l e , its i n d i v i d u a l c h a r a c t e r s , its rites, its sayings, its history w a s o n e vast p r o p h e t i c system, veiling, b u t full of the N . T . 3 ' It is r e m a r k a b l e t h a t b y

the Prophet,

1 8 6 0 , a n d still m o r e w h e n h e w r o t e

Daniel

P u s e y s e e m s t o h a v e c o m e t o a d h e r e t o a v i e w v e r y like

t h a t w h i c h h e h a d c r i t i c i s e d i n t h e s e e a r l y l e c t u r e s . B u t it w o u l d

be

b y n o m e a n s t h e o n l y i n s t a n c e of his a b a n d o n i n g a line of t h i n k i n g o p e n e d u p in his t w e n t i e s a n d thirties.32 H o w e v e r , as w e shall see, it w o u l d b e a g r e a t m i s t a k e t o s u p p o s e t h a t t h i s w a s all t h a t

Pusey

h a d t o s a y a b o u t t h e p r o p h e t s i n 1 8 6 0 a n d l a t e r : if it h a d b e e n , h i s c o m m e n t a r y would probably not have earned such widespread recogn i t i o n a n d p r a i s e a s it d i d . H o w then does Pusey interpret chapters 9 a n d h e is t r u e t o h i s p r o m i s e

to use, a n d

10 o f H o s e a ? F i r s t ,

cite, t h e c o m m e n t a r i e s

spiritual writings of the past, especially the C h u r c h are

nearly

chapters

fifty

attributed

alone, some

quotations

of t h e m

Fathers.

in the c o m m e n t a r y

quite lengthy, a n d

on

and

There these

there are

nearly

t h i r t y m o r e , m a i n l y q u i t e brief, w h i c h a r e set off b y q u o t a t i o n

marks

w i t h o u t t h e a u t h o r b e i n g explicitly n a m e d . least c o u l d h a v e b e e n f o u n d in P o c o c k e .

33

S o m e of these latter A m o n g the explicit

t i o n s t h e l a r g e s t n u m b e r c o m e f r o m R u p e r t o f D e u t z (c. closely followed by G r e g o r y t h e G r e a t a n d

31

Bernard

and

cita-

1070-1129),

'Osorius', w h o m a y

a sixteenth-century Spanish Catholic bishop of that n a m e . Jerome,

at

be

Ambrose,

P o c o c k e a r e a l s o c i t e d s e v e r a l t i m e s . It is i n

Cited in Forrester (1989) p. 103. See on this the study of H.C.G. Matthew, "Edward Bouverie Pusey: From Scholar to Tractarian", JTS N.S. 32 (1981), pp. 101-124, and Forrester (1989) passim. 33 Compare Pusey's unattributed citations on Hosea 9:10 (1860-77 p. 59) with Pococke, (1685) pp. 464 and 466. In these cases the words cited are not Pococke's own comments but parts of his summary of the views of others, specifically Abravanel, "Jerome and many others" and the Vulgate. 32

these

citations

that

particularly brought expository

the

lasting

spiritual

out, though

comments.

A

few illustrative

t h e w o r d s all their princes

teaching

it is n o t

are revolters

of the

neglected

examples

prophet

in P u s e y ' s

must

in H o s . 9:15 Pusey

is

own

suffice.

On

comments:

T h e i r case, then, was utterly hopeless . . . T h e political p o w e r which s h o u l d p r o t e c t g o o d n e s s , b e c a m e t h e f o u n t a i n o f c o r r u p t i o n . " N o n e is there, to r e b u k e t h e m that o f f e n d , to recall those that err; n o o n e w h o , b y his o w n g o o d n e s s a n d v i r t u e , p a c i f y i n g G o d , c a n t u r n a w a y his w r a t h , as t h e r e w a s in t h e t i m e o f M o s e s " . " A s k e s t t h o u , w h y G o d cast t h e m out of His h o u s e , w h y they w e r e not received in the C h u r c h o r t h e h o u s e o f G o d ? H e s a i t h t o t h e m , b e c a u s e t h e y are all revolters, departers, i.e. b e c a u s e , b e f o r e t h e y w e r e c a s t o u t visibly i n t h e b o d y , they d e p a r t e d in m i n d , w e r e far a w a y in heart, a n d t h e r e f o r e w e r e c a s t o u t in t h e b o d y a l s o , a n d lost, w h a t a l o n e t h e y l o v e d , t h e t e m p o r a l a d v a n t a g e s of the h o u s e of G o d . " 3 4 Footnotes indicate and

Rupert

that

of Deutz.

the citations are Pusey

does

not

f r o m C y r i l (of belabour

r e l e v a n c e , b u t it is e v i d e n t . O n

Israel

P u s e y g l o s s e s a s a luxuriant

b u t in the s a m e

vine,

is an empty

the

Alexandria)

contemporary

vine i n

10:1

(which

negative sense)

he

remarks: F o r t h e m o r e a f r u i t t r e e p u t t e t h o u t its s t r e n g t h in l e a v e s a n d b r a n c h e s , t h e less a n d w o r s e f r u i t it b e a r e t h . [ J e r o m e is c i t e d i n s u p p o r t o f t h i s r e n d e r i n g . ] T h e s a p i n t h e v i n e is a n e m b l e m o f H i s H o l y S p i r i t , t h r o u g h W h o m a l o n e w e c a n b e a r f r u i t . His grace which was in me, s a y s S. P a u l , was not in vain. It is in v a i n t o us, w h e n w e w a s t e t h e stirrings o f G o d ' s S p i r i t i n f e e l i n g s , a s p i r a t i o n s , l o n g i n g s , t r a n s p o r t s , " w h i c h b l o o m their h o u r a n d f a d e " [ f r o m the L y r a Apostolica], Like the leaves, t h e s e f e e l i n g s a i d in m a t u r i n g f r u i t ; w h e n t h e r e a r e l e a v e s o n l y , t h e t r e e is b a r r e n a n d nigh unto cursing, whose end is to be burned.'" A g a i n the c o n t e m p o r a r y application w a s too obvious to n e e d nation. In

expia-

10:12 Pusey (unlike Calvin) w a s c o n f i d e n t that there

a p r o p h e c y of the c o m i n g of

was

Christ:

T h e P r o p h e t , a s is t h e w a y o f t h e p r o p h e t s , g o e s o n t o C h r i s t , w h o w a s e v e r in t h e p r o p h e t s ' h e a r t s a n d h o p e s . T h e w o r d s c o u l d o n l y b e u n d e r s t o o d i m p r o p e r l y o f G o d t h e F a t h e r . G o d d o e s n o t come, W h o is e v e r y w h e r e . H e e v e r w a s a m o n g his p e o p l e , n o r d i d H e will t o b e a m o n g t h e m otherwise t h a n h e r e t o f o r e . . . T h e P r o p h e t saith then, " N o w is t h e t i m e t o s e e k t h e L o r d , a n d p r e p a r e f o r t h e c o m i n g o f

34 35

Pusey (1860 1877) p. 61. Pusey (1860 1877) pp. 62 63.

C h r i s t ; f o r H e , w h e n H e c o m e t h , will t e a c h y o u , y e a will g i v e y o u t r u e r i g h t e o u s n e s s , w h e r e b y y e shall b e righteous b e f o r e G o d , a n d h e i r s of His k i n g d o m " . 3 6 T h e c o n t e m p o r a r y a p p l i c a t i o n w a s in this case u n d e r l i n e d b y a tation from

quo-

Pococke:

If I s r a e l o f o l d w e r e so t o o r d e r t h e i r w a y s in e x p e c t a t i o n o f H i m , a n d t h a t t h e y m i g h t b e p r e p a r e d f o r H i s c o m i n g ; a n d if t h e i r n e g l e c t ing to d o this m a d e t h e m liable to such h e a v y j u d g m e n t s ; h o w m u c h s e v e r e r j u d g m e n t s s h a l l t h e y b e w o r t h y of, w h o , a f t e r H i s C o m i n g a n d raining u p o n t h e m the plentiful showers of heavenly doctrine, a n d a b u n d a n t m e a s u r e o f H i s g r a c e a n d gifts o f H i s H o l y S p i r i t , d o , f o r w a n t of b r e a k i n g u p the fallow g r o u n d of their hearts, suffer His holy w o r d t o b e lost o n t h e m . T h e f e a r f u l d o o m o f s u c h u n f r u i t f u l C h r i s t i a n s is set d o w n b y S. P a u l . 3 7 Pusey several times, usually with reference to Pococke, betrays understanding

of w h a t

the

tion of the J e w s . T h u s o n

prophecy

implies

Hos. 9:4 he

for the

present

his

situa-

writes:

Ndther shall they be pleasing to the Lord; f o r t h e y s h o u l d n o l o n g e r h a v e t h e m e a n s p r e s c r i b e d f o r r e c o n c i l i a t i o n w i t h G o d . S u c h is t h e s t a t e o f Israel n o w . . . In their half o b e d i e n c e , they r e m a i n u n d e r the cerem o n i a l l a w w h i c h H e g a v e t h e m , a l t h o u g h H e c a l l e d t h e m , a n d still calls t h e m , t o e x c h a n g e t h e s h a d o w f o r t h e s u b s t a n c e in C h r i s t . B u t i n t h a t t h e y c a n n o t fulfil t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f t h e l a w , e v e n in its o u t w a r d form, the law, which they acknowledge, bears witness to t h e m , t h a t t h e y a r e n o t living a c c o r d i n g to t h e m i n d of G o d . 3 8 B u t P u s e y is c l e a r t h a t t h i s r e j e c t i o n a p p l i e s o n l y t o t h e n a t i o n . Pococke

on 9:15, he

Citing

says:

This w a s a n a t i o n a l j u d g m e n t , a n d so i n v o l v e d t h e w h o l e o f t h e m , a s to their o u t w a r d c o n d i t i o n , w h i c h they e n j o y e d as m e m b e r s of that n a t i o n , a n d m a k i n g u p o n e b o d y p o l i t i c . It d i d n o t r e s p e c t t h e s p i r i t u a l c o n d i t i o n o f s i n g l e p e r s o n s , a n d t h e i r r e l a t i o n , in t h i s r e s p e c t , t o God.39 And

what

a fortiori

36

is s a i d o f t h e J e w s

application

again, a c c o r d i n g to Pococke,

to a n y o t h e r

has

an

nation:

Pusey (1860-77) p. 68. Pusey (1860-77) p. 68. 38 Pusey (1860-77) p. 56. 39 The Minor Prophets, p. 61. T h e question of the implication of the p r o p h e t s ' teaching for c o n t e m p o r a r y J u d a i s m is also raised in the T r a n s l a t o r ' s Preface to Calvin's c o m m e n t a r y on Joel, A m o s a n d O b a d i a h , C T S J o e l - O b a d , pp. vi-ix. 37

If G o d so d e a l t w i t h Israel o n t h e i r d i s o b e d i e n c e a n d d e p a r t i n g f r o m His service, to w h o m h e h a d so p a r t i c u l a r l y e n g a g e d H i m s e l f to m a k e g o o d to t h e m t h e firm possession of that l a n d ; h o w shall a n y p r e s u m e o n a n y right o r title to a n y o t h e r , o r t h i n k to p r e s e r v e it to t h e m s e l v e s by a n y f o r c e o r s t r e n g t h of t h e i r o w n , if t h e y revolt f r o m H i m , a n d cast off" t h a n k f u l o b e d i e n c e to H i m ? T h e Apostle c a u t i o n e t h a n d t e a c h eth us so to a r g u e : If God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee, a n d t h e r e f o r e w a r n e t h , be not high-minded, a n d p r e s u m p t u o u s , but fear.w Pusey's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of H o s e a t h e r e f o r e served at n u m e r o u s points to r e i n f o r c e his m o r e g e n e r a l c o n c e r n f o r a n a t i o n a l revival of t r u e r e l i g i o n . A t l e a s t i n t h e c o m m e n t s o n t h e s e c h a p t e r s t h e r e is n o t r a c e o f s p e c i f i c a l l y T r a c t a r i a n t h e m e s , a n d t h i s is p e r h a p s w h y t h e m e n t a r y could receive such widespread

acclaim.

T w o further characteristics of Pusey's c o m m e n t a r y m a y be in conclusion.

The

first

is h i s a d e p t n e s s

at

com-

41

finding

a

noted

memorable

p h r a s e to s u m u p the teaching of the p r o p h e t . For example, he takes the plural of shrines:

the high places of Aven in H o s . 1 0 : 8 t o i m p l y a m u l t i p l i c i t y " M a n y s u c h idol-shrines w e r e f o r m e d a r o u n d it, o n its

m o u n t , until Bethel b e c a m e a metropolis of idolatry."42 O r again, to q u o t e a m o r e g e n e r a l r e m a r k f r o m his I n t r o d u c t i o n to H o s e a , w h i c h applies v e r y well to c h a p t e r s 9 a n d

10:

T h e w o r d s of u p b r a i d i n g , of j u d g m e n t , of w o e , b u r s t o u t , as it w e r e , o n e by o n e , slowly, heavily, c o n d e n s e d , a b r u p t , f r o m t h e p r o p h e t ' s h e a v y a n d s h r i n k i n g soul, as G o d c o m m a n d e d a n d c o n s t r a i n e d h i m , a n d p u t His w o r d s , like fire, in t h e p r o p h e t ' s m o u t h . . . E a c h verse f o r m s a w h o l e for itself, like o n e h e a v y toll in a f u n e r a l knell. 4 3 Secondly,

alongside

the practical

and

devotional

aspects of

the

c o m m e n t a r y a g o o d d e a l o f s c h o l a r s h i p a n d l e a r n i n g is i n c l u d e d . F o r e x a m p l e , there are a variety of notes on the H e b r e w original, includi n g t h e d e t e c t i o n , p o s s i b l y c o r r e c t , o f a w o r d - p l a y w h e n in H o s .

10:8

it is s a i d t h a t t h o r n s , n o t s a c r i f i c e s , will " g o u p " , ‫ ע ל ה‬, o n t h e a l t a r s . 4 4 In line with Pusey's d e c l a r e d i n t e n t i o n t h e r e a r e relatively few such

40

Pusey (1860-77) p. 62. T h e Scottish Presbyterian George Adam Smith is citcd in the Preface to the 1906 edition of Pusey's Minor Prophets, p. xii, as having said: "Anyone who has worked at these prophets has found the Commentary [sc. of Pusey] indispensable: I always feel grateful to him when writing on the subject". 42 Pusey (1860 -77) p. 65. 4:i Pusey (1860-77) p. 6. 44 Pusey (1860-77) p. 65. 41

notes in t h e H o s e a c o m m e n t a r y , b u t as h e p r o g r e s s e d t h r o u g h

the

T w e l v e he gave increasing space to t h e m , c o m m e n t i n g rather sourly in a n o t e a d d e d

to the

1877 edition

t h a t h e f o u n d this

necessary

" a s t h e u s e a n d a b u s e o f H e b r e w i n c r e a s e d " ( p . viii, n o t e a ) . 4 ' P u s e y also took n o t e of the a r c h a e o l o g i c a l discoveries in M e s o p o t a m i a drew on

them

at a p p r o p r i a t e places, even

in t h e H o s e a

and

commen-

tary w h e n the Assyrian texts h a d only recently b e e n d e c i p h e r e d .

For

e x a m p l e , in a n o t e o n H o s . 9 : 1 7 h e writes: " T h i s a p p e a r s b o t h f r o m the sculptures of N i n e v e h , in w h i c h m u l t i t u d e s of w o r k m e n , of c o u n tenance

and

form

distinct

represented

as

w o r k i n g in c h a i n s , a n d f r o m t h e i n s c r i p t i o n s of t h e k i n g s " , a n d

he

quotes some examples.

46

from

the Assyrians,

are

H e d o e s n o t d o this to p r o v e t h e fulfilment

of the p r o p h e c y or the a c c u r a c y of biblical history, as others to d o later; in fact t h e e v i d e n c e

is in s o m e

tension with

the

were text

u n d e r discussion, a n d h e h a s to resolve this. T h e i n c l u s i o n of s u c h references bears witness to a w i d e r

educational

aim

which

exist a l o n g s i d e t h e e a r n e s t spiritual e x h o r t a t i o n s d e l i v e r e d without necessarily h a v i n g to be subservient to

could

elsewhere,

them.

T h e balance b e t w e e n such historical knowledge a n d the

commenta-

tor's

time

of

George

published

in

1896.47

religious p u r p o s e

Adam

Smith's

Smith

was

at

had

commentary, this t i m e

clearly shifted by which

was

first

Professor of H e b r e w

the and

Old

Testament

Exegesis at the F r e e C h u r c h C o l l e g e in G l a s g o w : h e w a s later (1910) to b e c o m e

Principal of the University of A b e r d e e n .

In his

Preface

S m i t h h a d to d e f e n d himself against t h e a c c u s a t i o n , levelled

against

his e a r l i e r c o m m e n t a r y o n I s a i a h , o f " p r o s t i t u t i n g p r o p h e c y " b y a p p l y i n g it t o " a p r o b l e m o f o u r o w n d a y " . H i s r e p l y is f o r t h r i g h t : The prostitution of the p r o p h e t s is their c o n f i n e m e n t to a c a d e m i c uses . . . T h e p r o p h e t s spoke f o r a p r a c t i c a l p u r p o s e ; t h e y a i m e d at t h e h e a r t s of m e n ; a n d e v e r y t h i n g t h a t s c h o l a r s h i p c a n d o for t h e i r writings h a s surely for its final a i m the illustration of t h e i r witness to the w a y s of

45 O n Pusey as a Hebraist, especially in his early career, see the learned study of A. Livesley, "Regius Professor of Hebrew", in Butler (1983) pp. 71-118. 46 Pusey (1860-77) pp. 61-62, note 11. 4 ' G. Adam Smith, The Book of the Twelve Prophets (London, 1896). It appeared as part of " T h e Expositor's Bible", a series of commentaries aimed at preachers. Quotations arc from this edition, unless otherwise specified. T h e second edition, published in 1928 with numerous alterations, was one of a set which comprised only Smith's own commentaries on the prophetic books.

G o d w i t h m e n , a n d its a p p l i c a t i o n t o l i v i n g q u e s t i o n s a n d d u t i e s a n d hopes.48 But was

he

had

firmly

already

made

committed

it p l a i n

to the

new

on

the preceding pages

developments

in the

that

he

textual

h i s t o r i c a l c r i t i c i s m o f t h e B i b l e , e v e n if a t c e r t a i n p o i n t s h e

and

believed

that they h a d b e e n pressed to excess. In a later b o o k , b a s e d o n tures given at Yale University in

1899, h e w a s to spell o u t in

lec-

detail

h o w historical criticism was not only c o m p a t i b l e with a belief in

the

lasting relevance of the O l d T e s t a m e n t b u t could actually m a k e

that

clearer.49

relevance Smith

had

by

this t i m e

come

to terms with

the critical view

of

t h e religion of t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t w h i c h s a w in t h e p r o p h e t s of t h e eighth

century

B.C.

a

huge

step

forward

from

belief in

a

purely

national deity to w h a t c a m e to be called "ethical m o n o t h e i s m " . v i e w h a d b e e n spelt o u t in t h e writings of s c h o l a r s s u c h as Duhm

in G e r m a n y a n d W i l l i a m R o b e r t s o n

S m i t h in S m i t h ' s

S c o t l a n d , w h e r e m a n y o p p o s e d it a n d R o b e r t s o n S m i t h w a s from

his c h a i r

George Adam of 25,

but

a

at

Aberdeen

after a

lengthy

heresy

This

Bernhard native

deposed

trial

in

1881.

S m i t h w a s c h o s e n to t a k e his place, as a y o u n g revealing anccdotc

difference of substance

between

suggests

that

there

the two men's

was

not

man much

views.

P r o f e s s o r R o b e r t s o n S m i t h . . . w a s s t a y i n g w i t h his m o t h e r in A b e r d e e n . T h e n e w l y - a p p o i n t e d s u b s t i t u t e c a l l e d u p o n h i m t o s e e k his a d v i c e a s t o t h e c o n d u c t o f t h e classes. T h e fiery little m a n s e e m e d n o t t o o w e l l p l e a s e d to see h i m , w h i c h w a s scarcely surprising. " W h a t w o u l d y o u d o " , h e d e m a n d e d f i e r c e l y , "if I s h o u l d r e f u s e t o o b t e m p e r t h e d c c i s i o n o f t h e A s s e m b l y a n d insist o n t a k i n g t h e class m y s e l f ? " " T h e n " , s a i d G e o r g e , "I w o u l d b e p r o u d t o g o a n d sit a m o n g y o u r s t u d e n t s " . 3 0 H e was himself a noted authority on the g e o g r a p h y of Palestine

The Historical Geography of the Holy Land

was

first

published

a n d h e g a v e , in t h e P r e f a c e to his c o m m e n t a r y o n t h e M i n o r a

characteristic

between

48

the

illustration

classical

of

prophets

the

difference

which

and

their predecessors.

he

in

(his 1894)

Prophets, perceived

Speaking

of

S m i t h (1896) vol. 1, p. xi. Cf. the d e d i c a t i o n of b o t h editions to H e n r y D r u m m o n d , the r e n o w n e d Scottish evangelist, w h o was a colleague a n d close friend of the Smiths in Glasgow: L. A d a m Smith, George Adam Smith (London, 1943), p. 48. 49 G . A d a m Smith, Modem Criticism and the Preaching of the Old Testament (London, 1901). 50 L. A d a m Smith (1943) p. 19.

the M i n o r P r o p h e t s as a whole, w h i c h h a d b e e n " h a u n t e d for centuries b y a p e d d l i n g a n d a m b i g u o u s title", h e

continued:

T w o of t h e m , A m o s a n d H o s e a , w e r e the first of all p r o p h e c y - rising cliff-like, w i t h a s h e e r a n d m a g n i f i c e n t originality, to a h e i g h t a n d a m a s s sufficient to set a f t e r t h e m t h e t r e n d a n d slope of t h e w h o l e p r o p h e t i c r a n g e . T h e T w e l v e t o g e t h e r c o v e r t h e e x t e n t of t h a t r a n g e , a n d illustrate the d e v e l o p m e n t of p r o p h e c y at a l m o s t every stage f r o m t h e e i g h t h c e n t u r y to t h e fourth. 5 1 Smith's general approach overall p l a n of his

first

t o t h e p r o p h e t s is a l s o e v i d e n t i n

volume.

the

It b e g i n s , a f t e r a b r i e f a c c o u n t

of

the B o o k of t h e T w e l v e as a w h o l e , with a survey of early p r o p h e c y i n I s r a e l , b e f o r e A m o s . T h e e m p h a s i s is v e r y m u c h o n t h e d e f i c i e n c i e s of t h e p r o p h e t s of this p e r i o d . W h e n h e c o m e s to the

commentary

p r o p e r , the p r o p h e t s are not a r r a n g e d in their canonical order,

but

in their ( p r e s u m e d ) historical o r d e r : A m o s , H o s e a , M i c a h . E a c h

has

a lengthy I n t r o d u c t i o n , with m u c h detail o n the historical b a c k g r o u n d a n d discussion of the a u t h e n t i c i t y of, for e x a m p l e , t h e passages referring to future h o p e a n d

the need for repentance. T h e

H o s e a ' s m e s s a g e is e n t i t l e d " T h e

Problem

chapter

on

t h a t A m o s L e f t " : it w a s

necessary for "the p r o p h e t of L a w " or "the p r o p h e t of C o n s c i e n c e " to b e followed b y " t h e p r o p h e t of R e p e n t a n c e " , as S m i t h

describes

H o s e a , albeit in a c o n t e x t of divine love a n d grace. R e f e r r i n g to t h e later prophets w h o took u p Hosea's themes, Smith concludes: " T h e s e o t h e r s e x p l o r e d t h e k i n g d o m o f G o d : it w a s H o s e a w h o t o o k it b y storm".52 F r o m all this t h e r e clearly e m e r g e s t h e p i c t u r e of p r o p h e c y as a develo p i n g institution with w h i c h m o d e r n s c h o l a r s h i p is f a m i l i a r . B e h i n d this t h e r e is also a clear belief in divine p r o v i d e n c e w h i c h e n s u r e s t h e c o n t i n u i n g r e l e v a n c e of t h e b o o k : in a n a g e w h e n t h e ' r e a l i s m ' of seie n c e a n d t h e w o r k i n g s of u n i v e r s a l L a w call in q u e s t i o n t h e o l d ('Evangelical') ideas, H o s e a ' s t e a c h i n g o n G o d ' s love for m a n a n d m a n ' s love for G o d a n d his fellows is n e e d e d all t h e m o r e . 3 3 Smith

followed

"Theological approach

52 53

whose

commentary character

to the prophets which

ideas m o r e

51

his t e x t u a l

Essays", than

on

Hosea

emphasises

three

of a

their overall

the detailed w o r d i n g of the text. T h e

Smith (1896) vol. 1, p. vii. Smith (1896) vol. 1, p. 230. Smith (1896) vol. 1, p. 231.

with

is a l s o r e d o l e n t

new

religious

essays

are

entitled

"The

Knowledge

of G o d " ,

"Repentance"

and

"The

against Love". A n u m b e r of features c a n be recognised here w e r e to b e c o m e p r o m i n e n t

a generation

later w h e n m a n y

Sin

which

scholars

t u r n e d t h e i r m i n d s to "Biblical T h e o l o g y " as a m e a n s of i n t e r p r e t ing a historically c o n d i t i o n e d Bible for the needs of their o w n There

a r e w o r d - s t u d i e s (on ' k n o w l e d g e '

and

'return', for

day.

example),

a focus o n (salvation-) history as t h e chief m e a n s b y w h i c h t h e

peo-

pie of G o d c o m e to a k n o w l e d g e of h i m , opposition to ancient

Near

Eastern

religion a n d

ritualism, a n d

a m o r e systematic a p p r o a c h

the prophet's words which almost overshadows the detailed

to

exposi-

t i o n o f t h e t e x t . I n t h e f i n a l e s s a y , w h i c h is i n s o m e w a y s m o r e l i k e a s e r m o n , the c o n t r i b u t i o n of H o s e a ' s subjective e x p e r i e n c e of m a r riage b r e a k d o w n

t o h i s t h e o l o g y is e m p h a s i s e d (cf. t h e p h r a s e

most fundamental truth that the b e g i n n i n g of the

first

Hosea gave t o

essay), b u t m o r e t r a d i t i o n a l m o t i f s

1 1:4) a n d t h e u n c o m p r o m i s i n g , f o r all its n e w

at

appear

in a r a r e reassertion of the p r o p h e c y - f u l f i l m e n t p a t t e r n (with ence to H o s .

"the

r e l i g i o n " [italics a d d e d ]

referexpres-

s i o n , p i c t u r e o f d i v i n e j u d g m e n t : " L o v e a b u s e d is l o v e l o s t , a n d l o v e Hell".54

lost m e a n s

W h a t d o e s S m i t h h a v e t o s a y a b o u t c h a p t e r s 9 a n d 10 s p e c i f i c a l l y ? O n e ' s first a n s w e r m i g h t w e l l b e " N o t m u c h " , e s p e c i a l l y a f t e r r e a d ing the m a n y pages of Calvin a n d Pusey on the s a m e chapters. Smith has eleven pages (pp. 2 7 9 - 2 8 9 ) o n t h e m , of which

nearly four

are

o c c u p i e d b y his n e w t r a n s l a t i o n of t h e text.53 T h i s c a n n o t simply b e put down

to t h e limits o n t h e s p a c e a v a i l a b l e in t h e

commentary,

b u t it d o e s b e a r s o m e r e l a t i o n t o its f o r m a t . T h e s p a c e d e v o t e d introductory

and

c o n c l u d i n g ('theological') essays m i g h t

used for m o r e detailed verse-by-verse

commentary,

and

o f f o r m a t is p r o b a b l y i n d i c a t i v e o f t h e s a m e s h i f t s i n

have the

to

been choice

interpretation

that we have already noted. History and theology are n o w m o r e

to

t h e f o r e , w h e n it c o m e s t o C h r i s t i a n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e O l d

Test-

a m e n t , t h a n t h e text itself as a n o b j e c t o f d e t a i l e d e x e g e t i c a l

study.

Smith saw chapters 9 a n d

10 a s p a r t o f a m a j o r s e c t i o n o f

the

b o o k w h i c h h e entitied " A P e o p l e in D e c a y . II. Politically" ( 7 : 8 - 1 0 : 1 5 ) ,

54 Smith (1896) vol. 1, p. 350. In the first edition the essay had a final paragraph (p. 354) which spoke of Hell not as a place of flames, but as "a dreary waste of ash and cinder, strewn with snow", but this was omitted in the second edition of 1928 (cf. p. 379). 55 In the second edition there are fifteen pages, but the increase is mainly due to a more generous page layout, especially for the translation.

which

followed a section h e a d e d

(4:1-7:7). headed

It is s o m e w h a t

"A

People

in

" A P e o p l e in D e c a y . I.

Morally"

s u r p r i s i n g t h a t t h e r e is n o m a j o r

Decay.

Religiously".

The

theme

d o e s , it is t r u e , a p p e a r i n t h e s u b - h e a d i n g o f c h a p t e r

section

of

idolatry

10, b u t

in s e c o n d p l a c e to politics ( " P u p p e t - k i n g s a n d P u p p e t - g o d s " ) . is, a t

the

least,

a

notable

"foregrounding"

of the

only There

significance

of

n a t i o n a l life i n g e n e r a l f o r t h e p r o p h e t ' s m e s s a g e h e r e . T h i s s h i f t is also r e f l e c t e d in t h e d e t a i l e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e t w o

chapters.

I n 9 : 1 9 ‫ ־‬S m i t h f o c u s e s o n " T h e E f f e c t s o f E x i l e " , w h i c h will b r e a k u p b o t h t h e j o y a n d t h e s a c r e d n e s s o f t h e p e o p l e ' s lives. B u t doom

is a l r e a d y

leaders:

Smith

being

here

fulfilled by

follows the

the

corruption

traditional

7 9 ‫ ־‬as r e f e r r i n g t o false p r o p h e c y .

56

of h e r

interpretation

Israel's spiritual

of

verses

T h e following section ( 9 : 1 0 1 7

is e n t i t l e d " T h e C o r r u p t i o n t h a t is t h r o u g h L u s t " . T h e

o f t h e s i n o f l u s t is a t first s u r p r i s i n g , b u t S m i t h r e f e r s b a c k

explic-

itly t o t h e a l l u s i o n s t o it i n H o s e a 4 a n d h e p r o b a b l y h a d i n

mind

t h e fuller a c c o u n t of t h e e p i s o d e at B a a l - P e o r (9:10) in N u m b e r s a l t h o u g h h e d o e s n o t a c t u a l l y c i t e t h a t p a s s a g e . B e t h a t a s it m o s t of the c o m m e n t

on

t h i s s e c t i o n is a l e n g t h y d i a t r i b e

the m o r e s of S m i t h ' s o w n day, w h i c h

‫) ־‬

introduction

25, may,

against

include:

. . . t h e n u m b e r of g r e a t s t a t e s m e n falling by t h e i r p a s s i o n , a n d in t h e i r fall f r u s t r a t i n g t h e h o p e s of n a t i o n s ; the g r e a t families w o r n o u t b y i n d u l g e n c e ; t h e h o m e s b r o k e n u p b y infidelities; t h e t a i n t i n g of t h e b l o o d of a n e w g e n e r a t i o n by t h e p o i s o n o u s p r a c t i c e s of t h e old, h a v e n o t all t h e s e t h i n g s b e e n in e v e r y a g e , a n d d o t h e y n o t still h a p p e n n e a r e n o u g h t o ourselves to give us a g r e a t f e a r of t h e sin w h i c h c a u s e s t h e m all? . . . W e h a v e a m o n g us m a n y w h o find t h e i r business in t h e t h e a t r e , o r in s o m e of t h e p e r i o d i c a l l i t e r a t u r e of o u r t i m e , in w r i t i n g a n d s p e a k i n g a n d e x h i b i t i n g as closely as t h e y d a r e to limits of p u b l i c d e c e n c y . 3 ‫׳‬ T h e t r e a t m e n t of c h a p t e r p a g e if t h e t r a n s l a t i o n

10 is e s p e c i a l l y b r i e f (little m o r e t h a n

of the text a n d

t h e c r i t i c a l n o t e s o n it

e x c l u d e d ) : " f e w n o t e s a r e n e e d e d " , S m i t h says. T h e c o m m e n t s

a

are are,

however, s u p p l e m e n t e d by the exposition of verses 1 1 - 1 2 at the e n d

5l> In the second edition (pp. 303-304) he adopted the now generally accepted view that these verses refer to the rejection of Hosea's message by the people. Another interesting change is from "the vision of the poet" as a description of Hosea's gift (1st ed., p. 281) to "the vision of the prophet" (2nd ed., p. 305), which suggests a withdrawal from a bold early literary evaluation in favour of a more traditional standpoint. 57 Smith (1896) vol. 1, pp. 284-85.

o f t h e e s s a y o n r e p e n t a n c e , w h e r e S m i t h d e v e l o p s his f a v o u r i t e t h e m e with a powerful elaboration of H o s e a ' s

imagery:

A n o t h e r f a m i l i a r passage, t h e P a r a b l e of t h e H e i f e r , describes t h e s a m e a m b i t i o n to r e a c h spiritual results w i t h o u t spiritual processes . . . C a t t l e , b e i n g u n m u z z l e d by law at t h r e s h i n g time, loved this best of all t h e i r y e a r ' s w o r k . Y e t to r e a c h it t h e y m u s t first go t h r o u g h the h a r d e r a n d u n r e w a r d e d trials of p l o u g h i n g a n d h a r r o w i n g . Like a heifer, t h e n , w h i c h loved h a r v e s t only, Israel w o u l d s p r i n g at the r e w a r d s of p e n i t e n c e , t h e p e a c e a b l e fruits of r i g h t e o u s n e s s , w i t h o u t g o i n g t h r o u g h t h e discipline a n d c h a s t i s e m e n t w h i c h a l o n e yield t h e m . R e p e n t a n c e is n o m e r e t u r n i n g o r e v e n r e - t u r n i n g . It is a d e e p a n d a n ethical process the b r e a k i n g u p of fallow g r o u n d , the l a b o u r a n d l o n g exp e c t a t i o n of t h e sower, the seeking a n d w a i t i n g for J e h o v a h till H i m s e l f s e n d the r a i n . . . A r e p e n t a n c e so t h o r o u g h as this c a n n o t b u t result in t h e m o s t c l e a r a n d steadfast m a n n e r of life. T r u l y it is a r e t u r n i n g n o t b y oneself, b u t a returning by God, a n d it leads to t h e keeping of leal love and justice, and waiting upon God continually (xii.7). 58 The

three commentaries sampled

h e r e h a v e in c o m m o n

a

com-

m i t m e n t to a c o n t e m p o r a r y C h r i s t i a n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the text w h i c h is n o t s u p e r f i c i a l b u t g r o u n d e d i n a s e r i o u s g r a p p l i n g w i t h t h e H e b r e w o r i g i n a l a n d t h e h i s t o r i c a l b a c k g r o u n d a s it w a s u n d e r s t o o d . All t h r e e writers use

arguments

from

analogy

(even

the

a fortiori

in

case) to relate the text t o their o w n times. P u s e y s o m e t i m e s this b y a n

allegorising or spiritualising interpretation,

his q u o t a t i o n s comments

on

from Hos.

older

sources,

but

in t h e

cited

Pusey's achieves

especially case

in

from

10:1 t h e y a r e b a s e d o n m e t a p h o r i c a l

his

language

i n t h e o r i g i n a l , j u s t like S m i t h ' s e x p o s i t i o n o f 1 0 : 1 1 - 1 2 q u o t e d a b o v e . S m i t h too has a distinctive w a y of translating the p r o p h e t ' s into contemporary

message

t e r m s , in t h e isolation of religious i d e a s w i t h

a

p e r m a n e n t validity. T h e r e a r e s o m e m o r e striking differences. B o t h Calvin a n d S m i t h are notably restrained in speaking of a

Christian

fulfilment of p r o p h e c y , w h e r e a s Pusey freely claims such a

connec-

t i o n . T h i s t r a d i t i o n a l m o t i f is c e r t a i n l y r e l a t e d t o h i s h i g h r e g a r d f o r the

Church

expected

Fathers, where

it is w i d e s p r e a d ,

but

t h a t its p r e s e n c e i n t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t

one

might

would

have

have

had

a s m u c h i n f l u e n c e o n C a l v i n a n d S m i t h . It is P u s e y t o o w h o

con-

siders m o s t the relevance of the p r o p h e c y to the c o n t e m p o r a r y

sta-

tus of J u d a i s m , the O l d

58

a central

Testament.

topic for any Christian

interpretation

His conclusions are not entirely negative,

Smith (1896) vol. 1, pp. 344 45; cf. pp. 288-89.

of but

they are more Testament of h o w

so t h a n

it

may

the prophets and

the

r e q u i r e . T h i s is n o t t h e p l a c e t o a t t e m p t a f r e s h

Hosea,

and

the

the context of Christian but

the text of b o t h

be

will p l a c e s u c h

hoped

prophets

generally,

belief at the e n d that

an account

the

preceding

may

be

analysis

account

understood

of the twentieth

on a firmer footing. T w o

New

and

in

century,

reflections

new works

of

c o m m e n t a r y p r o m i s e to b r i n g the interpretations of the F a t h e r s

into

v i e w i n a w a y r e m i n i s c e n t o f P u s e y ' s p l a n s ; 5 9 b u t i t is n o t o n l y

(and

p e r h a p s n o t in t h e

past

first

place) the c o m m e n t a r i e s

of the distant

that deserve attention f r o m those w h o m u s t n o w take u p the task of interpretation.

'‫ יי‬T h e Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture is d u e to begin with a volume on Mark, edited by T . C . O d e n a n d C . A . Hall (InterVarsity Press, D o w n e r s G r o v e IL), in M a y 1998; a n d the one-volume International Catholic Bible Commentary, edited by W . R . F a r m e r (Liturgical Press, Collegeville M N ) , has been a n n o u n c e d as forthc o m i n g in S e p t e m b e r 1998.

WHOSE WORDS? QOHELETH, HOSEA AND A T T R I B U T I O N IN BIBLICAL L I T E R A T U R E 1 BY

STUART

WEEKS

Durham

The

term

'Qoheleth'

has puzzled

readers

centuries,2

for m a n y

and

p e r h a p s s i n c e its v e r y i n c e p t i o n , b u t m o s t c o m m e n t a t o r s h a v e it t o b e

a

real

name

or

title b y

Ecclesiastes wishes to b e

which

the

identified, so t h a t

author

of the

modern the

book.

usual

when

3

approach

ascription

in

of any

resembles the

Bible:

i n d i v i d u a l , t h a t i n d i v i d u a l is

being mate-

within

those

books.

naive

as to a s s u m e

actual

authorship:

that few

Solomon

wrote

authorial

claims of m a n y

to an

authorial

of

essen-

identified, rightly o r wrongly, as the writer or originator of the rial

books are attributed

to

is

fly-leaf

In this respect, the t r e a t m e n t of Q o h e l e t h

scholarly

book

the attribution

tially t h e s a m e as t h e a t t r i b u t i o n to a n a u t h o r o n t h e

taken

Modern all s u c h scholars

Proverbs,

any

scholarship attributions would

more

is n o t , are

accept,

than

later apocalyptic

they

of course,

so

reliable guides for

instance,

would

accept

books or testimonies.

to

that the In

1 I a m grateful for the opportunity to t h a n k T o n y Gelston, not for the h a r d task of filling his shoes at D u r h a m , b u t for a personal kindness long ago. T h e Society for O l d T e s t a m e n t Study is noted for its w a r m t h a n d collegiality, but for a y o u n g student at his first conference a n d still clinging to his supervisor's coat-tails, it proved a little intimidating. T o n y , w h o didn't know m e f r o m A d a m at that time, m a d e a point of talking to m e at meals a n d taking a n interest in what I was doing, a kindness which I have since learned to be quite typical. W o u l d that all fine scholars were such fine h u m a n s as well. 2 T h e book of Ecclesiastes begins with a description of its content as " T h e words of Q o h e l e t h , the son of David, king in J e r u s a l e m " , which is later given f u r t h e r specification by Q o h e l e t h ' s claim to have ruled Israel from Jerusalem. W h a t followsis a first-person speech by this Q o h e l e t h , until in 12:9 a second voice describes Q o h e l e t h a n d his writing in the third person. T h e word ' Q o h e l e t h ' does not seem to be a n a m e , a n d is once used with the definite article (12:8; cf. L X X 7:27), suggesting that it m a y be a title; if so, there m a y be some connection with the root ‫ ק ה ל‬, a n d thereby with ' s u m m o n i n g ' or the 'assembly'. All this is very uncertain, though. 3 G . O g d e n , Qoheleth (Sheffield, 1987), p. 15, is fairly typical: " ' Q o h e l e t h ' . . . is the a d o p t e d n a m e of the a u t h o r of 1 : 2 1 2 : 8 ‫ ־‬. H e is a n Israelite sage, who, according to the Editor's testimony in 1 2 : 9 1 0 ‫ ־‬, stood firmly within the wisdom tradition".

s u c h cases, t h o u g h , t h e a t t r i b u t i o n s a r e usually c h a r a c t e r i s e d as ' p s e u d o n y m o u s ' ; they a r e t a k e n to h a v e t h e s a m e

fly-leaf

f u n c t i o n as gen-

uine attributions, but with the n a m e of the real a u t h o r replaced that of a n o t h e r individual -

by

usually s o m e o n e f a m o u s f r o m the past.

T h i s a p p r o a c h s e e m s to b e i n f o r m e d m o r e b y t h e c o n v e n t i o n s t h e m o d e r n a n d classical w o r l d s t h a n b y a n c i e n t N e a r E a s t e r n tice. T h e

extant materials d o not suggest that authorial

was expected

for most

non-documentary

literature

of

prac-

attribution

in t h e

ancient

world. T h o s e texts, mostly E g y p t i a n , w h i c h d o b e a r attributions generally b e l o n g to particular literary genres in w h i c h

monologues

or

d i a l o g u e s p l a y s o m e c e n t r a l r o l e , a n d t h e a t t r i b u t i o n is o f t h e w o r d s to a speaker, n o t of the b o o k to a writer.4 S o m e e x a m p l e s m a y

help

to clarify the rationale b e h i n d this a t t r i b u t i o n of certain texts within literary cultures which generally preferred

anonymity.

T w o e a r l y i n s t r u c t i o n s set t h e p a t t e r n : a n E g y p t i a n w o r k uted

to P t a h h o t e p ,

and

a Sumerian

one

attributed

to

attrib-

Suruppak."'

A l t h o u g h b o t h w o r k s are a m o n g s t the earliest poetic literature f r o m t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e c u l t u r e s , n e i t h e r is a s o l d a s it c l a i m s t o b e . Instruction

of Ptahhotep

p r e s e n t s itself a s t h e a d v i c e g i v e n b y a

The vizier

o f t h e F i f t h D y n a s t y , w h o l i v e d i n t h e e a r l y 2 4 t h c e n t u r y B . C . E . ; it is u n l i k e l y , h o w e v e r , t o h a v e b e e n w r i t t e n a n y e a r l i e r t h a n t h r e e f o u r c e n t u r i e s a f t e r t h i s v i z i e r l i v e d . Suruppak c o m p o s e d earlier than the 24th century -

or

m a y actually have been t h e A b u S a l a b i k h t e x t is

generally d a t e d to the m i d d l e of the third m i l l e n n i u m -

b u t it p r e -

s e n t s itself a s b e i n g a n t e d i l u v i a n . E v e n w e r e t h e r e a n y r e a s o n t o t a k e the

figure

o f S u r u p p a k a s h i s t o r i c a l , t h e n , it s e e m s c l e a r t h a t

both

texts h a v e b e e n substantially b a c k - d a t e d , a n d that neither attribution is t o t h e r e a l

writer.

R a t h e r t h a n j u s t w r i t e this off as ' p s e u d o n y m i t y ' , t h o u g h , w e m i g h t usefully ask w h y these w o r k s h a v e b e e n a t t r i b u t e d to l o n g - d e a d indiv i d u a l s . F o r Ptahhotep

a n a n s w e r is s u g g e s t e d b y t h e m a t e r i a l

which

4 In other cases, most notably literary letters, the attributions are clearly linked to the documentary form of the texts. 5 We have each work in more than one version. T h e principal edition of Ptahhotep is Z. Zàba, Les Maximes de Ptahhotep (Prague, 1956). There is a valuable new introduction and translation in R.B. Parkinson, The Tate of Sinuhe and Other Ancient Egyptian Poems 1940-1640 B.C. (Oxford, 1997), pp. 246-72. For Suruppak see especially Β. Alster, The Instructions of Suruppak: a Sumerian Proverb Collection (Copenhagen, 1974); there have been some subsequent textual discoveries. For fuller bibliography of these and other ancient instructions discussed below, see the appendix to my Early Israelite Wisdom (Oxford, 1994), pp. 162-89.

frames the about

basic

advice.

A

prologue

begins

P t a h h o t e p , in w h i c h h e a p p r o a c h e s

about

t h e i n f i r m i t y of his old a g e , a n d

his successor.

The

king assents,

and

the work

with

the king with a asks p e r m i s s i o n

urges

his vizier

a

story

complaint

to train

to teach

up "the

s p e e c h o f t h e p a s t " , m a k i n g h i s s t u d e n t a m o d e l f o r all t h e s o n s

of

scribes to e m u l a t e .

in

The

advice which

f o l l o w s , t h e n , is s u p p o s e d

s o m e w a y to be older even than P t a h h o t e p , a n d carries royal approval. The

epilogue

tion

of

this

to the w o r k advice

will

then

begins by stressing that the

make

it

last

for

ever,

and

perfec-

finishes

with

P t a h h o t e p ' s boast that he has prospered, a n d achieved the ideal y e a r s o f life. T h e

v a l u e o f t h e a d v i c e , t h e n , is a s s u r e d

status of Ptahhotep,

who

f o l l o w i n g its p r i n c i p l e s ,

has

and

achieved by

l o n g life a n d

its o w n

age:

it h a s

both high

1 10

by

the

rank

lasted

so

by long

b e c a u s e o f its t r u t h f u l n e s s a n d p e r f e c t i o n . It is l i k e l y t h a t s i m i l a r i d e a s underpin

Suruppak.

ter, w h o s e n a m e legendary flood

In

t h i s t e x t t h e f a t h e r is a m o r e

is b e t t e r - k n o w n

hero, but the son, Ziusudra,

story, w h o

commendation

goes o n

minor

as t h a t of a city t h a n

to achieve

is t h e h e r o o f t h e

immortality.

This

charac-

as t h a t of a Sumerian

is i n i t s e l f a

of the advice, but there m a y h a v e b e e n o t h e r

cations apparent

to the original a u d i e n c e .

a d v i c e is s e t i n a c o n t e x t

and

6

impli-

In both works, then,

associated with

the

individuals w h o

lend

Similar motives m a y h a v e u n d e r l a i n the attribution of o t h e r

early

w e i g h t t o it.

i n s t r u c t i o n s , i n w h i c h b a c k - d a t i n g t o s o m e f a m o u s i n d i v i d u a l is c o m m o n . S o m e t i m e s , h o w e v e r , m o r e specific motives m a y be T h e Instruction

for

discerned.

Merìkare,

f o r i n s t a n c e , is a t t r i b u t e d t o a k i n g o f t h e

Heracleopolitan

Dynasty

in

e n a b l e s it b o t h

to p u r s u e

the

the

First

theme

Intermediate

of kingship

Period,

which

f r o m a royal

per-

spective, a n d to exploit the historical circumstances of the period m a k e i t s p o i n t s ; it m a y a l s o e m p h a s i s e , b y i m p l i c a t i o n , t h e m o r e tied political conditions

of the M i d d l e

r a t h e r d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h a t o f Ptahhotep. vizier w a s i m p o r t a n t , of the

6

advice:

but

although

had

Kingdom.'

This approach

is

In that work, the status of the

little d i r e c t

supposedly

to set-

relevance

intended

for

the

to the

content

training

of

a

L a m b e r t draws attention to a story in Berossus, which has the Hood-hero bury writings lor later recovery, a n d suggests that this text m a y have been associated with such ideas. See YV.G. L a m b e r t , Babylonian Wisdom Literature (Oxford, 1960), p. 93. 7 For the text, see especially W . Helck, Die lehre für König Merikare (Wiesbaden, 1977); there is a translation in Parkinson, (1997), pp. 2 1 2 - 3 4 .

particular individual, for a particular post, P t a h h o t e p ' s w o r d s explicitly a d d r e s s t h e n e e d s o f i n d i v i d u a l s i n a n u m b e r o f d i f f e r e n t s i t u a t i o n s . I n Merikare,

on the other h a n d , the royal status a n d past actions

o f t h e s p e a k e r a r e c r u c i a l t o t h e c o n t e n t . T h i s is a n i m p o r t a n t to t h e

nature

of such

attributions:

they do

not

simply

value of the book, but rather provide a story context, within the w o r d s are to be

clue

inflate

the

which

understood.

S o f a r a s w e c a n tell, t h e v o i c e o f P t a h h o t e p is o n l y o n e o f m a n y w h i c h t h e a u t h o r m i g h t h a v e c h o s e n : his r e q u i r e m e n t m a y h a v e b e e n n o m o r e t h a n a f a m o u s individual w h o lived d u r i n g the g o l d e n

age

o f t h e O l d K i n g d o m . S o m e t i m e s , t h o u g h , t h e s e t t i n g is v e r y s p e c i f i c i n d e e d ; so, for i n s t a n c e , the words

of the

t h e Instruction

assassinated

of Amenemhet

king A m e n e m h e t

T w e l f t h D y n a s t y , a n d is i n t e n d e d

both

is p r e s e n t e d I, f o u n d e r o f

to c o n d e m n

the

as the

attempted

c o u p w h i c h l e d t o his d e a t h , a n d t o l e g i t i m i s e his s u c c e s s o r S e n w o s r e t . 8 T h e attribution a n d setting are not

fixed,

then, but designed to serve

t h e p a r t i c u l a r n e e d s o f t h e w o r k . T h i s is a l s o t r u e o f t e x t s o t h e r t h a n i n s t r u c t i o n s . A n o t h e r T w e l f t h D y n a s t y w o r k , t h e s o - c a l l e d Prophecy Neferti,

again

adopts

the

Old

Kingdom

setting beloved

of

of

Middle

K i n g d o m writers, a n d presents the w o r d s of a lector-priest s u m m o n e d to s p e a k at the F o u r t h D y n a s t y c o u r t of K i n g S n o f r u . T h e s e

words

d e s c r i b e , i n c o n v e n t i o n a l t e r m s , a t i m e o f d i s o r d e r w h i c h is b r o u g h t to an e n d

through

the intervention

of o n e

'Ameny':

the text

thus

u s e s its p a s t s e t t i n g t o m a k e a p o l i t i c a l p o i n t f o r t h e t i m e o f its c o m p o s i t i o n - A m e n y is a p p a r e n d y A m e n e m h e t I. 9 O t h e r E g y p t i a n w o r k s related to Neferti, notably the discourses attributed to K h a k e p e r r e s e n e b , I p u w e r , a n d S a s o b e k , set e x p r e s s i o n s o f p e s s i m i s m in t h e m o u t h s n a m e d individuals. T h e

first

o f t h e s e , Khakeperreseneb,

seems,

of

interest-

ingly, to begin with a rejection of a n c i e n t teaching; n o n a r r a t i v e c o n t e x t is o u t l i n e d , b u t t h e s p e a k e r ' s n a m e is t h e p r e n o m e n o f S e n w o s r e t II, a n d this m a y b e i n t e n d e d to b e a r s o m e significance. T h e o f Ipuwer

is l o s t , b u t t h e s p e a k e r s e e m s t o b e e n g a g e d

in

beginning dialogue

w i t h a k i n g ; S a s o b e k is v e r y f r a g m e n t a r y , b u t b e g i n s w i t h a n a c c o u n t of the speaker's wrongful

8

imprisonment.10

T h e fullest presentation of the text is in W. Helck, Der text der "Lehre Amenemhets I, für seinen Sohn" (Wiesbaden, 1969), but there have been several subsequent finds which have clarified the setting; for translation, see Parkinson (1997), pp. 203-11. 9 W. Helck, Die Prophezeiung des Nft.tj (Wiesbaden, 1970); Parkinson (1997), pp. 131-43. 10 For Khakheperreseneb and Ipuwer, see A.H. Gardiner, The Admonitions of an Egyptian

A t t r i b u t i o n s a r e v e r y m u c h r a r e r in S u m e r i a n m a t e r i a l , a n d to be to legendary or divine

figures."

T a k e n with the Egyptian

tend evi-

dence, though, they confirm the very strong impression

that

early

a t t r i b u t i o n s h a v e little o r n o t h i n g t o d o w i t h t h e a c t u a l

authorship

o f t e x t s : t h e i n d i v i d u a l s t o w h o m a d v i c e o r l a m e n t is a t t r i b u t e d not authors but characters, often connected

to a very specific

are nar-

rative setting. T h e y m a y b e c h o s e n as f a m o u s m e n of the past,

but

t h i s is n o t n e c e s s a r i l y so: t h e c h o i c e o f p r o t a g o n i s t is l i n k e d t o

the

n a t u r e a n d p u r p o s e of e a c h

work.

W h e n later texts use attributions to individuals w h o a r e otherwise u n k n o w n , w e s h o u l d not, t h e r e f o r e , take this as a sign t h a t they h a v e moved

to s o m e

wholly different convention,

in w h i c h

the

attribu-

tions are to the actual authors. T h e imposition of a setting seems to have

imposed

problems

characters may

for s o m e

have been

writers,

perceived

and

the

as restrictive.

use of

famous

It w a s all

very

well t o p l a c e i n s t r u c t i o n o n t h e lips o f kings o r viziers, b u t t h a t w a s n o t the c o n t e x t in w h i c h m o s t r e a d e r s lived. O n e M i d d l e

Kingdom

w r i t e r s e e m s to h a v e b e e n d r i v e n b y these c o n s i d e r a t i o n s to a n o n y m i s e h i s w o r k , b y e n t i t l i n g it s i m p l y

The Instruction by a Man for his Son,

a n d s o t o e m p h a s i s e t h e u n i v e r s a l a p p l i c a b i l i t y o f its a d v i c e . 1 2 I n t h e N e w K i n g d o m , works w e r e regularly attributed to individuals of m o r e ordinary rank -

such as A n y o r A m e n e m o p e

-

whose

experience

w o u l d b e m o r e o n a p a r w i t h t h a t o f m o s t s c r i b e s . T h e r e is n o w a y to p r o v e t h a t these a r e n o t actually the n a m e s of the a u t h o r s , t h e r e a r e s e v e r a l i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t t h e y a r e n o less n a r r a t i v e ters t h a n the protagonists of earlier works. T h e

but

charac-

Instruction of Any,

e x a m p l e , is a c t u a l l y in t h e f o r m o f a d i a l o g u e , w h e r e

the

for

scribe's

s o n r e s p o n d s t o h i s f a t h e r , p o l i t e l y b u t n e g a t i v e l y ; a s i m i l a r c l a s h is f o u n d in a n A k k a d i a n work.13 E v e n g r a n t e d t h e slim possibility

that

Sage, from a Hieratic Papyrus in Leiden (Leipzig, 1909); Parkinson (1997), pp. 144 50, 166-99. T h e fragment of Sasobek (Pap. Ramesseum I A. 17- 19) is in J.W.B. Barns, Five Ramesseum Papyri (Oxford, 1956), pp. 1 1 0 . " As in, for example, the strange Farmer's Instruction, where the farmer is identified as Ninurta. '2‫ י‬An edition of this text is apparently being prepared by Fischer-Elfert; the best source at present is VV. Helck, Die Lehre des Djedefhor und die Lehre eines Vaters an seinen Sohn (Wiesbaden, 1984), but this lacks many new texts. 13 There is, notoriously, no reliable edition ο Γ Any: Ε. Suys, IM Sagesse d'Ani (Rome, 1935) should be used with caution. T h e Akkadian work is known in copies from Ras Shamra, Emar, and Boghazköy, but the nature of its attribution is disputed. Nougayrol, in Ugaritica ν (Paris, 1968), pp. 273-93, reads the names Sube'awilum

scribes might submit their heirs to the humiliation of public

expo-

s u r e - A n y ' s son confesses his o w n inability to l e a r n so m u c h a d v i c e it is d i f f i c u l t t o i m a g i n e t h a t e i t h e r t h e f a t h e r o r s o m e t h i r d

sat d o w n to r e c o r d s u c h c o n v e r s a t i o n s for g e n e r a l c o n s u m p t i o n . most, the scribes are p r o b a b l y comparable

fictionalised

to, say, the t h i r d - p e r s o n

versions of the

-

party At

authors,

c h a r a c t e r of Kinky

Friedman

i n t h e d e t e c t i v e n o v e l s w r i t t e n b y K i n k y F r i e d m a n . It is a t l e a s t a s likely, t h o u g h , t h a t t h e c h a r a c t e r s a r e w h o l l y T h i s s u p p o s i t i o n is g i v e n a d d e d of 'Onchsheshonqy,

fictional.

force by the very late

Instruction

w h i c h is o n c e a g a i n s e t i n t h e p a s t , a n d b e g i n s w i t h

a n extensive, almost certainly

fictional

narrative.14 Interestingly,

w o r k s e e m s t o h a v e b e e n i n f l u e n c e d b y t h e A r a m a i c Ahiqar,

this

a work

w h i c h , i n t h e e a r l i e s t f o r m w e p o s s e s s , is a s i m i l a r m i x t u r e o f t a l e a n d t e a c h i n g . T h e h i s t o r i c a l e x i s t e n c e o f A h i k a r h i m s e l f is o f t e n t a k e n f o r g r a n t e d , o n v e r y l a t e a n d t e n u o u s e v i d e n c e , b u t it is m o s t u n l i k e l y that any such

figure

w a s really responsible for writing the

w h i c h b e a r s his n a m e . period are few a n d

15

teaching

R e l e v a n t M e s o p o t a m i a n texts for this later

f r a g m e n t a r y ; with the exception of the

father-

son dialogue just m e n t i o n e d , there are n o published instructions with t h e i r a t t r i b u t i o n s i n t a c t . It is n o t e w o r t h y , t h o u g h , t h a t o n o n e o f t h e only occasions w h e n w e a r e a l m o s t definitely given the n a m e of a n a c t u a l a u t h o r , i n t h e f a m o u s Babylonian

Theodicy,

t h e n a m e is n o t p r e -

s e n t e d explicitly as a n a t t r i b u t i o n , b u t in t h e f o r m of a n

acrostic.16

In short, then, ancient N e a r Eastern literature does not c o m m o n l y , if e v e r , u s e a u t h o r i a l a t t r i b u t i o n s a s a g u i d e t o t h e a c t u a l

author-

s h i p o f w o r k s . R a t h e r , it is i n c l i n e d t o p r e s e n t c e r t a i n s o r t s o f m a t e r i a l in t h e f o r m o f s p e e c h e s , d e l i v e r e d b y c h a r a c t e r s w h o m a y

play

a role in a b r o a d e r n a r r a t i v e . T h e s e c h a r a c t e r s c a n b e d r a w n

from

and Zurranku for the father and son, but Arnaud does not consider these to be personal names in his Recherches au Pays d'Astata. Emar vi, 4 (Paris, 1987), pp. 377 83. 14 S.R.K. Glanrille, Catalogue of Demotic Papyri in the British Museum, ii. The Instructions of 'Onchsheshonqy (British Museum Papyrus 10508) (London, 1955). There is a translation and valuable study in M. Lichthcim, Late Egyptian Wisdom Literature in the International Context O B O 2 (Freiburg and Göttingen, 1983). 15 For the text, see most conveniently, A. Cowley, Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century B.C. (Oxford, 1923). J . M . Lindenberger's excellent The Aramaic Proverbs of Ahiqar (Baltimore and London, 1983) does not include the narrative section. T h e only reference to a 'historical' Ahiqar is in a Seleucid Period text from Uruk, which has probably been influenced by the literary tradition. 16 See Lambert (1960), pp. 6389‫־‬. Each line within each stanza begins with the same syllable; taken together, these syllables spell out the Akkadian for "I, SagilKinam-ubbib, the incantation priest, am adorant of the god and king".

history

or

times

fictionalised

find,

created

though,

from

whole

versions

is a n y

cloth; just

of the

convention

real authors, c o m p a r a b l e

terms of the m o d e r n

possibly, writers.

they

are

What

do

find,

first-person

of w h i c h

their

under-

it is p e r h a p s e a s i e r t o t h i n k

novel. W h e n

Robert

Graves

wrote

p r e s e n t s his w o r d s as those of his

leading to

" R o b e r t G r a v e s " a t t r i b u t i o n , b u t a r e i n s t e a d like t h e s e c o n d a r y to Claudius.

of pseudonymity

the

attri-

F o r this r e a s o n , t h e c o n c e p t s of ' p e n - n a m e s '

are

not entirely appropriate:

the n a m e s which

are given d o not s t a n d in the place of a u t h o r ' s

in

attribution,

c h a r a c t e r . A n c i e n t a t t r i b u t i o n s a r e r a r e l y if e v e r c o m p a r a b l e

bution

not

of ascribing literary works to

for example, he created a work with a double

the real a u t h o r

some-

we

to m o d e r n western convention. T o

stand the attributions which we

I Claudius,

actual

or we

names.

T h e l i k e l y r e s p o n s e o f t h e o r i g i n a l r e a d e r s h i p is n o t e a s y t o

judge:

a l t h o u g h it is c l e a r t h a t t h e c o n v e n t i o n w a s r e c o g n i s e d , a n c i e n t

works

were sometimes taken to have been c o m p o s e d 1

w h o m they were attributed. ‫ ׳‬W e e r s w e r e less c o n c e r n e d we

are.

In

intention

any

case,

to deceive

with

might speculate that ancient

though,

it s e e m s u n l i k e l y

an

interesting

that

there

than

was

any

readers.

question

comes

writer a n d speaker in to

the

fore:

how

ancient

independent

are these characters f r o m their creators? Obviously, they are at level

simply

mouths

by

ventriloquist the

writers.

that they are no m o r e ers. I n

this respect,

to

read-

the historical facts of the m a t t e r

O n c e w e see a distinction b e t w e e n texts,

by the individuals

puppets,

It

might

than

there

speaking be

a

words

mistake,

placed

though,

in

to

reason

to regard

them

as

their

assume

vehicles for the opinions of those

is n o

one

writ-

different

f r o m a n y o t h e r c h a r a c t e r s i n a n c i e n t n a r r a t i v e . S o it is, f o r i n s t a n c e , t h a t A m e n e m h e t a n d M e r i k a r e ' s f a t h e r b o t h s p e a k as kings, their

words

were

almost

certainly

conversely, the speeches of

which

and

narrative

by

commoners,

The Eloquent Peasant w e r e

p o s e d by a scribe.18 F u r t h e r m o r e , speeches

written

the presentation

offers writers

a r e n o t t h e i r o w n . T h i s is m o s t

an

just

probably

of ideas

opportunity

to

as,

com-

through

air

views

o b v i o u s in d i a l o g u e s ,

where

the a u t h o r m a y espouse radically different views through

17

although

the

words

T h e most valuable evidence here is cjnite confusing: there is a eulogy to authors on Pap. C h e s t e r Beatty IV, but this itself seems to believe that Amenemhet was written by the f a m o u s scribe Khety. 18 For the text, see R.B. Parkinson, The Tale of the Eloquent Peasant (Oxford, 1991).

of different characters -

and

none

of these views n e e d

for example, a manservant

finds

correspond

Dialogue of Pessimism,

to his o w n opinions. In t h e h u m o r o u s B a b y l o n i a n

j u s t i f i c a t i o n s f o r all t h e a b s u r d

c o n t r a d i c t o r y p r o p o s a l s of his d i t h e r i n g m a s t e r , a n d

m o r e s y m p a t h e t i c c h a r a c t e r ; if t h e w r i t e r h a s a s e r i o u s p o i n t , it c o n c e r n s t h e h u m a n

and

is p r o b a b l y

the

though,

ability t o r e a s o n in s u c h c o n t r a d i c t o r y

ways,

a point m a d e by example: neither character actually presents the t h o r ' s o p i n i o n , a n d b o t h a r e the subject of his gentle m o c k e r y . the

fine

Middle

of Life and his Ba,

Kingdom

au-

19

In

Dialogue between a Man Tired c o n v e n i e n t l y a s t h e Lebensmüde,

composition,

usually k n o w n m o r e

the a r g u m e n t s of e a c h c h a r a c t e r for a n d against dying are b o t h

per-

suasive, a n d are voiced, indeed, by separate aspects of the s a m e

per-

sonality.20 H e r e

a g a i n , it s e e m s t h a t t h e w r i t e r is i n f u l l

agreement

w i t h n e i t h e r , b u t is i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e d i a l o g u e b e t w e e n t h e t w o points. T h e

point need

hardly be laboured: characters m a y

view-

express

ideas a n d opinions with which their authors d o not necessarily

agree.

In s o m e works, i n d e e d , t h e r e m a y b e a deliberately satirical

inten-

tion. T h i s Any,

is a n o t o r i o u s l y

hard

issue to j u d g e ;

in

the

Instruction of

for example, the father's speech does seem to be deflated

abruptly

by the son's unexpected

response,

b u t it is n o t

rather

clear

f a r t h e r e a d e r is e x p e c t e d t o s y m p a t h i s e w i t h t h a t r e s p o n s e . A later work, attributed to a n u n n a m e d on

the

other

hand,

how much

"Scribe of the H o u s e of Life",

is a l m o s t c e r t a i n l y

a parody

of older

instructions, with the scribe m a d e to seem p o m p o u s a n d

Egyptian

irrelevant.21

I n I s r a e l i t e l i t e r a t u r e , o f c o u r s e , it h a s b e e n s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e o f J o n a h is p o r t r a y e d i n a s i m i l a r l y s a t i r i c a l w a y , a n d w e h a v e seen

that

the

Babylonian

Dialogue of Pessimism u s e s

figure already

characters

who

are deliberately absurd. W e should be very wary of presuming,

then,

t h a t a n c i e n t w r i t e r s e x p e c t u s t o t a k e all o f t h e i r c h a r a c t e r s This

brings

me

back

to

Qoheleth,

and

the

seriously.

assumption

that

the

n a m e o r t i t l e u s e d t o d e s c r i b e t h e s p e a k e r i n t h i s w o r k is a c t u a l l y

a

n a m e o r title a d o p t e d b y t h e w r i t e r h i m s e l f . I n t h e light o f e v i d e n c e f r o m e l s e w h e r e i n t h e a n c i e n t w o r l d , it s h o u l d b e o b v i o u s t h a t assumption

19

needs m o r e justification than

it u s u a l l y r e c e i v e s .

this

Setting

L a m b e r t (1960), p p . 1 3 9 - 4 9 . T e x t in R . O . Faulkner, " T h e M a n w h o was T i r e d of Life", JEA 42 (1956), p p . 2 1 - 4 0 ; translation: Parkinson (1997), pp. 1 5 1 - 6 5 . 21 R.J. Williams, " S o m e F r a g m e n t a r y D e m o t i c W i s d o m T e x t s " , in J . H . J o h n s o n a n d E.F. Weite (eds.), Studies in Honor of George R. Hughes (Chicago, 1976), pp. 2 6 3 - 7 1 , esp. p p . 270f. 20

consideration of the H e b r e w p r o p h e t i c corpus aside for the

moment

a n d t h e r e is n o g o o d r e a s o n t o a s s o c i a t e E c c l e s i a s t e s w i t h t h a t literature

we h a v e very few a n c i e n t e x a m p l e s of attribution

to

an

a c t u a l a u t h o r , a n d t h e b a l a n c e o f p r o b a b i l i t y is s t r o n g l y o n t h e s i d e of considering Q o h e l e t h to be a creation

of the real writer.

Some

c o m m e n t a t o r s , i n d e e d , h a v e rightly t a k e n this a p p r o a c h , a n d M i c h a e l Fox, m o s t recently, refers to Q o h e l e t h as a ' p e r s o n a ' of the

author,

w h o s p e a k s i n h i s o w n v o i c e i n t h e e p i l o g u e o f c h a p t e r 12, b u t is e s s e n t i a l l y i n a g r e e m e n t w i t h h i s This

seems

a sensible

creation.

conclusion,

who

22

especially

in t h e light

a c t u a l a t t r i b u t i o n . F e w s c h o l a r s , if a n y , w o u l d a c c e p t t h a t

of

w r o t e t h i s b o o k , a n d y e t t h i s a p p e a r s t o b e t h e c l a i m m a d e in first

t w o c h a p t e r s , albeit r a t h e r coyly.

s o n a t all t o s a y t h a t t h e a u t h o r

23

T h e r e seems no good

really was k n o w n

as

the

Solomon the rea-

'Qoheleth',

b u t w a s l y i n g a b o u t t h e S o l o m o n bit, e s p e c i a l l y w h e n , w h a t e v e r else it m a y h a v e b e e n , ' Q o h e l e t h ' w a s a l m o s t c e r t a i n l y n o t t h e name.

I suspect,

Qoheleth

though,

that

Fox

does

not

go

writer's

far enough,

m a y be something quite different from a mere

that

disguise,

a n d t h a t this b o o k m a y b e o n e in w h i c h t h e a u t h o r a n d his acter stand some way Perhaps the most

char-

apart. o b v i o u s h i n t o f t h i s is i n t h e e p i l o g u e t o

the

b o o k , w h i c h c o m m e n t s o n Q o h e l e t h a n d his w o r k : B e y o n d the fact t h a t h e w a s a wise m a n , Q o h e l e t h also t a u g h t knowle d g e to t h e p e o p l e , a n d h e m e a s u r e d , e x p l o r e d a n d a r r a n g e d m a n y sayings. Q o h e l e t h s o u g h t to find w o r d s to take delight in, a n d u p r i g h t l y w r o t e w o r d s of t r u t h . T h e w o r d s of t h e wise a r e like g o a d s , a n d like nails set (in t h e m ) a r e t h e sayings in t h e collections o f f e r e d by e a c h single s h e p h e r d . B e y o n d these things, m y son, b e w a r e : the m a k i n g of b o o k s is a c o n s t a n t process - t h e r e is n o e n d (to it) - b u t c o n s t a n t s t u d y w e a r s out flesh. (12:9 12) I h a v e t a k e n a few slight liberties w i t h t h e t r a n s l a t i o n h e r e ; in ticular, the m a k i n g of books a n d

12 a r e

things

d o n e ' m u c h ' r a t h e r t h a n ' c o n s t a n d y ' , b u t t h a t is d i f f i c u l t t o

render

in English.

t h e s t u d y in verse

par-

In a n y case, the sense seems clearer t h a n

some

com-

m e n t a t o r s suggest: after a c o m p l i m e n t a r y start, albeit o n e that focuses o n Q o h e l e t h ' s style m o r e 22

than

his c o n t e n t , t h e e p i l o g u e m o v e s

on

M.V. Fox, Qohelet and his Contradictions (Sheffield, 1989). Apart from Rehoboam, not renowned for his wisdom, Solomon is the only "son of David" to have ruled Israel from Jerusalem in the biblical tradition (cf. 1:1,12). 23

t o a r a t h e r s t r a n g e s i m i l e . T h e " w o r d s o f t h e w i s e " is a t e r m

used

to d e s c r i b e t w o of t h e collections of sayings in t h e B o o k of P r o v e r b s , 2 4 and

h e r e it s e e m s s i m i l a r l y

to indicate such

sayings, w h i c h are c o m p a r e d

written

collections

to the goads or prods used by

of

shep-

h e r d s . C o n t i n u i n g t h i s s i m i l e , a l t h o u g h p e r h a p s a little c l u m s i l y ,

the

w r i t e r f u r t h e r suggests t h a t e a c h s a y i n g in e a c h collection b y

each

w i s e m a n is like e a c h n a i l i n t h e g o a d u s e d b y e a c h s h e p h e r d .

The

p o i n t o f t h e s i m i l e is r e a c h e d i n t h e final v e r s e : s u c h c o l l e c t i o n s m u l t i p l y e n d l e s s l y , b u t t o k e e p s t u d y i n g t h e m is t o w e a r o u t o n e ' s

flesh

e v e r m o r e f r o m t h e l a s h i n g s o f t h e s e g o a d s . It m i g h t j u s t b e

possi-

b l e t o t a k e " b e y o n d t h e s e t h i n g s " , a t t h e s t a r t o f v e r s e 12, t o

mean

that o n e s h o u l d restrict oneself to the advice of Q o h e l e t h (the express i o n h a s n o e x a c t p a r a l l e l , a n d its m e a n i n g is n o t e n t i r e l y t h a t i n itself, t h o u g h ,

certain);

h a r d l y e x c l u d e s his advice f r o m t h e

general

assertion. It is n o t e a s y t o i m a g i n e m a n y w r i t e r s c h o o s i n g t h i s b l u r b f o r t h e i r book:

it c o u l d

fill

masochistic, with

no

reader,

except,

perhaps,

a n y strong desire to r e a d

the

most

morally

works by "wise

men"

like Q o h e l e t h . I t s p r a i s e s o f t h a t a u t h o r r i n g a little h o l l o w ,

more-

o v e r . F o r all its m a n y

fine

q u a l i t i e s , this w o r k c a n h a v e left f e w in

its a u d i e n c e w i t h a n y c o n v i c t i o n t h a t t h e y h a v e b e e n t a u g h t edge

or received

moral

guidance

in a n y c o n v e n t i o n a l

way.

knowlOn

a

m o r e t e c h n i c a l l e v e l , f u r t h e r m o r e , t h e s t y l e o f t h e w o r k is n o t , o v e r all, t h a t o f a s a y i n g s - c o l l e c t i o n : t h i s is n o t a w o r k c r e a t e d b y one

anthologising

described

and

arranging

separate

some-

sayings, as Q o h e l e t h

d o i n g i n v e r s e 9 . If a s e p a r a t e e p i l o g i s t a d d e d

is

these

re-

m a r k s , it is a l m o s t h a r d t o b e l i e v e t h a t h e h a d r e a d t h e b o o k ; if t h e w r i t e r h i m s e l f c o m p o s e d t h e m , t h e n t h e r e is a w h i f f o f i r o n y i n

the

a i r . I n n e i t h e r c a s e is it e a s y t o t a k e t h i s e p i l o g u e a s a s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d recommendation. T u r n i n g t o t h e m o n o l o g u e itself, w e find a Q o h e l e t h w h o s e acter and whose

inclinations

are very m u c h

explorations seemingly

lead

him

those

char-

of the wise m a n ,

into a contradiction

but

o f all

that such w i s d o m stands for. T h e m o n o l o g u e b e g i n s , i n 1:2, w i t h t h e m o t t o w h i c h s u m s u p s o m a n y o f Q o h e l e t h ' s l a t e r e n q u i r i e s : e v e r y t h i n g is ‫ ה ב ל‬. T h i s t e r m is difficult, a n d

seems

to m e a n

t a k e its b a s i c i m p l i c a t i o n 24

See Prov. 22:17; 24:23.

d i f f e r e n t t h i n g s in d i f f e r e n t places;

to be, t h o u g h , t h a t things a r e as

I

fleeting

a n d b e y o n d o n e ' s g r a s p o r i n f l u e n c e as a b r e a t h of w i n d . T h e is f o l l o w e d b y t h e c e n t r a l q u e s t i o n w h i c h answer:

"what

can

humans

Qoheleth

accomplish?",

and

that

sets h i m s e l f question

p o e m w h i c h s e e m s to d e n y the possibility of a n y h u m a n the world

is

fixed,

and

impervious

to innovation.

has seen

"everything done

under

After this

by

a

intro-

Solomon,

the sun", a n d w h o

uses

w i s d o m in an a t t e m p t to u n d e r s t a n d the world, but w h o again n o w a y to effect c h a n g e in that world. I n

to

influence:

d u c t o r y material, Q o h e l e t h plays the role of the wise king who

motto

his sees

1:18, h e g o e s so f a r as to

suggest that w i s d o m a n d knowledge actually increase frustration

and

despair. These

ideas are picked u p a n d enlarged

u p o n in m u c h

of w h a t

follows. T h e s e c o n d c h a p t e r begins with Q o h e l e t h ' s s u p p o s e d

mem-

o i r o f h i s t i m e a s k i n g , w h i c h is a g a i n a p o r t r a i t o f f u t i l i t y , a s n o t h i n g h e d o e s h a s a n y l a s t i n g e f f e c t . It is n o t w i t h o u t its c o m i c m o m e n t s , t h o u g h , as h e a s s u r e s t h e r e a d e r t h a t h e r e t a i n e d his w i s d o m

while

e x p e r i m e n t i n g w i t h d r u n k e n n e s s ( " A l l i n t h e c a u s e o f s c i e n c e . . ."), a n d it e n d s w i t h h i s i m p o r t a n t c o n c l u s i o n t h a t t h e p r o f i t m a y

have

b e e n i n t h e p l e a s u r e , n o t t h e c o n s e q u e n c e . T h i s is f o l l o w e d b y assertion though

in c h a p t e r the eternal

3 that workings

e v e r y t h i n g will h a p p e n of G o d

are

concealed

in time, from

B e c a u s e e v e r y t h i n g will h a p p e n , Q o h e l e t h a r g u e s r a t h e r ingly, t h e r e will b e a d i v i n e j u d g e m e n t the wicked, but for the m o m e n t

God

the even

humans.

unconvinc-

to sort the righteous

from

has a reason to conceal

this

f r o m h u m a n s : h e is t e s t i n g t h e m b y s h o w i n g n o d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n . F r o m this p o i n t

on, the work

v o i c e is u n m i s t a k a b l y

shows

still t h a t

much

less c o h e r e n c e ,

of Q o h e l e t h .

although

After an

initial

the com-

plaint a b o u t oppression, a n d the lack of c o m f o r t e r s for the oppressed, m o s t of c h a p t e r 4 seems c o n c e r n e d with the t h e m e of co-operation, and

chapter

5 with,

firstly,

the need

to avoid a n n o y i n g

God,

and

t h e n t h e futility of w e a l t h . T h i s leads to a f u r t h e r discussion of t h e n e e d to enjoy w h a t o n e has, a n d

to look n o further, before

chap-

t e r 6 c l i m a x e s w i t h a n e x t r a o r d i n a r i l y r a d i c a l set o f s t a t e m e n t s : W h a t e v e r exists h a s a l r e a d y b e e n called b y its n a m e , w h a t t h e h u m a n is: h e c a n n o t p l a y j u d g e w i t h w h a t himself. 2 5 As w o r d s multiply, t h e y m a k e m o r e v a n i t y , is t h a t for t h e h u m a n ? F o r w h o k n o w s w h a t is best

2s

a n d it is k n o w n is s t r o n g e r t h a n and what good for t h a t h u m a n

T h e sense of ‫ ל ד י ן עש‬is uncertain, but I take the verb to mean something closer to its normal sense than 'strive' or 'contend'.

a s h e lives o u t t h e n u m b e r e d d a y s o f his v a i n life a n d s p e n d s like a s h a d o w ; w h o u n d e r the sun?

26

c a n tell t h a t h u m a n

w h a t will e x i s t a f t e r

to be saying. W i s d o m

fundamentally concerned with teaching a n d acquiring the

wisdom

is a n

impossible

task. T h e

is r e a l l y

book

of J o b

voices similar c o n c e r n s , p e r h a p s , b u t J o b does n o t p o s e as a n wise

is

knowledge

n e c e s s a r y t o s u r v i v e a n d p r o s p e r in life. If s u c h k n o w l e d g e then

him

(6:10-12)

T h e s e are strange things for a wise m a n

unattainable,

them

expert

man.

T h e n e x t c h a p t e r s e e m s to drive the p o i n t h o m e , with a series often mystifying statements. S o m e of these are conventional

enough,

b u t t h e r e is a b i t t e r e d g e t o t h e s e r i e s , a n d p e r h a p s a c e r t a i n cism, n o t least w h e n

Qoheleth

declares that " W i s d o m

of

cyni-

is g o o d

with

a n i n h e r i t a n c e " (7:11). H e e n d s w i t h a q u e s t i o n t h a t e c h o e s t h e

ear-

lier 1:15, b u t n o w s e e m s t o a s c r i b e t h e w o r l d ' s evils d i r e c t l y to d i v i n e action: C o n s i d e r the w o r k of G o d : w h o c a n straighten o u t w h a t he has m a d e c r o o k e d ? (7:13) Although 7 and at

there

are

r e f e r e n c e s t o it a t v a r i o u s p o i n t s i n

8, t h e failure of w i s d o m

the

end

of

chapter

8

and

chapters

is o n l y f i r s t a c k n o w l e d g e d

explicidy

the

9,

beginning

of

chapter

when

Q o h e l e t h denies the validity of the wise m a n ' s claims to k n o w is d o n e

under

cern what to

stress

certain,

the sun",

and

will o r will n o t p l e a s e G o d .

the and

importance skill is n o

"what

asserts the inability of h u m a n s

of pleasure, guarantee

This drives h i m in

a world

of success.

to

once

where

Chapter

dis-

again

nothing 10

launches

i n t o a s e r i e s o f s a y i n g s w h i c h is, if a n y t h i n g , e v e n s t r a n g e r t h a n previous

series in c h a p t e r

7. T h e

first

saying suggests

is

that

the

wisdom

c a n b e o v e r w h e l m e d b y e v e n a little folly, a n d t h e t h i r d s a y i n g u n d e r mines make

the second

q u i t e literally. V e r s e s

the curious claims that, for example,

fall i n t o it", o r statements the

b y t a k i n g its i m a g e r y

end

obvious:

"He

which

of the even

who

are

series, the

quarries

hardly the

babbling

sayings

" H e w h o digs a pit

r o c k s will b e

universal

truths.

seem

fool m i g h t

8-10

to

work

injured

by

Conversely,

become

quite

will

them", towards absurdly

out, for instance,

that

" i n t h e p l a c e w h e r e t h e t r e e f a l l s , t h e r e it w i l l l i e " . O n c e

more,

s t i n g o f t h e s e r i e s is i n i t s t a i l , w h e n

that

26

Qoheleth

observes

T h e use of ‫ א ט ר‬here is difficult, but the general sense clear.

the

those

w h o b u s y t h e m s e l v e s w a t c h i n g f o r t h e r i g h t w e a t h e r will n e v e r

finish

t h e i r w o r k , a n d s h o u l d s i m p l y g e t o n w i t h it. T h i s is a p p a r e n t l y

yet

a n o t h e r a t t a c k o n w i s d o m a n d its e f f i c a c y . Although

we

have

skipped

rather

rapidly

through

this

difficult

m a t e r i a l , it s h o u l d b e a p p a r e n t t h a t t h e r e r u n s t h r o u g h t h i s

mono-

logue a strong resistance to a n y claims that the world can be

under-

stood and

changed, or that

the best w a y

to act can be k n o w n

or

taught. Qoheleth's conclusion, that one should enjoy what one a n d a c c e p t o n e ' s l o t is v e r y f a r f r o m t h e b e l i e f s o f m o s t and

sentence

literature, such

as t h a t f o u n d in

can

instructional

Proverbs.

I t is v e r y

difficult i n d e e d , m o r e i m m e d i a t e l y , to reconcile s u c h ideas with p o r t r a y a l o f t h e c h a r a c t e r i n t h e e p i l o g u e : j u s t w h a t is it t h a t

the

Qoheleth

w o u l d have taught to the people, a n d h o w m u c h of a painful

goad

is t h e a d v i c e t o e n j o y o n e s e l f ? F o r all t h a t h e p a i n t s h i m s e l f i n

tra-

d i t i o n a l c o l o u r s , Q o h e l e t h is a l o n g w a y f r o m t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l

wise

man

of c h a p t e r

12.

I h a v e d e s c r i b e d Q o h e l e t h ' s m e s s a g e a s t h o u g h it w e r e b u t it is n o t . T h e

problem

lies n o t s o m u c h

consistent,

in t h e d i r e c t

contra-

dictions or s u d d e n expressions of piety, which have swallowed

much

scholarly

ink over the years, but

cohe-

siveness.

How

do we explain,

more

in a g e n e r a l

lack of

for instance, the s u d d e n

switches

of

form or theme, a n d the admixtures of conventional a n d deeply unconventional sayings? W h y , w h e n

it c o m e s d o w n

t o it, d o e s

Qoheleth

n o t simply say w h a t he m e a n s to say? T h e r e a r e doubtless

various

factors at w o r k here; these m a y vary f r o m o u r inability to catch

all

t h e n u a n c e s t h r o u g h t o s o m e s e c o n d a r y a d d i t i o n s . It s e e m s v e r y p o s sible, t h o u g h ,

that the characterisation

of Q o h e l e t h

has had

some

p a r t t o p l a y . S o f a r w e h a v e l o o k e d a t t h e m e s s a g e ; let u s t u r n b r i e f l y to the

man.

First o f all, t h e r e ' s t h a t n a m e . W h e n ated

Qoheleth,

he

could

have

given

the writer of this b o o k

him

obviously, he could simply have called h i m

almost

any

ere-

name.

Most

S o l o m o n , since he

has

a n y w a y t o p l a y t h e r o l e o f S o l o m o n i n t h e first t w o c h a p t e r s .

Instead

he used a term which was apparently incomprehensible

readers

within a relatively short time: o u r

to

Septuagint version of the

w i t h its s t a b a t a t r a n s l a t i o n , is a d m i t t e d l y

late, b u t n o b o d y

t o h a v e h a d a n y b e t t e r i d e a s . If t h i s t e r m is a t i t l e , a s t h e

book, seems

sporadic

use of a definite article m i g h t suggest, t h e n w e m i g h t r e a s o n a b l y ask w h y s u c h a title w a s u s e d i n p l a c e o f a n a m e .

Whatever

s o n , it is a s t r a n g e a t t r i b u t i o n , m a d e all t h e s t r a n g e r b y

the

rea-

Qoheleth's

identification with Solomon. H o w e v e r used ancient readers were fictional

a t t r i b u t i o n s , t h e r e is n o r e a s o n t o t h i n k t h a t t h e y

characters intended

to c h a n g e

identity.

to be a n a m e

Since

Qoheleth

is n o t

to

expected

apparently

for S o l o m o n , the a u t h o r seems to be

pre-

s e n t i n g us w i t h a c h a r a c t e r w h o o p e n l y disguises h i m s e l f as a n o t h e r c h a r a c t e r . P e r h a p s , m o r e precisely, h e s h o w s us a w i s d o m writer, as d e s c r i b e d in t h e e p i l o g u e , a d o p t i n g t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l ,

fictional

guise

o f S o l o m o n . O n e c o n s e q u e n c e , o f c o u r s e , is t h a t t h e r e a d e r

knows

Q o h e l e t h ' s a c c o u n t o f h i s k i n g s h i p t o b e u n t r u e : it is a l m o s t

explic-

itly a

device.

O n e i m p o r t a n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f Q o h e l e t h ' s m o n o l o g u e is its r a t h e r autobiographical character. Even after the royal 'memoir',

Qoheleth

p o i n t s c o n s t a n t l y to his o w n e x p e r i e n c e as t h e basis f o r his m e s s a g e , claiming to have 'seen' s o m e t h i n g on m o r e t h a n 20 occasions.2' is a little c u r i o u s . A f e w d i d a c t i c c o m p o s i t i o n s i n t h e a n c i e n t

This world

d o rely heavily a n d explicitly o n p e r s o n a l o b s e r v a t i o n or e x p e r i e n c e :

Meúkare

and

Amenemhet a r e

o b v i o u s e x a m p l e s . It is m u c h m o r e

com-

m o n , t h o u g h , f o r s u c h c l a i m s t o r e m a i n i m p l i c i t . F o r all t h a t ,

Amenemope

say,

is s u p p o s e d t o s u m u p t h e l i f e - e x p e r i e n c e o f its p r o t a g o -

n i s t , t h e a d v i c e is n o t d i r e c t l y p r e s e n t e d a s c o n c l u s i o n b a s e d o n o b s e r v a t i o n . Q o h e l e t h talks a b o u t h i m s e l f so m u c h t h a t his w o r k

overall,

and

flavour

n o t j u s t in the

first

two chapters, almost takes o n the

o f a m e m o i r . O n e w r i t e r h a s b e e n l e d t o c o m p a r e it t o t h e A k k a d i a n genre of

fictional

autobiography.28

It is n o t o n l y t h e r o y a l a s p e c t o f t h i s r e m e m b e r i n g w h i c h s e e m a little s u s p i c i o u s t o t h e r e a d e r : s o m e o f t h e c l a i m s a r e extravagant

indeed.

E v e n if Q o h e l e t h

must very

might conceivably mean,

4:1, t h a t h e h a s s e e n e v e r y t y p e of o p p r e s s i o n in t h e w o r l d ,

in

rather

t h a n e v e r y i n c i d e n t o f it, h e c l e a r l y m e a n s i n 4 : 1 5 t h a t h e s a w e v e r y p e r s o n alive, w h i l e h e claims to h a v e seen e v e r y t h i n g in, for instance, 1:14 a n d 7:15. D e s p i t e this w e a l t h , p e r h a p s glut, of e x p e r i e n c e , w h e n Q o h e l e t h cites a c t u a l i n c i d e n t s , h e d o e s so in t h e v a g u e s t of t e r m s , w i t h s h o r t a n d o f t e n c o n f u s i n g s t o r i e s , w h i c h c a r r y little

conviction

a s e y e - w i t n e s s e v i d e n c e (e.g. 5 : 1 2 f f . ; 8 : 1 0 ; 9 : 1 3 f f . ) . N o n e o f t h i s r e s e m bles the detailed testimony οï 27

Menkare,

or even the

first-person

para-

See 1:14; 2:13,24; 3:10,16,22; 4:1,4,7,15; 5:12(ET 13), 17(ET 18); 6:1; 7:15, 8:9,10,17; 9:11,13; 10:5,7. In a few of these cases, Qoheleth is apparently expressing a conclusion rather than an observation. 28 T . Longman, Fictional Akkadian Autobiography: A Generic and Comparative Study. (Winona Lake, 1991).

ble of Prov. 2 4 : 3 0 3 4 ‫ ־‬. Q o h e l e t h ' s ideas m a y b e b a s e d u p o n his p e r sonal experience, b u t that e x p e r i e n c e lacks credibility

throughout.

In the e n d , we seem to be dealing with a b o o k w h e r e the

author

has created a wise m a n in w h o m the conventional characteristics

of

didactic writers are emphasised a n d exaggerated, p e r h a p s almost

to

t h e p o i n t of satire; this c h a r a c t e r ' s s p e e c h

of

is f i l l e d w i t h

the sort

p o e t i c a n d v e r b a l g y m n a s t i c s in w h i c h a n c i e n t w r i t e r s so o f t e n

took

g r e a t p r i d e , b u t is m o r e t h a n a l i t t l e r a m b l i n g a n d i n c o n s i s t e n t . speaker's

principal

conclusions

seem

to

be

that

one

a n t a g o n i s i n g G o d , b u t a c c e p t t h a t H i s w o r l d is i m p e r v i o u s t o understanding;

human

activity

is i n e f f e c t u a l , a n d

avoid human

sometimes

while w i s d o m offers n o real insight, but m e r e l y a painful

fear God,

act

in

moderation,

and

enjoy what

we

do;

futile,

awareness

o f its o w n l i m i t a t i o n s . U l t i m a t e l y , Q o h e l e t h s u g g e s t s t h a t w e

very m o d e l of a wise m a n , he d e n o u n c e s w i s d o m

The

should

should

though

the

a n d its c l a i m s

to

u n d e r s t a n d i n g . In 8:17, i n d e e d , w h e n h e denies the wise m a n ' s claim t o k n o w l e d g e , Q o h e l e t h c o n d e m n s all t h a t h e s t a n d s f o r h i m s e l f .

We

m i g h t say t h a t t h e w r i t e r uses this c h a r a c t e r to e m b o d y his m e s s a g e : he

creates

a

explicitly a n d

wise

man

through

to

question

parody.

the

On

claims

of wise

examination,

then,

Ecclesiastes s e e m s n o t so m u c h a n e x c e p t i o n to a n c i e n t

men,

both

the book

of

conventions,

as a r a t h e r clever use of t h e m . At t h e v e r y least, t h e b o o k gives us n o g o o d r e a s o n t o b e l i e v e t h a t Q o h e l e t h w a s its r e a l a u t h o r , a n d vides m a n y grounds for supposing that he was

pro-

not.

A s a s o u r c e f o r ' r e a l ' a u t h o r i a l a t t r i b u t i o n s in N e a r E a s t e r n ature, the corpus of J e w i s h

prophetic

liter-

literature seems, on the

face

o f it, t o o f f e r s t r o n g p o s s i b i l i t i e s . M o s t s c h o l a r s a c c e p t , h o w e v e r ,

that

t h e r e is a d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e a c t u a l c o m p o s e r s o f t h e books a n d the prophets to w h o m traditional

view envisages

prophetic

they are attributed. Although

a process of collection

and

the

redaction

by

t h e s e c o m p o s e r s , r a t h e r t h a n w h o l l y c r e a t i v e a u t h o r s h i p , w e m a y still describe,

say,

the

book

of A m o s

as

a

book

about

Amos

by

an

u n k n o w n writer, r a t h e r t h a n the p r o d u c t of the p r o p h e t himself.

In

such cases as Isaiah a n d Z e c h a r i a h , i n d e e d , w e m a y r e a s o n a b l y

won-

der

have

how

much

of 'their'

books

the

original

prophets

would

recognised. T h i s s e p a r a t i o n b e t w e e n b o o k a n d p r o p h e t raises difficult questions, of course, a b o u t extent

to w h i c h

the historicity of the accounts,

they are representative. W i t h

little o r n o

tion a b o u t their sources a n d motives, w e c a n n o t

and

the

informa-

know h o w far

the

c r e a t o r s of t h e b o o k s selected a n d a d a p t e d t h e m a t e r i a l s to suit t h e i r

particular was

a

viewpoints.

prophet

more

than

which

the

prophetic From

So,

when

of d o o m ,

for

a

commentator

instance,

he

is,

claims

that

technically,

asserting

the evidence warrants: w e can speak only of the w a y prophets

are

presented

to

us

by

the

of ancient

convention,

composers

the

perspective

must have posed a problem.

representing

cated.

of

in the

books. prophetic

literature

Its l o n g p o e t i c s p e e c h e s w e r e , b y

d e n t or design, perfectly suited to long-established literary but

Amos

For

the

the

delivery

author

of those

of Ecclesiastes,

speeches say,

or

was

more

of J o b ,

acci-

tradition, compli-

each

speech

c o u l d b e attr ib u te d to a single a p p r o p r i a t e c h a r a c t e r . In the

prophetic

literature,

but

however,

the

speeches

were

the words

ken by the prophet, whose identity presumably

of G o d ,

assured the

spo-

authen-

deity of his s p e e c h . T h e p r o p h e t c o u l d , m o r e o v e r , s p e a k in his

own

right,

with

so t h a t t h e s a m e c h a r a c t e r w a s , in effect, t w o c h a r a c t e r s

t w o v o i c e s . T h i s w a s p o t e n t i a l l y c o n f u s i n g , e s p e c i a l l y if t h e was

to be

problem

portrayed

was

interacting

achieved

with

God.

Some

b y explicit attribution,

prophet

resolution

making

G o d s p e e c h e s w i t h i n t h e f r a m i n g s p e e c h of t h e p r o p h e t . S o in for

example,

the

book

as

a

whole

is d e s c r i b e d

as

of

the words

the

"words

direct

attrimore

this

the

book

of H o s e a

or

other

of are

butions. W h e r e such devices are not used, matters can b e c o m e confusing, and

formulae

of

Amos,

A m o s " , a n d b e g i n s " A n d h e s a i d . . . " ( 1 : 1 f.). T h e w o r d s o f G o d thereafter qualified using messenger

the

presents particular

difficulties in

respect.

These

difficulties a r e

essentially

confined to the

first

three

chap-

ters, after w h i c h t h e p r o p h e t speaks solely as a m o u t h p i e c e for

God.

The

came

to

book

Hosea"

i t s e l f is p r e s e n t e d

as

(1:1), r a t h e r

as the w o r d s

than

"the word

of Y H W H of Hosea,

which and

describes

G o d s p e a k i n g 'with' o r ' t h r o u g h ' t h e p r o p h e t , 2 9 e m p h a s i s i n g his as s p o k e s m a n

and

agent,

rather

than

as speaker.

The

p r o p h e t a n d G o d a r e strongly i n t e r t w i n e d , t h o u g h , in c h a p t e r s 2. A t

command,

the prophet

takes a w o m a n ,

and

of

1 and

has

three

c h i l d r e n b y her. T h e n a t u r e of this w o m a n h a s b e e n discussed

down

29

God's

role

identities

A case can be m a d e for u n d e r s t a n d i n g ‫ ב‬to m e a n 'to' h e r e (cf., e.g., A.A. M a c i n t o s h , Hosea ( E d i n b u r g h , 1997), p. 7), as in, for instance, N u m . 12:8 a n d Z e c h . 1:9, b u t it m a y equally have its c o m m o n sense of agency. T h e sense is p r o b a b l y closer to "conversed w i t h " t h a n "spoke to", a n d ‫ א ל‬is used in the s a m e verse to imply direct address.

t h e years, b u t w e c a n really say n o m o r e t h a n t h a t she a n d h e r children

are apparently

associated with promiscuity.

Each

of the

chil-

d r e n is g i v e n a s y m b o l i c n a m e , a t G o d ' s c o m m a n d , a n d t h e s y m b o l i s m o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p a n d o f t h e n a m e s is e x p l a i n e d The

relationship

between

Hosea

and

the

individually.

woman

is

explicitly

i n t e n d e d to symbolise or represent the relationship between G o d

and

I s r a e l , w h o h a s f o r s a k e n h i m f o r p r o m i s c u i t y . T h i s is p r o b a b l y t o b e understood woman

as a n

just as

'instant' symbol:

God

is t i e d

to

H o s e a is t i e d t o a

a promiscuous

p r o m i s c u i t y c o n t i n u e d , t h e r e is n o m e n t i o n account,

and,

apart

from

her

bearing

actions go unremarked.

The

explicitly

paternity

Hosea's.

The

first

people.

If

Gomer's

o f it i n t h e r e s t o f

of children,

her

of these children, of the

promiscuous

others

subsequent

incidentally,

is u n s p e c i f i e d ,

t h e r e is n o r e a s o n t o b e l i e v e t h a t t h e y h a d o t h e r f a t h e r s . T h e of the

children

are

similarly

qualified by

the expectation

names.

chapter

The

symbolically,

does

then, but

instant

symbols,

of a later c h a n g e

not

portray

a

the

although to m o r e

situation

a string of single, symbolic

is but

names

they

are

acceptable

which

develops

actions.

In

the

initial r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h G o m e r , a n d in t h e n a m i n g of " N o t m y

peo-

pie", H o s e a plays the role of G o d . In the divine speech w h i c h

fol-

lows the account,

though,

God

plays Hosea, apparently

addressing

t h e w o m a n ' s c h i l d r e n . N o w t h e w o m a n is a c t i v e l y p r o m i s c u o u s ,

and

t h e c h i l d r e n a r e t o r e m o n s t r a t e w i t h !1er l e s t s h e a n d t h e y b e

pun-

ished.

It is e m p h a s i s e d

here: except refrains from 23 (ET

13,

When

that

God,

not

for a single o c c u r r e n c e the

"says Y H W H "

the prophet,

in

is t h e

11:11, the b o o k

expressions

used

in

speaker

elsewhere

2:15,18,

w e get to c h a p t e r

that of the p r o p h e t

3, t h e p e r s p e c t i v e c h a n g e s a b r u p t l y ,

himself. T h e

first

chapter was presented

narrator's voice, the second by God's, a n d n o w the p r o p h e t addresses the r e a d e r in the

first

himself

h e is t o l d t o l o v e a n a d u l t e r o u s w o m a n , j u s t a s G o d l o v e s for the action

Now

adulterhere,

unusually speaks of himself in the third p e r s o n .

it i m p r o b a b l e

that

either

is a

later

insertion.

More

preserved

by

the

book's

author.

This

opinion,

and

impor-

t a n t l y , it m i l i t a t e s a g a i n s t t h e v i e w t h a t c h a p t e r 3 is a s e p a r a t e iniscence,

as

Along

with the w o r d ‫ ע ו ד‬, 'again', this b i n d s t h e t w o a c c o u n t s together, makes

a

p e r s o n . T h e narrative of c h a p t e r 1

ous Israel. Interestingly, in the e x p l a n a t i o n 1:2, G o d

to

by

is p i c k e d u p a s H o s e a d e s c r i b e s h o w G o d a g a i n s p e a k s t o h i m .

in

and

16, 2 1 ) .

rem-

common

a m o n g c o m m e n t a t o r s , 3 0 s e e m s t o r e s t o n little m o r e that

first-person

speech must be more authentic -

than the

h a r d t o s u s t a i n e v e n w i t h i n t h e b i b l i c a l l i t e r a t u r e , let a l o n e a long history of

fictional

idea

a view which

is

against

a u t o b i o g r a p h y in the ancient N e a r

East.

If t h e c o m p o s e r of t h e b o o k w a s p r e p a r e d to a d a p t t h e w o r d i n g to link t h e p a s s a g e w i t h c h a p t e r

1, h e w a s c l e a r l y n o t j u s t

anthologis-

i n g o r l e a v i n g t h e t e x t a s h e f o u n d it: w h y , t h e n , d i d h e n o t j u s t p u t it i n t h e t h i r d p e r s o n , i n s t e a d o f l e a v i n g t h i s s u d d e n j u m p the

first?

T h i s switch of perspective w o u l d seem to require

to

another

explanation. H o s e a ' s b e h a v i o u r i n t h i s a c c o u n t is r a t h e r d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h a t i n chapter and

1. T h e r e , h i s o n l y a c t i o n w a s t o o b e y t h e d i v i n e

take G o m e r ;

now

he goes a n d

purchases

command

a suitable

woman.

T h a t m a y n o t b e t h e s a m e a s ' l o v i n g ' o n e , b u t it is b r o a d l y i n l i n e with what

God

required

of him, a n d

serves to create the

symbol.

W h a t h e d o e s n e x t , t h o u g h , g o e s b e y o n d t h a t r e q u i r e m e n t : h e tells t h e w o m a n t h a t s h e will r e m a i n f a i t h f u l , p r o m i s i n g t o d o t h e

same

himself.51 T h i s establishes a n e w r e l a t i o n s h i p a n d s y m b o l , q u i t e diff e r e n t f r o m t h a t i n i t i a l l y c o m m a n d e d , a n d it is o n e w h i c h will f u n c t i o n a s a s y m b o l t h r o u g h its d u r a b i l i t y . T h e r e is n o s u g g e s t i o n Hosea

is a c t i n g a t

God's

G o d ' s , is a s y m b o l o f self in t h e

first

command

fidelity

here, and

and hope. W h e n

his s y m b o l ,

that

unlike

he speaks for

him-

p e r s o n , h e r e , t h e n , H o s e a is a l s o a c t i n g i n h i s

own

right, n o t as divine s p o k e s m a n or

agent.

It s e e m s v e r y p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e s e s w i t c h e s o f p e r s o n a r e a n

attempt

to distinguish t h e d i f f e r e n t p l a y e r s a n d s p e a k e r s in a p o t e n t i a l l y c o n fusing context. In

1:2 a n d 3 : 1 , G o d a p p a r e n t l y s p e a k s o f h i m s e l f i n

the third p e r s o n to keep the real a n d symbolic relationships distinct. I n c h a p t e r 3 , c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y , H o s e a ' s v o i c e is n o t t h a t o f G o d , t h e c h a n g e of p e r s o n m a y b e a device to p o i n t this u p -

a

and

device

w h i c h w a s u n n e c e s s a r y in t h e first c h a p t e r , w h e r e H o s e a n e v e r s p o k e in his o w n

right.

If it s e e m s a r a t h e r o d d d e v i c e , t h e n w e

b e a r in m i n d , p e r h a p s , t h a t s u c h l u x u r i e s as q u o t a t i o n m a r k s

should were

unavailable to the writer. Instead, he uses a c h a n g e of perspective, w h i c h b r i n g s w i t h it, h o w e v e r , a c l a i m o f a u t h o r s h i p . 30

See, for example, Macintosh (1997), p. 113: " 3 : 1 - 4 . . . was written by Hosea himself soon after the events described in it and preserved by him personally". 31 Although a jussive implication is possible in 3:3, there is no explicit command, as one might expect were Hosea giving a futile or optimistic order: the most natural reading of the sentence is as a prediction, not a command.

L a t e r p r o p h e t i c b o o k s s h o w the i n f l u e n c e of p s a l m o d y a n d of the a p o c a l y p t i c t e s t i m o n i a l s t y l e i n t h e i r u s e o f t h e first p e r s o n , b u t it is interesting to observe that o t h e r early p r o p h e t i c literature seems

to

u s e it i n w a y s d i r e c t l y c o m p a r a b l e t o H o s e a 3. T h e a c c o u n t i n I s a i a h 6 ~ 8 is p r o b a b l y t h e m o s t o b v i o u s e x a m p l e , a l t h o u g h a n y r e a d i n g t h a t b o o k is r e n d e r e d d i f f i c u l t b y its c o m p l i c a t e d r e d a c t i o n a l

of

history.

A m o s f u r n i s h e s a less p r o b l e m a t i c a n a l o g y . A l t h o u g h t h a t p r o p h e t is n e v e r r e q u i r e d t o s y m b o l i s e G o d ' s will in his p e r s o n a l life, t h e p e r s o n is u s e d i n t h e s e r i e s o f v i s i o n s (7:1

9 ; 8 : 1 9 : 1;3‫)־‬.T h e s e

t r a y c o m i n g d e s t r u c t i o n , b u t a l s o s i t u a t i o n s in w h i c h A m o s God

as an

independent

dissuades G o d

actor.

In

from carrying out

the

first

first

t w o visions h e

the planned

por-

confronts actually

destruction of

Israel,

b u t i n t h e n e x t t w o is f o r c e d t o p r o n o u n c e j u d g e m e n t h i m s e l f , t h r o u g h w o r d p l a y ; i n t h e l a s t , h e is m e r e l y a s p e c t a t o r . H i s a c t i o n s a n d h e r e a r e his o w n , a n d h e s p e a k s in his o w n voice; w h e n

words

portrayed

a s a d i v i n e s p o k e s m a n i n 7 : 1 0 - 1 7 , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , A m o s is d e scribed in t h e third

person.

M u c h c a u t i o n is n e e d e d h e r e , g i v e n o u r l i m i t e d u n d e r s t a n d i n g the w a y in w h i c h grounds

such

books developed,

for suggesting that prophets,

but

there do seem

to

in t h e e a r l y p r o p h e t i c

of be

litera-

t u r e , a r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e first p e r s o n w h e n r e q u i r e d t o d e s c r i b e situ a t i o n s in w h i c h t h e y a c t o r s p e a k as i n d i v i d u a l s in t h e i r o w n

right.

S o m e such idea surely u n d e r p i n s the later characterisation of J e r e m i a h , also, a l t h o u g h w e m a y n e e d

to reckon with o t h e r influences

I f t h e r e is a n y t r u t h i n t h i s s u g g e s t i o n , t h e n t h e s c e n a r i o

there.

envisaged

i n H o s e a , a n d i n A m o s a n d I s a i a h , f o r t h a t m a t t e r , is c l e a r l y

more

strange a n d c o m p l i c a t e d t h a n that of Ecclesiastes, the instructions, or m o s t o t h e r a n c i e n t ' s p e e c h ' l i t e r a t u r e . I t is a s t h o u g h , i n h i s r o l e

as

prophet,

in

we

see

Hosea

speaking

and

acting

side-on;

and

then

c h a p t e r 3, s p e a k i n g as h i m s e l f , h e s u d d e n l y t u r n s t o face us. W h a t e v e r effect he was striving for here, t h o u g h , apparently

chosen

to

use

the writer of the b o o k

different perspectives,

or

attributions,

a c h i e v e it, a n d t h a t b r i n g s u s b a c k t o t h e p o i n t a t w h i c h w e As modern

readers,

and

nation to believe that, w h e n

trusting souls, w e an ancient

have

has

started.

a natural

text explicitly o r

incli-

implicitly

a t t r i b u t e s m a t e r i a l t o a p a r t i c u l a r i n d i v i d u a l , it g e n u i n e l y e x p e c t s to accept

that individual

to

us

as the a u t h o r of the material. T h i s

incli-

n a t i o n c a n m i s l e a d us, t h o u g h , i n t o m i s s i n g a v e r y i m p o r t a n t

point

a b o u t ancient N e a r Eastern literature. For ancient readers a n d

writ-

ers, the w o r d s o n the p a g e s e e m to h a v e b e e n not text so m u c h

as

words, spoken by o n e or m o r e characters, a n d to be u n d e r s t o o d terms of those characters' o w n

natures a n d perspectives. W e

d o better, i n d e e d , to think m o r e in t e r m s of story a n d d r a m a in

terms

a

text, This

m a y b e o b v i o u s i n t e x t s l i k e J o b , b u t it is n o l e s s i m p o r t a n t a

con-

need

to be

we

aware

encounter

that

there

d i f f e r e n t v o i c e s in

than

are different speakers.

then, we

of essays. W h e n

in

might

s i d e r a t i o n in b o o k s as d i v e r s e as Ecclesiastes a n d

Hosea.

T H E SOCIAL BACKGROUND OF T H E BOOK OF MALACHI BY J.W.

ROGERSON Sheffield

Reconstructing

social situations f r o m

literary

t e x t s is a

hazardous

business. H o w e v e r , in cases w h e r e the only evidence for the background

t o a t e x t is t h e t e x t itself s o m e a t t e m p t a t

social

reconstruc-

t i o n is n e c e s s a r y , u n l e s s t h e d e c i s i o n is t a k e n t o i g n o r e a n y

pointers

in t h e text to extra-linguistic factors. I n w h a t follows, as a t r i b u t e to Tony

Gelston's

prolonged

study

and

work

on

the Twelve

Minor

P r o p h e t s a n d as a t o k e n of f r i e n d s h i p o v e r m a n y years, t h e will b e m a d e

to think a r o u n d

attempt

s o m e of t h e p o i n t e r s in M a l a c h i

t h e possible social b a c k g r o u n d ( s ) to t h e b o o k ' s

U s u a l a t t e m p t s to describe the social b a c k g r o u n d to M a l a c h i centrate on

the identity of the p r o p h e t , w h a t e v e r

have been, and

on

to

production.

his n a m e

conmight

the identity of possible redactors or editors

of

t h e b o o k . T h u s P.L. R e d d i t t ' s recent article identifies the p r o p h e t as a r e f o r m i n g Levite, on the g r o u n d s of the book's d o w n - p l a y i n g the distinction b e t w e e n Zadokites a n d n o n - Z a d o k i t e s at the a n d its i n t e r e s t i n c o l l e c t i n g a n d s u p e r v i s i n g t h e t i t h e . o f t h e r e d a c t o r is h a r d e r

1

The

to define. A c c o r d i n g to R e d d i t t

of

temple identity he

may

h a v e b e e n a n a c t i v e o r d i s e n f r a n c h i s e d L e v i t e . If h e w a s n e i t h e r , h e e m b r a c e d t h e spirit of t h e r e f o r m of t h e

prophet.

O n e o f t h e p r o b l e m s o f t h i s k i n d o f a p p r o a c h is t h a t it is a h o s t a g e to v a r y i n g theories of the history of c o m p o s i t i o n of M a l a c h i .

Whereas

R e d d i t t c a n distinguish b e t w e e n a p r o p h e t a n d a redactor, E. Bosshard a n d R . G . K r a t z distinguish three layers, a n d c o n c l u d e that the b o o k

1

P.L. Redditt, " T h e Book of Malachi in its Social Setting", CBQ 56 (1994), pp. 240-55. Redditt ascribes two series of oracles to the prophet, the first (1:6-2:9; 2:13-16) directed against the priests, the second (2:173‫־‬:la + 5; 1 : 2 ; 3 : 6 - 7 2; 10 12; possibly 3:13-15) directed against the people. T o a redactor is assigned the combining of the two series of oracles with the addition of 1:1, 3 : l b - 4 , 3:13-21 and with 3:13-15 reapplied.

+5

did not originate f r o m a collection of oracles by a n actual

prophet

' M a l a c h i ' . R a t h e r , t h e b o o k is p r i m a r i l y a l i t e r a r y p r o d u c t i o n

which

has edited a n d enlarged w h a t m i g h t h a v e b e e n isolated oracles of a p r o p h e t o r his circle.2 In o r d e r to a v o i d t h e c i r c u l a r i t y of a n a l y s i n g t h e b o o k ' s l i t e r a r y s t r u c t u r e a s a b a s i s f o r s e e k i n g its s o c i a l a p r o c e s s in w h i c h social a n d historical-critical j u d g e m e n t s

setting,

inevitably

affect the decisions r e g a r d i n g literary structure a n d d e v e l o p m e n t , different a p p r o a c h

will b e

assumed

that

e v e n if t h e b o o k o f M a l a c h i is a p u r e l y l i t e r a r y p r o d u c t i o n a n d

that

access to a p r o p h e t

followed here.

'Malachi'

It will b e

a

is i m p o s s i b l e

to achieve,

the

book's

p r o d u c t i o n will still h a v e h a d a s o c i a l b a c k g r o u n d w h i c h will

have

a f f e c t e d it i n s o m e w a y . E v e n if t h e b o o k is a n i n s t a n c e o f SchHftpro-

phetie3 a n d e v e n if it is t h e r e s u l t o f s e v e r a l s t a g e s o f r e d a c t i o n , t h e s e l i t e r a r y p r o c e s s e s will n o t h a v e h a p p e n e d i n a s o c i a l v a c u u m . T h e p a r t i c u l a r i s s u e s a d d r e s s e d will m o s t likely h a v e b e e n p r o v o k e d b y s o c i a l situations. W e a r e entitled to ask w h y t h e p a r t i c u l a r issues t h a t surf a c e in t h e texts h a v e b e e n d e a l t w i t h a n d n o t o t h e r issues; a n d

we

a r e entitled to t h i n k a r o u n d t h e social issues t h a t t h e texts d e a l w i t h a n d to d r a w tentative The

first p a s s a g e

Malachi 2 : 1 0 1 6 be considered,

conclusions.

to be ‫ ־‬.

considered

will b e

a well-known

crux,

T h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e u n i t y o f t h e p a s s a g e will n o t

nor whether

there are two separate oracles,

10-12

a n d 1 3 - 1 6 . T h i s is n o t b e c a u s e s u c h q u e s t i o n s a r e u n i m p o r t a n t ; n e i t h e r is t h i s m e a n t t o b e a n e x e r c i s e i n " f i n a l f o r m " c r i t i c i s m . questions

to be

raised

here

do

not

ultimately

depend

on

The

literary

decisions. A s is w e l l k n o w n , m u c h h e a t e d d i s c u s s i o n h a d b e e n g e n e r a t e d verse

by

11, w h i c h c a n b e t r a n s l a t e d l i t e r a l l y a s f o l l o w s :

J u d a h h a s b e e n disloyal, a n d a b o m i n a t i o n has b e e n c o m m i t t e d in Israel a n d in J e r u s a l e m . F o r J u d a h h a s defiled t h e s a n c t u a r y of t h e L O R D , w h i c h h e loves, a n d h a s m a r r i e d t h e d a u g h t e r of a foreign g o d . T w o lines of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n h a v e b e e n a d v o c a t e d , b o t h of w h i c h back to antiquity. T h e

first,

go

f o u n d in t h e T a r g u m , t r a d i t i o n a l J e w i s h

exegesis a n d most m o d e r n c o m m e n t a t o r s takes t h e reference to m a r rying the d a u g h t e r of a foreign g o d to m e a n t h a t J e w s h a d

married

2 E. Bosshard and R.G. Kratz, "Maleachi im Zwölfprophetenbuch", BN 52 (1990), pp. 27-46. 3 H. Utzschneider, "Die Schriftprophetie und die Frage nach dem Ende der Prophetie: Überlegungen anhand vom Mal. 1:6-2,16", L. G o o c h , " L i n g a r d v. B a r r i n g t o n , et al.: Ecclesiastical Politics in D u r h a m 1 8 0 5 - 2 9 " , Durham University Journal, vol. 85 ( J a n u a r y , 1993), p. 11. 7 G. T o w n s e n d (ed.), The Theological Works of the First Viscount Barrington . . . with a brief Memoir of his son, Shute Barrington, the Late Bishop of Durham, 3 vols (London, 1828), vŪ1. I, p. X L I X . 8 T o w n s e n d (1828), p. X L V I I I .

t o w a r d s the subversion of the a n c i e n t establishments of religion civil g o v e r n m e n t " .

9

The

French

Revolution

had

been

and

caused

infidelity, b u t infidelity w a s the c o n s e q u e n c e of the p o p i s h

by

corrup-

tion of Christianity which b r o u g h t

religion into c o n t e m p t by

mak-

i n g it a b s u r d .

that

could

The

corollary

was

Protestantism

alone

p r e s e r v e t h e n a t i o n f r o m infidelity a n d so f r o m political On

this u n d e r s t a n d i n g

counter-revolutionary

there was an

revolution.

obvious contradiction

alliance between

England

and

in

Rome,

any

whose

c o m b i n a t i o n of despotism a n d superstition merely p r o d u c e d by reaction revolution

and

unbelief. By their o w n superstitious

principles,

C a t h o l i c s w e r e i n c a p a b l e of u n d e r s t a n d i n g free British a n d full p o l i t i c a l r i g h t s c o u l d t h e r e f o r e b e d e n i e d Yet Barrington

considered

radicals a n d

institutions,

them.

Dissenters to b e

equally

b e y o n d t h e p a l e , i n d e e d a s little b e t t e r t h a n i n f i d e l s , w i t h w h o m

they

p o s e d a t h r e a t t o t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t , a n d d i s c e r n e d in P o p e r y , I n f i d e l i t y and

N o n c o n f o r m i t y a threefold challenge to C h u r c h

and

w a s this view w h i c h sustained a n a t i o n e m b a t t l e d with

State.

Napoleonic

F r a n c e , as the authorities c l a m p e d d o w n o n internal unrest, a n d mainstream fifteen-year

o p i n i o n rallied to the C h u r c h

of England.

It

During

as the

rule of the P r i m e Minister L o r d Liverpool f r o m 1812 to

1827, political a n d religious r e f o r m w a s p o s t p o n e d to wait until

1 8 2 8 - 2 9 . In his s t r o n g a t t a c h m e n t

sine die,

and

had

to the status

quo,

Barrington was representative of the conservative Anglican m i n d h i s e r a . H e d i e d in teenth-century

1826 in his n i n e t y - s e c o n d y e a r , a n d

revival of N o

Popery can

be traced

the

in p a r t

of

nineto

the

i n f l u e n c e of his H i g h T o r y m e n t a l i t y u p o n t h e C h u r c h of E n g l a n d . Barrington, however, had a particular domestic problem, that the R o m a n challenge was nearer h o m e than R o m e . T h e French

Révolu-

t i o n e x i l e d t o D u r h a m a b r a n c h o f t h e first C a t h o l i c s e m i n a r y a b r o a d at D o u a i , to C o u n t y D u r h a m , to C r o o k H a l l in 1808 to U s h a w . sequently

10

1794 a n d then

in

T h e Bishop's c h a r g e of 1806 against Popery, sub-

reprinted

in

1807

as a tract

p o n e n t s of Catholic E m a n c i p a t i o n in the

against

the

national

pro-

1807 election," a n d

later

extended with an attack on Transubstantiation,12 was answered by a

9

S. Barrington, A Charge Delivered, to the Clergy of the Diocese of Durham, at the Ordinary Visitation of that Diocese, in July 1801 (reprinted London, 1811), p. 288. 10 D. Milburn, A History of Ushaw College (Durham, 1964). 11 S. Barrington, The Grounds on which the Church of England separated from the Church of Rome, stated in a Charge delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Durham (London, 1807). 12 S. Barrington, The Grounds on which the Church of England separated from the Church

member

of the C a t h o l i c s e m i n a r y staff J o h n

Lingard, the

rising

his-

t o r i a n of English Catholicism.13 L i n g a r d h a d his p o l e m i c a l w o r k

cut

out for him, a n d during the subsequent decades he replied to attacks b y n u m e r o u s local clerics a n d to the Bishops of G l o u c e s t e r , St

David's

and

to Barrington one

Peterborough.

from the

of Barrington's

14

There

redoubtable

chaplains

in

was

a response

Henry

Lincoln,

to his

Phillpotts, w h o

1806, received

reply

became

the valuable

living

of G a t e s h e a d in 1 8 0 8 a n d a s u c c e s s i o n of p r e b e n d a l stalls f r o m

1809,

a n d in

1820, the golden rectory of S t a n h o p e , o n e of the richest

liv-

ings

England.

the

in

Phillpotts

owed

this

rise, w h i c h

took

him

to

see o f E x e t e r in 1830, a f t e r a n a b o u t - f a c e o n t h e issue of C a t h o l i c cipation,

to

his

doughty

controversial

T o r y i s m , especially against R o m a n Barrington

in his n i n e t y - s e c o n d

Barrington ings

astutely

to p r o m o t e

used

other

of

Eman-

Anglican

Catholics, a n d he was to die

like

year.15

his e x t e n s i v e

clergymen

a n t i - R o m a n cause. T h e

championship

who

patronage

devoted

Bishop encouraged

of valuable

their

talents to

the Rev. George

livthe

Town-

send to reply to the Catholic C h a r l e s Butler's

Book of the Roman Catholic

Church

and

Townsend

edited

George

of R o n a l d

preferred

him

Foxe's

to

a

canonry.16

Book of Martyrs,

K n o x ' s delightful essay, " T h e

t h e p o p e " , o n a visit t o R o m e in 1850. rington

through

densians whose

and

or

his w o r k

Vaudois

survival he

of

17

still l i v e s o n man

of the valleys

as the

tried to

his visit

of P i e d m o n t

the continuity

in

Catholic

polemicist

who

benefited

by

Wal-

northern

Italy,

of the true

Barrington's

Bar-

to the

Church

of Christ t h r o u g h the centuries of popish corruption.18 A n o t h e r

w h o crossed swords with Eingard was George

hero

convert

William Gilly attracted

1824 describing

held to prove

who

subsequently

patronage

Stanley Faber.

antiand Faber

of Rome reconsidered, in a view of the Romish Doctrine of the Eucharist; with an Explanation of the antepenultimate answer in the Church Catechism ( L o n d o n , 1809). 13 J . Lingard, Remarks on a Charge delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Durham, by Shute Barrington, Bishop of Durham at the Ordinary Visitation of that Diocese, in the Year 1806 ( L o n d o n , 1807). 14 G o o c h (1993). See also M . Haile a n d E. Bonney, Life and Letters of John Lingard (London, 1911), pp. 3 8 3 - 6 . 15 G.C.B. Davies, Henry Phillpotts, Bishop of Exeter 1778-1869 ( L o n d o n , 1954). 16 See my "Nationality a n d liberty, protestant a n d catholic: R o b e r t Southey's Book of the Church", in Stuart Mews (ed.), Religion and National Identity: Studies in Church History, vol. 18 (Oxford, 1982), pp. 4 0 9 - 3 2 . 17 R.A. K n o x , Literary Distractions ( L o n d o n a n d N e w York, 1958), pp. 114 33. 18 W . Gilly, Narrative of an Excursion to the Mountains of Piedmont, and Researches among the Vaudois or Waldenses (London, 1824).

a r g u e d like G i l l y t h a t t h e V a u d o i s , w i t h t h e A l b i g e n s i a n s , p r o v e d t h e v i s i b l e c o n t i n u i t y o f t h e t r u e C h r i s t i a n C h u r c h , 1 9 a n d it w a s whom

L i n g a r d ridiculed, in a g r a n d p a n j a n d r u m p a m p h l e t

his critics, for o p p o s i n g

Rome

from

the

viewpoint

of

Faber against

Protestant

20

prophecy.

I first m e t F a b e r i n a w o r k o f 7 3 8 p a g e s w h i c h h a d b e l o n g e d

to

C a r d i n a l M a n n i n g , e n u d e d Faberism Exposed and Refuted: and the Apostolicity of Catholic Doctrine of Faber's

Vindicated: against the second edition, "revised and

"Difficulties

of Romanism".

21

remoulded",

T h e author was Frederick Charles

H u s e n b e t h , the b i o g r a p h e r of the redoubtable "English Athanasius",22 J o h n M i l n e r , Bishop of C a s t a b a l a a n d V i c a r Apostolic of the M i d l a n d District,

a writer,

fighter

and

biter

of English

Protestants

and

of

A n g l o - G a l l i c a n o r " C i s a l p i n e C a t h o l i c s " w h o m h e t h o u g h t t o b e less t h a n loyal to R o m e . T h e u n e x p o s a b l e a n d i r r e f u t a b l e F a b e r

turned

o u t to be the uncle of the m o s t p o p u l a r of V i c t o r i a n C a t h o l i c

spir-

itual writers, Frederick William F a b e r of the B r o m p t o n O r a t o r y , a u t h o r of the battle h y m n of English a n d Irish C a t h o l i c i s m ,

the

"Faith

of o u r F a t h e r s " . Fr. F a b e r c o m b i n e d a f l a m b o y a n t prose-style with a n encyclopaedic knowledge of the wider a n d sometimes wilder of R o m a n

Catholic

mysticism

and

hagiography,

and

his taste

o d d a n d u n u s u a l s u b j e c t s w a s o n e t h a t h e s h a r e d w i t h his Yet

their

common

background

was

ordinary

realms

enough.

for

uncle. George

Stanley F a b e r was the son a n d g r a n d s o n of Anglican clergymen,

a

m i d d l e class f a m i l y w i t h g e n t r y c o n n e c t i o n s . T h e o n e t o u c h of t h e exotic was Protestant

his d e s c e n t Huguenot

on

his g r a n d m o t h e r ' s

refugee, Henri

de

side

Dibon,

from a

who

French

according

to

t h e a c c o u n t in his Bible, i n h e r i t e d b y t h e F a b e r s , h a d his legs b u r n t with w r e a t h s of straw by soldiers e n f o r c i n g the outlawry of

French

P r o t e s t a n t i s m in 1685. Fr. F a b e r ' s b i o g r a p h e r R o n a l d C h a p m a n

sug-

19 G.S. Faber, An Inquiry into the History and Theology of the Ancient Vallenses and Albigenses: as exhibiting, agreeably to the promises, the perpetuity of the sincere Church of Christ (London, 1838). ‫ "'־‬J . l i n g a r d , A General Vindication of the Remarks on the Charge of the Bishop of Durham, containing: A Reply to a Letter from a Protestant Clergyman of the Diocese of Durham: A Reply to the Observations of the Rev. Thos. Le Mesurier, Rector of Newnton Longville; A Reply to the Strictures of the Rev. G.S. Faber, Vicar of Stockton upon Tees; and Some Observations On the more fashionable Methods of interpreting the Apocalypse (fourth edition, Dublin, 1811). 21 (Norwich, 1836). See G.S. Faber, The Difficulties of Romanism (London, 1826); and its second edition, "revised and remoulded" of 1830. For further on the controversy, see below, notes 49 and 50. 22 T h e title is said to have been conferred on him by Newman. See Wilfrid Ward, The Life of John Henry Cardinal Newman, 2 vols. (London, 1913), vol. I, p. 119.

gests t h a t " F a i t h of o u r F a t h e r s " m a y o w e s o m e t h i n g to his family's tradition

ing character Faber's

by Catholics,23 a n d

of persecution of R o m a n

Catholicism

was

the inherently an

persecut-

article of faith to

Fr.

uncle.

George

Stanley

Anglican.24

He

Faber's

passed

external

from

a

career

fellowship

was and

also

conventionally

tutorship

at

Lincoln

College, O x f o r d , a n d m a r r i a g e to a d a u g h t e r of the s o m e t i m e for Stockbridge,

to serve as a c u r a t e

1805, B a r r i n g t o n a p p o i n t e d h i m V i c a r of S t o c k t o n - o n - T e e s in Durham,

where

he displayed

his d e d i c a t i o n

as a pastor.

and

he showed

his d e v o t i o n

offer from the ultra-conservative suggestion,

of an

own, a common

Lord

a d j o i n i n g living

to

subseCounty

to his p e o p l e

by refusing

Eidon,

at

be

made

held

practice of the time. T h e

in

In

County

His

q u e n t parishes w e r e at R c d m a r s h a l l a n d L o n g N e w t o n , also in Durham,

M.P.

to his f a t h e r in Yorkshire.

an

Barrington's

plurality

with

historian Robert

his

Surtees

is s a i d t o h a v e h e a r d o f t h i s l a t e a t n i g h t , a n d o r d e r e d h i s h o r s e t o b e s a d d l e d so that,

mirabile dictu,

he could look u p o n a minister w h o

r e f u s e d a s e c o n d living. F a b e r r e m a i n e d a close f r i e n d of

a n d his successor W i l l i a m V a n M i l d e r t , w h o a p p o i n t e d G e o r g e Faber's layman

brother

to b e

had

Barrington Stanley

his s e c r e t a r y ; t h e s e c r e t a r y ' s son,

the

f u t u r e Fr. F a b e r , t h e r e f o r e g r e w u p at A u c k l a n d Palace. Bishop Burgess m a d e G e o r g e Stanley F a b e r a P r e b e n d a r y of Salisbury in 1831, V a n Mildert a p p o i n t e d h i m M a s t e r of S h e r b u r n Durham

in

1832. H e r e

he pulled d o w n

Hospital in

the old M a s t e r ' s

and

County

residence,

a n d r e b u i l t it f o r h i s g r e a t e r c o m f o r t . T h e r e is n o d o u b t i n g h i s i n d u s try, f o u n d e d o n his h a b i t of

rising

b y six in s u m m e r a n d w i n t e r

for

w r i t i n g a n d study. N o r w a s this at t h e e x p e n s e of his p a s t o r a l

care.

H e w a s a n assiduous visitor to t h e p o o r , b u t w a s also convivial,

"with

a

rich

store of r a c y a n e c d o t e s " a n d stories in t h e dialect of his n a t i v e

Yorkshire.25 H e died a g e d eighty in forty works, mostly controversial, doublet

23

of sermons,

preached

1854, having written m o r e

beginning with

before

the

his

University

first

than

published

of O x f o r d

in

R o n a l d C h a p m a n , Father Faber ( L o n d o n , 1961), p. 2. T h e r e is very little in print a b o u t Faber, a p a r t f r o m the entry in the Dictionary of National Biography a n d the ' M e m o i r ' by Francis A. Faber prefixed to the second edition of The Many Mansions in the House of the Father ( L o n d o n , 1854). T h e r e is also a n essay in H e n r y Heavisides, The Annals of Stockton-on-Tees; with Biographical Notices (Stockton-on-Tees, 1865), pp. 101 5; an obituary in The Durham Advertiser, 3 February 1854 (I a m grateful for these references to R o g e r Norris); a n d a notice in The Gentleman's Magazine, vol. X L I ( M a y 1854), pp. 5 3 7 . 9 ‫־‬ 25 Heavisides (1865), p. 103. 24

1 7 9 9 , An

attempt

in the Revelation, Bara.

One

Mansions

to explain

by recent events, five of the seven vials

and an Inquiry

of his last b o o k s ,

of the House

which

of the Father,26

Bird S u m n e r , A r c h b i s h o p Scripture

into the Scriptural

signification

appeared

in

mentioned

of the

word

The

Many

1851,

d e d i c a t e d to his old f r i e n d J o h n

of C a n t e r b u r y ,

set o u t to d i s c o v e r

the precise locality of the f u t u r e H e a v e n

of the

from

Blessed,

w h i c h h e a r g u e d consisted in a literally r e n e w e d a n d r e n o v a t e d e a r t h . Its s e c o n d e d i t i o n c o n t a i n s his No

modern

memoir.

s c h o l a r h a s s e e n fit t o s t u d y

Faber's theology,

s u m a b l y o n t h e g r o u n d s t h a t his v i e w p o i n t w a s 'pre-critical',

pre-

except

f o r P e t e r T o o n in his m o n o g r a p h o n t h e E v a n g e l i c a l r e s p o n s e to t h e O x f o r d M o v e m e n t . 2 7 I n d e e d F a b e r ' s t o p i c s s o u n d m o r e t h a n a little eccentric, - his early taste w a s " f o r singular a n d r e c o n d i t e subjects"28 b u t this w a s n o t the case in their day. H i s l e a r n i n g w a s

immense,

a n d it w a s i n all i n n o c e n c e t h a t h e a s k e d w h e t h e r h e s h o u l d sit h i s o r d i n a d o n e x a m i n a t i o n in Latin o r English. H i s l e a d i n g idea, expressed with consistency a n d detail t h r o u g h a series of m u l t i v o l u m e

works,

w a s a systematic theological e x p l a n a t i o n of the history of the world, u s i n g t h e S c r i p t u r e s a s its b a s i s : a n i d e a r o o t e d i n t u r n i n t h e

ordi-

n a r y c l a s s i c a l w e s t e r n a s s u m p t i o n t h a t all t h e r e l i g i o n s o f t h e

world

had

denotes

his

f r a m e of m i n d . H e w a s fascinated b y the earliest e r a of h u m a n

a common

origin.

One

particular

preoccupation

his-

tory, w h i c h h e a r g u e d against B i s h o p W a r b u r t o n b e l o n g e d to a

first,

universal, patriarchal, dispensation or divine revelation to

mankind,

before the Levitical dispensations to the J e w s , a n d the N e w m e n t to the Christians.

29

from Paradise, J e h o v a h

Testa-

I n t h e first a g e o f t h e w o r l d , a f t e r t h e exile was manifest b e t w e e n the c h e r u b i m at

the

gates of E d e n , as H e w o u l d b e m a n i f e s t in Christ's r e t u r n at the Last D a y . T h e worship of

t h e first a g e h a d b e e n t h e o f f e r i n g o f a n i m a l

sacrifice to G o d , a n offering p r o p h e t i c of t h e a t o n e m e n t of Christ's sacrifice o n C a l v a r y . C a i n ' s infidel offering of vegetables h a d

been

r e f u s e d , b e c a u s e it w a s a r e j e c t i o n o f t h e a t o n e m e n t b e f o r e t h e e v e n t , w i t h t h e o u t c o m e o f t h e first m u r d e r , a n d " t h e entire discarding

of bloody

26 For the germ of this work, see G.S. Faber, A Treatise on the Genius and Object of the Patriarchal, the Levitical, and the Christian Dispensations, 2 vols. (London, 1823), vol. I, p. 23. 27 P. Toon, Evangelical Theology 1833-1856: A Response to Tractarianism (London, 1979). 28 Faber (1854), p. xiii. 29 Faber (1823), vol. I, p. 23.

piacular sacrifices and the systematic adoption of vegetable eucharistie offerings‫ ״‬shades of R o m a n i s m - in a n apostasy f r o m divine revelation. T h i s h a d in "its p r a c t i c a l effects closely r e s e m b l e d t h e fruits, w h i c h a n o t dissimilar infidel philosophy

has produced

in the c o u r s e of the

anti-

christian F r e n c h Revolution".30 T h e great flood was a p u n i s h m e n t of A d a m ' s d e s c e n d a n t s for t h e i r rejection of their d u t y of sacrifice, w h i c h n o d o u b t included an attack on the gates of E d e n , a theory F a b e r buttressed with references to Hcsiod a n d O v i d , a n d

which

compared

w i t h t h e infidel a t t a c k s o n t h e C h r i s t i a n C h u r c h in his o w n

day.

T h e a n t e d i l u v i a n apostasy w a s followed b y a postdiluvian o n e , as F a b e r , like G e o r g e E l i o t ' s M r . C a s a u b o n , s o u g h t t h e k e y t o all t h e m y t h o l o g i e s . T h e orgies in w h i c h t h e F l o o d w a s r e m e m b e r e d

became

t h e basis of t h e p a g a n mysteries, w h i l e in t h e i m a g i n a t i o n of t h o s e b o r n a f t e r t h e D e l u g e , A d a m a n d his t h r e e s o n s a t c r e a t i o n p r e f i g u r e d Noah

and

his t h r e e sons, S h e m ,

Japeth

and

Ham,

thereby

giving

rise to t h e t h e o r y of m e t e m p s y c h o s i s . As t h e e a r t h h a d risen t h e w a t e r s of c h a o s , so t h e a r k h a d

risen

above

from

the water of

the

Deluge, a n d the renascent earth above the Flood, a n d earth a n d

ark

h a d b e c o m e the crescent s y m b o l of the e a r t h goddesses a n d goddesses of primitive p a g a n i s m .

Ham

may

have been

the

moon propa-

g a t o r of this idolatry, for " h e w a s n o t only i g n o r a n t of the sanctifying influence of p u r e religion", b u t " w a s a stranger to the laws even of c o m m o n d e c e n c y " . 3 1 N o a h b e c a m e a s u n - g o d , as h e a n d his s o n s were deified by H a m ' s g r a n d s o n the apostate N i m r o d , the builder of the tower of Babel, with the consequent disintegration of m a n k i n d ' s original primitive l a n g u a g e into a m u l t i t u d e of tongues, a n d of the mystic Babylon, m o t h e r of harlots, which f o r e s h a d o w e d both a n d p a p a l R o m e . T h i s takes the r e a d e r straight into N o Popery.

pagan "The

a n a l o g y " , c o n c l u d e d F a b e r , "is o b v i o u s : as t h e p u r e w o r s h i p of t h e p a t r i a r c h s w a s first a u t h o r i t a t i v e l y c o r r u p t e d a t B a b e l , s o w a s t h e d i vine religion of Christ at

Rome".32

U n l i k e o t h e r C h r i s t i a n w r i t e r s , like F a b e r ' s g r e a t t h e o l o g i c a l

men-

t o r B i s h o p S a m u e l H o r s l e y , w h o s a w reflections in p a g a n i s m of t h e

30

Faber (1823), vol. I, p. 11. G.S. Faber, A Dissertation on the Mysteries of the Cabvri; or the Great Gods of Phenicia, Samothrace, Egypt, Troas, Greece, Italy, and Crete; being an Attempt to deduce the Several Orgies of Isis, Ceres, Mithras, Bacchus, Rhea, Adonis, and Hecate, from an Union of the Rites commemorative of the Deluge with the Adoration of the Host of Heaven, 2 vols. (London and Oxford, 1803), vol. II, p. 11. 32 Faber (1803), vol. II, p. 14. 31

doctrine

of the Trinity,

Faber

derived

every

triad

of G o d s ,

from

C h i n a to Peru, f r o m N i m r o d ' s deification of the three sons of N o a h , a n d lavished a m a s s of e r u d i t i o n o n his ' h e l i o - a r k i t e ' t h e o r y , is p e r f e c t l y s e n s i b l e o n t h e b a s i s o f h i s i n i t i a l p r e m i s e , t h a t contains

in skeletal o u t l i n e

the

literal

history

of the

which Genesis

human

race,

which h a d once worshipped the one true G o d , a n d could only have fallen into p a g a n i s m

by the wilful m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g

of

patriarchal

religion. T h i s did not seem a b s u r d

to Barrington, to w h o m

dedicated

this t h e m e ,

his p r i n c i p a l

Idolatry Ascertained from

opus

upon

Historical

Testimony

The

Origin

and Circumstantial

of 1816. Its intellectual respectability w a s also severally by Viscount Chancellor

Barrington, the learned of the E x c h e q u e r ,

Faber

of

Pagan

Evidence,

guaranteed

B i s h o p of St D a v i d ' s a n d

to w h o m

Faber dedicated

the

the three

f r o n t i s p i e c e s of his w o r k ; a n d b y t h e A r c h b i s h o p s of C a n t e r b u r y

and

York and the n u m e r o u s other bishops a n d peers w h o subscribed

to

it. I n d e e d t h e v i e w t h a t p a g a n i s m w a s t h e r u i n o f a p r i m i t i v e r e v e l a tion to A d a m a n d N o a h r e m a i n e d c o m m o n for a n o t h e r

generation,

a n d was to be m a i n t a i n e d by G l a d s t o n e against those w h o

argued

for a naturalistic origin for religion.33 F a b e r w a s , h o w e v e r , p r e p a r e d t o r e i n t e r p r e t t h e six d a y s o f e r e a t i o n a s six e r a s o f g r e a t l e n g t h , o n t h e b a s i s o f t h e j u s t

emerging

fossil r e c o r d , a n d o f a l e a r n e d d i s q u i s i t i o n o f t h e m e a n i n g s word

'day',34 a n d

one should

not underestimate

of the

the excitement

t h e s e e m i n g l y scientific c h a r a c t e r of his f u s i o n of r a t i o n a l i s m a n d lical l i t e r a l i s m , o f f e r i n g p r e c i s i o n vision of s u p e r h u m a n Faber

loved

the

figures

poems

on

every point, with

of

Bib-

a

romantic

h a l f lost in t h e m i s t o f h i g h

antiquity.

of Sir W a l t e r

Scott

and

Robert

Southey,

especially those o n mythological subjects; he d e v o u r e d G o t h i c

rom-

a n c e s a n d m a s t e r e d A r a b i c a n d H i n d u m y t h o l o g y . " H e h a d a taste for o r i e n t a l lore a n d tales of e n c h a n t m e n t , a n d this m a d e h i m ticularly prefer the T E M P E S T

and the M I D - S U M M E R

par-

NIGHT'S

3

D R E A M a m o n g s t S h a k e s p e a r e ' s plays". ' H i s w a s a f r a m e of m i n d w h i c h m i g h t s e e m t o d o little h a r m , b u t h i s t h e o r y o f t h e apostasies f r o m antediluvian prefiguring and

and

postdiluvian

paralleling the popish

orthodox

primaeval religion

apostasy, sustained

his

as

view

33 D. Bebbington, "Gladstone and Grote", in P.J. Jagger (ed.), Gladstone (London, 1998), p. 173. ' 34 Dispensations, vol. I, pp. 111-66. 35 Heavisides (1865), p. 103.

of R o m a n

Catholicism, w h i c h also d r e w u p o n

the same

tion of i m a g i n a t i v e r o m a n c e a n d literal biblical Here

combina-

history.

F a b e r s t o o d in a t r a d i t i o n of l e a r n e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e

t w o m o s t f a m o u s p r o p h e t i c b o o k s of Scripture, D a n i e l a n d

Revela-

tion, believed b y a l o n g line of C h r i s t i a n scholars to hold the key to h u m a n h i s t o r y . 3 6 T h e B o o k o f D a n i e l w a s , o n t h e f a c e o f it, w r i t t e n a b o u t D a n i e l t h e P r o p h e t in t h e sixth c e n t u r y b e f o r e Christ. A c c o r d i n g to m o d e r n

s c h o l a r s , it w a s p r i m a r i l y c o m p o s e d

in t h e s e c o n d

cen-

t u r y B . C . E . to e n c o u r a g e t h e M a c c a b e a n J e w s in t h e i r r e s i s t a n c e to t h e G r e e k S e l e u c i d king, A n t i o c h u s I V E p i p h a n e s , w h o h a d set

up

an "abomination

in

Jerusalem.

37

of d e s o l a t i o n " , a s t a t u e of Z e u s , in t h e t e m p l e

N e b u c h a d n e z z a r ' s d r e a m in C h a p t e r 2 w a s of a

of g o l d , silver, b r a s s a n d

iron, with proverbially c e l e b r a t e d feet of

i r o n a n d clay, a n d D a n i e l ' s vision in C h a p t e r the fourth with iron teeth, brass claws a n d and

beasts originally

world,

of B a b y l o n ,

statue

represented Media,

Persia

the

7 was of four beasts, ten horns. T h e

four great

and

the

statue

kingdoms

Hellenistic

of

the

empire

of

A l e x a n d e r t h e G r e a t a n d Seleucia, a n d t h e e l e v e n t h Little H o r n

of

the f o u r t h beast w a s A n t i o c h u s IV. T h e f o u r beasts of D a n i e l ,

how-

e v e r , r e a p p e a r in t h e m o n s t e r o f C h a p t e r 13 o f t h e B o o k o f R e v e l a t i o n , with ten horns, seven heads, bear's feet a n d a lion's m o u t h , the Fathers of the C h u r c h

took to be the R o m a n

e x e g e s i s m a d e t h e t e n h o r n s its s u c c e s s o r b a r b a r i a n

Empire.

which Puritan

kingdoms,

t h e survival of t h e e m p i r e in o n e f o r m o r a n o t h e r , u n d e r

and

Byzantium

in t h e E a s t a n d C h a r l e m a g n e ' s h e i r s i n t h e w e s t , w a s a n o t h e r f r u i t ful t h e m e

for prophecy.

In

Chapter

17, a w o m a n

in p u r p l e

s c a r l e t r i d e s t h e b e a s t a n d is t h e m y s t i c B a b y l o n , t h e c i t y o f with

her

name,

MOTHER

OF

"MYSTERY, HARLOTS

BABYLON

AND

THE

Rome,

GREAT,

ABOMINATIONS

and

OF

THE THE

E A R T H " , e m b l a z o n e d o n h e r f o r e h e a d , after the c u s t o m of the prostitutes of

Rome.

W h i l e r e o r d e r i n g D a n i e l ' s e m p i r e s t o m a k e t h e last t h e

Roman,

the Protestant R e f o r m e r s e x t e n d e d these images to p a p a l R o m e ,

so

t h a t in P r o t e s t a n t m y t h o l o g y , t h e L i t d e H o r n of D a n i e l ' s f o u r t h b e a s t a n d t h e S c a r l e t W o m a n in R e v e l a t i o n w e r e t h e R o m a n C h u r c h 36

and

T h e subject is covered from an Adventist perspective in an exhaustive and not very accurate manner in Le Roy Edwin Froom, The Prophetic Faith of our Fathers: The Historical Development of Prophetic Interpretation, 4 vols. (Washington D.C., 1946-54). 37 L.F. H a r t m a n and A.A. Di Leila, The Book of Daniel (New York, 1978); A. Lacocque, Le Livre de Daniel (Paris, 1976) = The Book of Daniel (London, 1979).

Pope, who Epistle

w a s also d e n o u n c e d

to the

Episdes. T h e

Thessalonians second

as the M a n

and

o f S i n in t h e

the Antichrist

beast in R e v e l a t i o n

of the

Chapter

second

Johannine

13, w i t h

lamb's

h o r n s , b e c a m e the ecclesiastical a n d p a p a l a n a l o g u e of p a g a n

Rome.

It w a s , t h e n , this b o d y of d a r k , b l o o d y , a p o c a l y p t i c i m a g e s

which

lay at the h e a r t of the P r o t e s t a n t rejection of R o m e , the i m a g e s the R o m a n C h u r c h as beast, h o r n a n d w h o r e , t h e very

of

embodiment

of t h i s - w o r l d l y evil, w i t h i n a n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e f o u r g r e a t e m p i r e s spanning recorded h u m a n

history.

T h i s view of p r o p h e c y w e n t with a chronology. T h e

seventeenth-

c e n t u r y P u r i t a n J o s e p h M e d e f o u n d in D a n i e l the p e r i o d of the Litde Horn

as a time, times a n d

half a time, three a n d

years, or forty two m o n t h s or which

it w a s p r e d i c t e d

that

a half times

1,260 days. T h i s was the period the

abomination

of desolation

s t a n d within t h e T e m p l e , a n d recurs in C h a p t e r

or for

would

12 o f t h e B o o k

of

R e v e l a t i o n as the d u r a t i o n of t h e exile a n d captivity of t h e C h r i s t i a n C h u r c h . M e d e translated these 1,260 p r o p h e t i c days as years, o n the principle

that

a prophetic

day

is a y e a r , d u r i n g w h i c h

Antichrist w o u l d persecute the saints of G o d . Mede,

this 'historicist'

interpretation

of the

the

In the century

1,260-year

papal after

domination

of A n t i c h r i s t w a s a c c e p t e d b o t h b y Sir I s a a c N e w t o n a n d his episcopal namesake T h o m a s , whose

Dissertations on the Prophecies

m a d e the

theory wholly respectable. But w h e n the French Revolution

turned

u p o n t h e R o m a n C h u r c h i n 1 7 9 2 , it s e e m e d t o s o m e t h a t t h e years was n o w accomplished,

the Scottish interpreter

William

C u n n i n g h a m e d a t e d the beginning of Antichrist's reign, by

subtrac-

tion of 1,260, to A . D .

and

1,260

533, w h e n

the pope's universal jurisdiction

was allegedly recognized by the E m p e r o r Justinian. T h e other perio d s in D a n i e l , of 1,290 a n d 1,355 d a y s , 3 0 a n d 75 d a y s o r p r o p h e t i c years beyond

1 7 9 2 , g a v e t h e w o r l d a n o t h e r 7 5 y e a r s o f life t o

i n a t i m e o f toil a n d

trial a n d

tribulation which

a n d industrial revolutions w e r e inflicting o n the

the new

1867,

political

earth.

T h e complexities of this vast n e w p r o p h e t i c literature a r e n o t easily s u m m a r i s e d . 3 8 T h e

historicist

Antichrist

could

be

harmonised

with a futurist vision of the Antichrist w h o , w h e t h e r a p o w e r or

a

38 S.C. Orchard, English Evangelical Eschatology 1790-1850 (University of Cambridge Ph.D., 1969); W.H. Oliver, Prophets and Millennialisls: The Uses of Biblical Prophecy in England from the 1790s to the 1840s (Auckland, New Zealand, 1978). For Faber, see Froom (1946-1954), especially vol. Ill, pp. 338-46.

person, and

w a s still t o c o m e ,

half years.

the

2,200,

which

or

A

2,300,

varied

and

parallel or

would

2,400

days or years

of Daniel

Chapter

Faber's.

Yet

French

these

systems

Revolution

had

and

a

developed

common

social a n d

seventy

8,

to

was

the

of

of

and

and

three

meanings

a

systems,

text,

the

years, o r 4 9 0 years, of C h a p t e r 9. C u n n i n g h a m e ' s w a s only o n e of prophetic

of the

for a literal

of

The

versions

reign

concerned

weeks

number

with

who

controversy

in

inspiration

answer and

political unrest

origin.

reawakened

t h e P r o t e s t a n t a p o c a l y p t i c m e n t a l i t y , w i t h a n e w a t t e n t i o n to t h e lett e r o f t h e S c r i p t u r a l text w h i c h p r o v e d t h a t t h e last d a y s h a d To

those witnessing the profoundest

political a n d

social

come.

change

in

m o d e r n history, there was the reassurance that the key to these events them.39

w a s in t h e Bible, so t h a t C h r i s t i a n i t y c o u l d m a k e sense of Some

eccentric,

like

R i c h a r d Brothers, w h o f o r e s h a d o w e d the British Israelite t h e o r y

that

the

manifestations

British

were

her day, J o a n n a woman be

a

lost tribes

of Israel,

with

learned

the

one,

Messiah.40

new

and

inspired

even

more

in the

C a t h o l i c refugees to E n g l a n d figure

French

famous

of E n g l a n d ,

politicians

Horsley,

and

conablest

welcomed

the and

infidelity. Horsley's

Catholicism

establishmentarian

ical sedition in Britain, a n d a p a t r i o t i c m e s s a g e f o r t h e

Faber worshipped

colossus with w h i c h

fight

Britain was at

an

unbeliever.

rad-

against war.

B i s h o p H o r s l e y as his " M a s t e r in Israel",41 a n d

like H o r s l e y , d e n i e d t h a t t h e P o p e w a s A n t i c h r i s t , w h o m u s t be

to

tradition

prophetic writing h a d both a conservative thrust against internal

the Gallican continental

the

as exiles f r o m revolution,

of t h e c o m i n g Antichrist n o t in R o m a n

revolutionary

as

a n d at h o m e . T h e

Samuel

in

12, c l a i m e d

the prophetical

radical

abroad

French

saw the true

Church

Yet

both

bishop

in

or

simply

Southcott, of the notorious black box, w h o

servatives fearing revolution, b o t h

but

were

c l o t h e d w i t h t h e s u n in R e v e l a t i o n , C h a p t e r

pregnant

was

the

of this c o n c e r n

"The

donation

of the

name

of

Antichrist

rather to

the

P o p e is p u r e l y g r a t u i t o u s . I t r e s t s u p o n n o c e r t a i n w a r r a n t o f S c r i p ture: and, indeed,

it m a y

r a t h e r b e s a i d t o c o n t r a d i c t it. T h e

d i e t e d A n t i c h r i s t is a n i n f i d e l a n d a n a t h e i s t " .

42

I n this respect,

pre-

Faber's

39 J . F . C . Harrison, The Second Coming: Popular Millenarianism 1780-1850 (London, 1979), pp. 5 7 - 1 3 4 . 4(1 R. Matthews, English Messiahs: Studies of Six English Religious Pretenders 1656-1927 (London, 1936), pp. 4 3 - 1 2 6 . 41 Faber (1854), p. xiii. 42 G.S. Faber, The Sacred Calendar of Prophecy: or a Dissertation on the Prophecies, which

hostility to t h e d e m o n i c a t h e i s m of t h e F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n the

kind

Roman

of ultra-conservative

and

apocalyptic

resembled

anti-revolutionary

C a t h o l i c i s m to w h i c h h e w a s o p p o s e d . But while

acknowl-

edging with Horsley that the P o p e was not the Antichrist to Faber did not a b a n d o n papal apostasy, a n d

the historicist s c h e m e of a

his p l a n , w o r k e d

Sacred Calendar of Prophecy, d e d i c a t e d

o u t i n its

1,260

finest

to B a r r i n g t o n ' s

come,

year-old

f o r m in

his

successor

at

D u r h a m , W i l l i a m V a n M i l d e r t , is a m a s t e r p i e c e o f i n g e n u i t y i n w h i c h the w h o l e of h u m a n

h i s t o r y is s h o w n t o b e e x p l a i n e d b y t h e

vari-

o u s i m a g e s in t h e B o o k o f R e v e l a t i o n o f seals, t r u m p e t s , w o e s vials.

and

43

F a b e r d a t e d t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h e t w o Little H o r n s , the

Roman

a n d the M a h o m e t a n , f r o m the s i m u l t a n e o u s recognition of the p a p a l p o w e r b y t h e B y z a n t i n e u s u r p e r P h o c a s a n d t h e rise of I s l a m in t h e early seventh

century. This neat parallelism

meant

for Faber

that

t h e L i t t l e H o r n s w o u l d last t h e p r e d i c t e d 1 , 2 6 0 y e a r s u n t i l 1 8 6 4 . B u t for Faber

n e i t h e r Little H o r n

was the Antichrist

o f t h e last

days,

w h o w a s f o r e s h a d o w e d in t h e s e v e n t h h e a d of t h e i m p e r i a l b e a s t of Revelation Chapter

13, t h e r e v i v e d R o m a n

E m p i r e in t h e f o r m o f

the N a p o l e o n i c E m p i r e , w h i c h F a b e r t h o u g h t m u s t arise again after its fall i n 1 8 1 5 . H e h a d t h e m e l a n c h o l y s a t i s f a c t i o n o f l i v i n g t o s e e h i s p r o p h e c y fulfilled in 1852, in t h e S e c o n d E m p i r e of L o u i s N a p o l e o n , d e c l a r i n g i n h i s all b u t had his

once ventured fixed

swayed ence

final

upon

w o r k that "I told y o u so".44 " W h e n

an elucidation

canons", declared

The Gentleman's Magazine,

towards a varied interpretation

of events

impression".

45

apparently

of p r o p h e c y

according "he was

under the immediate

irreconcilable

with

his

first

he to

never près-

deliberate

Antichrist, therefore, was to b e n o t a p e r s o n b u t a F r e n c h -

i n s p i r e d r e v o l u t i o n a r y infidel p o w e r , in u n i o n w i t h p a p a l R o m e . Like B a r r i n g t o n , F a b e r s a w P o p e r y as t h e m o t h e r of infidelity, a n d a r g u e d t h a t A n t i c h r i s t w o u l d b e " t h e o s t e n s i b l e ally of his a n c i e n t

colleague

t h e false p r o p h e t o r t h e ecclesiastical t w o - h o r n e d wild-beast".46 T h i s alliance w a s given p o i n t in British politics b y the radical politics of

Treat of the Grand Period of Seven Times, and Especially of its Second Moiety or the Latter Three Times and a Half, 3 vols. (London, 1828), vol. II, p. 209. 43 Ibid., vol. Ill, pp. 487-95 for a chronological summary. 44 G.S. Faber, The Revival of the French Emperorship anticipated from the necessity of prophecy (London, 1853). 45 The Gentleman's Magazine, p. 539. 46 Faber (1828), vol. II, p. 259.

English

and

Irish

Catholics,

and

it w a s

this

highly

conservative

c o n c e p t i o n , that P o p e r y a n d F r e n c h a n d English d e m o c r a t i c infidelity w e r e

allies, p r e f i g u r i n g t h e r e t u r n

of Antichrist, w h i c h

lay

be-

h i n d F a b e r ' s c o u n t e r o f f e n s i v e a g a i n s t t h e R o m a n C a t h o l i c revival in England. Y e t F a b e r w a s a l e a r n e d m a n , w h o u n l i k e strict P r o t e s t a n t gelicals, w a s n o t satisfied with r e f u t i n g R o m a n basis of the Bible alone. H i s e r u d i t i o n

Catholicism

extended

High

Churchmen,

Protestant

his convictions

u n d e r s t a n d i n g of private j u d g e m e n t

m a n his o w n p o p e " . I n d e e d h e d e c l a r e d t h a t S c r i p t u r e

the cen-

Churchman

witness of the F a t h e r s as well as f r o m the Scriptures. H e the usual

on

to the early

turies of the Christian era, a n d he w a s e n o u g h of a H i g h t o d e f e n d , like o t h e r

Evan-

from

the

dismissed as

"every

uninterpreted

c a n d e c i d e n o t h i n g , on the r a t h e r sophisticated position t h a t a n y text requires a reliable interpreter. T h u s

"we

must,

for the

interpréta-

tion of this o u r Sole R u l e , S c r i p t u r e , resort, n o t to t h e w a n t o n n e s s of our own

arbitrary dogmatism,

b u t to the ascertained

of the Primitive C h u r c h from the beginning". itive d o c t r i n e , w h i c h w a s b o t h

47

scriptural a n d

therefore, an objective external standard for

Concurrence

H e sought the primpatristic. T h e r e

finding

was,

B i b l i c a l t r u t h in

t h e m e a n i n g h e l d b y t h e E a r l y C h u r c h , a t l e a s t d u r i n g its first t h r e e centuries

o f life, o n

the

basis of the

Vincentian

Canon

that

the

C a t h o l i c F a i t h is t h a t w h i c h is h e l d b y C a t h o l i c s a t all t i m e s e v e r y where.

Thus

in d e f e n d i n g the d o c t r i n e

of the Trinity

against

the

Unitarians, Faber urged that Transubstantiation was only c o n d e m n e d b e c a u s e b o t h S c r i p t u r e a n d t h e F a t h e r s h a d d e n i e d it. 4 8 The of Romanism

of 1826, his a t t a c k o n a R o m a n C a t h o l i c

a p o l o g e t i c w o r k , a m u s i n g l y e n t i t l e d a Discussion

amicale,

Difficulties

anti-Protestant by J . F . M .

Le

P a p p e d e T r é v e r n , t h e B i s h o p o f S t r a s b o u r g , 4 9 is a m a s s i v e a p p e a l t o t h e t e s t i m o n y o f t h e e a r l y F a t h e r s . It w a s t h i s w h i c h b r o u g h t into dispute with both Trévern and Trévern's translator a dispute which

47

him

Husenbeth,

t u r n e d o n t h e rival m e r i t s of their translations

of

Toon (1979), p. 132. G.S. Faber, The Apostolicity of Trinitarianism: or, the Testimony of History, to the Positive Antiquity, and to the Apostolic Inculcation, of the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity, 2 vols. (London, 1832), vol. I, pp. xxxviii -ix. 4!l G.S. Faber, The Difficulties of Romanism in Respect to Evidence: or the Peculiarities of the Latin Church Evinced to be Untenable on the Principles of Legitimate Historical Testimony (second edition, London, 1830). T h e history of Faber's controversy with Trévern and Husenbeth is given in the Preface. 4‫״‬

patristic

Greek

through

nearly a round

and

Latin

texts,

which

all

three

of

them

argued

volumes.50

dozen

Faber's enthusiasm for patristic evidence gave h i m a u n i q u e tion

among

Protestant

divines

as a n

opponent

of the

new

posi-

Oxford

H i g h C h u r c h m e n o f t h e 1830s. It w a s o n patristic as well as S c r i p t u r a l grounds cally

that

he

regenerate

opposed

their

at baptism,

teaching

and

that

infants are

his r e s p o n s e s

automati-

to A l e x a n d e r

Knox

a n d J o h n H e n r y N e w m a n o n the t h e m e of justification by faith w e r e arguably to the

the

Fathers

Protestants him

most

and

was

who

Dr.

learned

that

denounced

saw

Pusey.

no

as a betrayal

difference

Both

received.31 Yet

they

made

in

the

Faber's

of Scripture

point

Church

of principle the

appeal

by

those

between

effective j u d g e

t h e m e a n i n g of the Biblical text. I n d e e d t h o u g h i n d u l g e n t to

of

Calvin-

ists, F a b e r r e j e c t e d o n p a t r i s t i c g r o u n d s t h e C a l v i n i s t , A r m i n i a n

and

Lockean

doctrines

found

one

element

of

of Alexandria,

but

the

of

election

Arminian

and

theory

predestination. in

Clement

He

claimed that the Calvinist doctrine h a d been invented by The the

witness of the Scriptures election

of individuals

of the c o m m u n i o n they

might

to

and

the Fathers

heaven

or

hell,

Augustine.

together was not but

to

membership

of the saved, the Christian C h u r c h , f r o m

still f a l l a w a y .

It w a s

election

to

the

Church

which

that

p r e a c h e d by St Paul, a n d that w a s the doctrine of m o s t of the after

was

Fathers

him.32

F a b e r was p r e p a r e d to b e called a n "Evangelical H i g h

Churchman";

t h o u g h this e x t e n d e d , h e t h o u g h t , n o f u r t h e r t h a n his belief in aboriginal appointment

of Episcopal Ecclesiastical Polity", the

tolic origins of t h e e p i s c o p a t e , w i t h o u t ing',

to

as

he

put

it,

"every

infelicity w a s o r g a n i s e d

Reformed

unchurching or Church

unepiscopally": which

which

"the apos-

'samarianis-

from

its

local

w a s so u n l u c k y as

to

5(1 T h u s H u s e n b e t h translated the Bishop's reply to F a b e r (1828). Faber replied to the Bishop with The Testimony of Primitive Antiquity against the Peculiarities of the Latin Church: being a Supplement to the Difficulties of Romanim ( L o n d o n , 1828). H u s e n b e t h wrote A Reply to this Supplement (Norwich, 1829). Faber replied with Some Account of Mr Husenbeth's Attempt to Assist the Bishop of Strasbourg ( L o n d o n , 1829). H u s e n b e t h replied with The Difficulties of Faberism ( N o r w i c h , 1829). F a b e r replied with the e x p a n d e d second edition of The Difficulties of Romanism ( L o n d o n , 1830). H u s e n b e t h replied with Faberism Exposed and Refuted. . . (Norwich, 1836). F a b e r replied with An Account of Mr. Husenbeth's professed Refutation of the Argument of the Difficulties of Romanism ( L o n d o n , 1836); a n d H u s e n b e t h wrote A Further Exposure. . . of Faberism (Norwich, 1836). 51 See T o o n (1979), pp. 1 4 1 - 6 . 52 G.S. Faber, The Primitive Doctrine of Election ( L o n d o n , 1834).

h a v e l o s t its b i s h o p s . 5 3 H e w a s " f a r f r o m d e n y i n g t o a n y

individual

in c o m m u n i o n with the C h u r c h of R o m e the appellation of LIC:

for I believe

his p a r t i c u l a r

limited

Church

to

the

Romish

emissaries,

b i s h o p s in E n g l a n d

unlawfully intruded

and

by an

Ireland were

Italian

prelate,

a

branch,

of Christ".54

t h o u g h a very c o r r u p t b r a n c h , of the Catholic C h u r c h But

CATHO-

be

schismatical

the

Pope.

the C h u r c h of R o m e was a C h u r c h , F a b e r recognized the o f s a i n t s like F é n e l o n

and

the Anglican

Hooker

Richard

Pascal within had

her, and

said,

dead

men

and

women,

that

thousands within

analogy: ancient Israel h a d lapsed into the idolatry of worshipping

existence

admitted

found mercy with the Lord. T h e r e was a prophetical O l d

but

still h a d

her

people,

though

theoretically

delusion of the M a n

labouring

under

the

thousand

strong

for

sions

living

hereditary

o f S i n . Y e t F a b e r felt a s s u r e d t h a t m o s t o f t h e Antichrist,

o n l y s e e k t o e x p l o i t it a s C a t h o l i c s h a d d o n e i n j o i n i n g

forces w i t h u n b e l i e v i n g radicals, b o t h in D u r h a m was

similarly

have a

incorrigible Papists w o u l d b e accessories to the u n i o n with and would

had

subordinately

seven

the Lord would

as

Testament

w i t h i n h e r w h o h a d n o t b o w e d t h e k n e e to Baal; so in t h e fallen a n d blighted C h u r c h o f R o m e ,

As

England

to papists,

to

make

who

reparation

would

a n d in I r e l a n d .

for g r a n t i n g political

strengthen

unbelief

l a s t c o n f e d e r a c y o f A n t i c h r i s t i n its w a r u p o n

and

conces-

reinforce

the saints of

the

God.

F a b e r p r e d i c t e d t h a t this a n t i c h r i s t i a n c o n f e d e r a c y w o u l d rise t h e n fall t o its d o o m

in

1864, a n d

It

so h e did n o t e x p e c t to

and

witness

it h i m s e l f . H i s l a s t y e a r s w e r e d a r k e n e d b y h i s n e p h e w ' s a p o s t a s y

to

R o m e , a desertion to the forces of the apocalyptic foe f r o m the hosts of light. H i s v i e w o f t h e w o r l d , so s a n e l y r o o t e d in t h e P r o t e s t a n t d i t i o n a n d i n t h e soil o f C o u n t y reader

as a w a s t e l a n d

poetry,

a confirmation

the

of the

Durham,

human

of C h e s t e r t o n ' s

Evangelist saw m a n y

m i g h t strike the

spirit, o r

like a

view that

kind

"though

of

no lit-

But taken

p o e t only asks to get his h e a d seeks to get the

heavens

Chesterton

into the heavens.

i n t o his h e a d .

And

his h e a d t h a t splits".56 Y e t F a b e r lived t h e m o s t p r o s a i c o f lives.

53 54 55 56

wild

St. J o h n

commentators".55

erally, a n d m a d e logical, t h e p o e t r y looks like m a n i a . A s

the logician w h o

modern

s t r a n g e m o n s t e r s in his vision, h e s a w

c r e a t u r e so wild as o n e of his o w n

p u t s it, " T h e

tra-

T o o n (1979), p. 42. 'Preface' to Faber (1836, second edition), p. xxv. G . K . Chesterton, Orthodoxy ( L o n d o n , 1909), p. 27. Chesterton (1909), p. 27,'

I t is it is He

w a s w r i t i n g h i s t o r y , n o t f a n t a s y ; it is o u r c h a n g e d v i e w p o i n t c o n s i d e r s his m i l l e n n i a l i s m m a n i c . T h e f o u n d a t i o n of his

which

apocalyp-

tic P r o t e s t a n t h i s t o r i c i s m w a s t h o r o u g h l y u n d e r m i n e d b y S . R . l a n d , in his a t t a c k u p o n t h e y e a r - d a y rule, b e f o r e b e i n g

Mait-

abandoned

a l t o g e t h e r . 5 7 T h e r e a r e , o f c o u r s e , still m i l l i o n s o f P r o t e s t a n t s w h o s e e R o m e a s h e d i d , b u t t h e y a r e n o t n u m e r o u s in t h e s e i s l a n d s o u t s i d e Ulster, a n d they n o longer h a v e the high p a t r o n a g e of the

bishops

o f t h e C h u r c h o f E n g l a n d . F a b e r ' s t y p e o f p r o p h e t i c s t u d y , w i t h its i n s i s t e n c e u p o n t h e l i t e r a l t r u t h o f t h e t e x t o f S c r i p t u r e , g a v e rise t o Biblical f u n d a m e n t a l i s m

in this c e n t u r y ; 3 8 a n d

that

still

flourishes,

t h o u g h without the learning w h i c h created the m i n d of Faber. I n d e e d his f r a m e w o r k of r e f e r e n c e , a set o f S c r i p t u r a l p r o p h e c i e s literally to history, h a s b e e n

applied

destroyed by the liberalism which

foresaw as t h e ultimate anti-Christian e n e m y . O n

he

other points,

strongest antagonists of the m o d e r n C h u r c h of R o m e are n o

the

longer

P a i s l e y i t e P r o t e s t a n t s b u t l i b e r a l s w h o d i s l i k e R o m e f o r its c o n t i n u i n g a t t a c h m e n t t o t h e w i d e r C h r i s t i a n o r t h o d o x y w h i c h it s h a r e s w i t h G e o r g e S t a n l e y F a b e r . N o P o p e r y is n o w m o r e c o m m o n a m o n g t h o s e h o s t i l e t o m e r e C h r i s t i a n i t y , a n d it is i n R o m e

that Infidelity

finds

its u l t i m a t e e n e m y . F a b e r i s m is d e a d , r a t h e r t h a n " e x p o s e d a n d r e f u t e d " ; b u t F a b e r ' s a n t i - R o m a n i s m lives o n , w h i c h s i m p l y s h o w s t h a t

when

p e o p l e l o s e o n e set o f r e a s o n s f o r h a t i n g a t h i n g , t h e y a r e s u r e find

to

another.

57 S.R. Maitland, An Enquiry into the grounds on which the Prophetic Period of Daniel and St. John has been supposed to consist of 1260 years (London, 1826); A Second Enquiry into the Grounds on which the Prophetic Period of Daniel and St. John, has been supposed to consist of 1260 Years (London, 1829); An Attempt to Elucidate the Prophecies concerning Antichrist (London, 1830); The twelve hundred and sixty days, in Reply to a Review in the Morning Watch (London 1830); The twelve hundred and sixty days: in reply to the strictures of W. Cunninghame (London, 1834). 58 E.R. Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism British and American Millenarianism 1800-1830 (Chicago, 1970); David N. Hempton, "Evangelicalism and Eschatology", The Journal of Ecclesiastical History 31 (April, 1980), pp. 1 79 94.

APPRECIATION REVEREND It is a n

honour

to be asked

DR.

O F

A.

T H E

GELSTON

to write a brief appreciation

for

this

collection of essays. T o n y G e l s t o n a n d I for m a n y y e a r s h a d

rooms

on the same landing, and

pupils

happily exchanged

f o r s u p e r v i s i o n s in a r e a s in w h i c h

undergraduate

e a c h w a s a specialist. A n d

as I

j o i n e d t h e d e p a r t m e n t f u l l - t i m e w h e n T o n y h a d b e e n o n e o f its d i s tinguished m e m b e r s for several years, I h a d the a d v a n t a g e of b e i n g able to learn m u c h

from him

about

the importance

of pastoral

as

w e l l a s a c a d e m i c c a r e o f s t u d e n t s . I n d e e d , if o n e w e r e t o f o r g e t t h a t Tony

is a n o r d a i n e d

be on

p r i e s t in t h e C h u r c h

the w a y to m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g

of E n g l a n d ,

one

would

h i s w h o l e i d e n t i t y . If w e

need

to think of a representative of the " l e a r n e d clergy", T o n y w o u l d

be

o n e o f t h o s e w h o s e n a m e w o u l d q u i c k l y c o m e t o m i n d . It is e n t i r e l y in c h a r a c t e r t h a t o n e o f his p r o j e c t s i n t h e h a p p y y e a r s s i n c e h e r e s i g n e d f r o m f u l l - t i m e t e a c h i n g s h o u l d b e a b o o k o n p r a y e r . A n d h i s life a s a preacher

and

pastor

in t h e

Church

continues,

in t h e s e r v i c e of t h e D i o c e s e o f D u r h a m

of his m i n i s t r y h a s b e e n

Churches

East. Methodists

of the N o r t h

to his e n r i c h m e n t

has,

a n d b e y o n d . N o r s h o u l d it

be forgotten that m u c h much

a s it a l w a y s in t h e

Methodist

as well as A n g l i c a n s

of their living a n d

owe

thinking, as well

they

know. And both R o m a n Catholic and Anglican ordinands who

read

Theology

from

in

Durham

h i m , l e a s t o f all w h e n

acknowledge

how

much

they imbibed

he was conscious of w h a t he r e p r e s e n t e d

t h e m in all h i s i n t e g r i t y o f life a n d

to

scholarship.

T o n y ' s c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e life o f D u r h a m L T n i v e r s i t y e x t e n d s b e y o n d its T h e o l o g y d e p a r t m e n t .

by those

who

t a u g h t in t h e S c h o o l o f O r i e n t a l S t u d i e s a n d w h o s h a r e d w i t h

H e is w a r m l y r e m e m b e r e d

him

t h e t e a c h i n g of S y r i a c a n d A r a m a i c . H i s colleagues in the d e p a r t m e n t also k n o w h i m as a m a n

intent on the highest

a c a d e m i c s t a n d a r d s b o t h in his o w n w o r k a n d m a d e on students. T h e

Theology possible

in t h e d e m a n d s

s a m e s t a n d a r d s h e a p p l i e d to his

he

adminis-

t r a t i v e tasks, a n d h e set f o r t h e rest of us b e n c h m a r k s of m e t i c u l o u s attention to detail a n d the c o m p l e t i o n of c h o r e s o n time w h i c h

few

o f us w a n t to e m u l a t e ! H e w a s a n a d m i r a b l e D e a n in t h e d a y s w h e n we

had

a

Faculty

of Divinity, a n d

his clarity a n d

efficiency

were

a l w a y s i n f u s e d with t h e kindliness a n d gentleness so c h a r a c t e r i s t i c

of

him

as a p e r s o n .

Testament

His period

Studies brought

as

President

much

of the

distinction

Society

for

Old

to the d e p a r t m e n t

of

the way

he

Theology. Tony's

students remain

enthusiastic

about

inspired t h e m with love for the H e b r e w

in w h i c h

language and

for texts

H e b r e w , as well as f o r his m a g i s t e r i a l e x p o s i t i o n o f t h e O l d

in

Testament

a n d its t h e o l o g y . A n d h e t a u g h t a n e x t r a o r d i n a r y r a n g e o f m a t e r i a l , w i t h L i t u r g y k e p t alive as a n a c a d e m i c d i s c i p l i n e in D u r h a m as a result o f his o w n and

supervising

willingness to e x t e n d

graduate

students.

Even

entirely

himself by teaching

those

who

did

L i t u r g y a s a n o p t i o n w i t h h i m w e r e m a d e a w a r e o f its

not

it

take

importance

b y h i m b y t h e b i e n n i a l visit t o a s y n a g o g u e i n G a t e s h e a d , a n d

by

his d e l i g h t in t h e o r g a n m u s i c w h i c h h e n o w h a s m o r e t i m e t o e n j o y ! His friends are deeply a n d w a r m l y appreciative of lasting friendship with h i m - n o easy m a t t e r to sustain as careers diverge a n d time passes. H e r e T o n y ' s utter reliability b e c o m e s m u c h - p r i z e d a n d courtesy to those to w h o m

h e is c o m m i t t e d .

as

fidelity

His generosity

o t h e r s , a n d his clarity of m i n d a r e m u c h v a l u e d b y t h o s e w h o

to

have

t h e p r i v i l e g e o f k n o w i n g h i m . W e a r e d e l i g h t e d t h a t n o w h e is f r e e to continue

his p u r s u i t

of long-term

and

quite fundamental

a r l y p r o j e c t s h e will f l o u r i s h a s h e s h o u l d . A n d

I think he

scholwould

w a n t u s t o a c k n o w l e d g e t h e i m p o r t a n c e t o h i m o f A n n e ' s life s h a r e d w i t h h i m , a n d o f all t h a t s h e h a s m a d e p o s s i b l e i n t h e y e a r s o f t h e i r h a p p y marriage together. T o T o n y then we offer our affection admiration, and warmest good

Ann

Loades

Durham

wishes.

and

PUBLICATIONS

OF ANTHONY

GELSTON

(a) BOOKS Vetus

Testamentum

Syrìace

III, 4, L e i d e n ,

1980.

(Dr Gelston was responsible for pages V I I - X X V

(top), X X X I

and

1 - 1 0 0 (except f o r r e a d i n g s o f l e c t i o n a r y m a n u s c r i p t s n o t e d in t h e seco n d apparatus), a n d h e edited the biblical m a n u s c r i p t s of the T w e l v e P r o p h e t s a n d w r o t e the c o r r e s p o n d i n g p a r t of the The Peshitta

of the Twelve

The Eucharistie

Prayer

Prophets,

of Addai

O.U.P.,

and Man,

Introduction).

1987.

O.U.P.,

1992.

(b) ARTICLES " T h e R o y a l P r i e s t h o o d " , Evangelical " T h e W a r s o f I s r a e l " , Scottish Journal

Quarterly

31 ( 1 9 5 9 ) , p p .

of Theolog)) 17 ( 1 9 6 4 ) , p p .

" T h e M i s s i o n a r y M e s s a g e o f S e c o n d I s a i a h " , Scottish Journal 18 (1965), p p . "The

Foundations (1966), p p .

Theology

of the

Second

Temple",

Vetus

Testamentum

16

232-235. Vetus

Testamentum

16 ( 1 9 6 6 ) , p p .

" A S i d e l i g h t o n t h e S o n o f M a n " , Scottish Journal

"Some

325-331. of

308-318.

"A Note on ‫ מלך‬mir", pp.

152-163.

of Theology

507-12. 22 (1969),

189-196. Notes on

Second

Isaiah",

Vetus

Testamentum

21

(1971),

pp.

517-527. " A N o t e o n I I S a m u e l 7 1 0 " , Zeitschrift für 8 4 (1972), p p .

die Alttestamentliche

Wissenschaft

92-94.

" K i n g s h i p i n t h e B o o k o f H o s e a " , Oudtestamentische

Studien

19 ( 1 9 7 4 ) ,

" A N o t e o n t h e T e x t o f P s a l m x x v i i i 7 b " , Vetus Testamentum

2 5 (1975),

pp. pp. "The

214-216.

Future pp.

"The

71-85.

of M a t t i n s

and

Evensong",

The

Churchman

89

(1975),

58-65.

Psalms at the Daily 267-275.

Services",

The

Churchman

8 9 (1975),

pp.

308

PUBLICATIONS OF ANTHONY GELSTON

"The

Lessons at the Daily Services",

The

Churchman

9 0 (1976),

pp.

24-33. " T h e C h u r c h o f E n g l a n d C a l e n d a r a n d L e c t i o n a r y " , Scripture 8, "Di

1 (1977), p p .

euchês

Bulletin

6-9.

l o g o u " , Journal

of

Theological

Studies

NS 3 3 ( 1 9 8 2 ) ,

pp.

172-175. "A Note on Psalm "The

lxxiv 8",

Vetus Testamentum

F u t u r e o f A d v e n t " , Scripture

Bulletin

" A N o t e o n t h e T e x t o f t h e Apostolic of Theological "Some

Studies

Readings

Peshitta of the

D i r k s e n a n d M . J . M u l d e r (eds.), History,

18, 1 ( 1 9 8 7 ) , p p .

Tradition

NS 3 9 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , p p .

in t h e

34 (1984), pp.

8287‫־‬. 1519

of Hippolytus,

‫ ־‬.

Journal

112-117.

Dodekapropheton"

The

Peshitta:

its Early

in

P.B.

Text

and

M o n o g r a p h s of the Peshitta Institute, Leiden, 4 (Leiden,

1988), p p . 8 1 - 9 8 . ( H e a l s o c o n t r i b u t e d t w o i t e m s t o t h e A p p e n d i x to this 9d2 -

volume:

Dodekapropheton

11d2 -

( I I I , 4) o n p p . 2 6 7 - 2 6 9 ,

Dodekapropheton

"Cranmer

and

Cranmer:

the

Essays

(Durham,

( I I I , 4) o n p p .

Daily

Services"

in Commemoration

1990), p p .

in

and

290-292). M. Johnson

of the 500th

(ed.),

Anniversary

Thomas

of his

Birth

51-81.

"Isaiah 52:13 53:12: A n Eclectic T e x t a n d a S u p p l e m e n t a r y note the H e b r e w Manuscript 35 (1990), p p .

K e n n i c o t t 9 6 " , Journal

Sykes

( e d . ) , Sacrifice

"Universalism

and

1991), p p .

in S e c o n d

(1992), p p .

on

Studies

187-211.

" S a c r i f i c e in t h e E a r l y E a s t S y r i a n (Cambridge,

of Semitic

Eucharistie Tradition"

Redemption‫׳‬.

Durham

Essays

in

S.W.

in

Theology

Studies

NS 4 3

118-125.

I s a i a h " , Journal

of Theological

377-398.

" K n o w l e d g e , Humiliation or Suffering: A Lexical, T e x t u a l a n d

Exe-

getical P r o b l e m in I s a i a h 5 3 " in H . A . M c K a y a n d D . J . A . C l i n e s (eds.), Of Prophets'

Visions

and the Wisdom

of Sages ( E s s a y s i n

hon-

o u r o f R . N o r m a n W h y b r a y o n his S e v e n t i e t h B i r t h d a y ) J Supplement

Series

162 (Sheffield, 1993), p p .

" B e h o l d t h e s p e a k e r " : a n o t e o n I s a i a h xli 2 7 " , (1993), p p .

Vetus Testamentum

1 6 " , Studia

43

405-408.

" T h e o d o r e of Mopsuestia: the A n a p h o r a a n d Mystagogical "The

SOT

126-141.

Patristica

26 (1993), p p . 21

Catechesis

34‫־‬.

Relationship of the A n a p h o r a s of T h e o d o r e a n d Nestorius that of A d d a i

and

Mari"

in G .

Karukaparampil

(ed.),

to

Tûvaik:

Studies in honour of Revd Jacob Vellian, (Kottayam,

1995), p p .

" T h e E n d of Chronicles", 1 (1996), pp.

Syrian C h u r c h e s Series X V I

2026‫־‬.

Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament

" T h e origin of the a n a p h o r a of Nestorius: G r e e k or Syriac?",

of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester pp. "The

10,

53-60. 7 8 (3)

Bulletin (1996),

73-86.

Lessons

in

the

Daily

Offices",

Tufton Review

1 i (1997),

pp.

1-13. "The

Intercessions in t h e East S y r i a n A n a p h o r a s of T h e o d o r e Nestorius",

Studio. Patristica 3 0

(1997), p p .

and

306-313.

Wúting and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah: Studies of an Interpretive Tradition, e d i t e d b y C r a i g

" W a s the Peshitta of Isaiah of C h r i s t i a n origin?" in

C . Broyles a n d C r a i g A. Evans, S u p p l e m e n t s to V e t u s T e s t a m e n tum LXX,2

(Leiden,

1997),

563-582.

" T h e T w e l v e Prophets: Peshitta a n d T a r g u m " in

Targum and Peshitta,

edited by Paul V . M . Flesher, T a r g u m Studies, 2 (Scholar Press, Atlanta, Georgia,

1998),

119-139.

"Notes on a Citation of Chrysostom by Severus",

Studies,

N S 5 0 (1999),

162-163.

Journal of Theological

INDEX

OF

SOURCES

HEBREW BIBLE

Genesis 1-3 l:26ff. 1:28 1:29-30 2-3 3 3:5 3:9 3:14-15 3:14 4 4:10 5:24 5:32 6-9 6:3 6:9 6:10 6:11-13 7:6 8:21 9 9:2-3 9:4 9:5ff. 9:5-6 10 13:6 14:22 15:1 15:4 15:5 15:6 15:13 18:10 18:18 18:19 21:28-32 22:18 26:4 28:14 32:4 35:4

92, 187 122 94, 99 95 87, 222 99 223 3 94 92 55 115 191 254 115, 123, 125‫ ־‬126 254, 262 126 241 126 254 125 125 96 116, 118, 126 120 115, 118, 126 241 26 31 258 259 26 259 254, 259 116 258 258 95 258 258 26 22 4

39-40 39:9 41:25ff. 42:22 43:15 49 49:5 49:8- 12 49:9 49:10

5 258 5 120 4 23 115 35-36 23, 35 23, 242, 260

Exodus 2:14 5:21 6:6 7:3-5 8:12-14 9:7 10:1 10:2 15:13 18:25 18:28 20:2 20:4 20:22 22:28-29 22:30 23:19 25:9 25:40 26:21 26:22 26:25 34:19fT. 32:20 34:30

254, 262 4 56 117 106 117 117 11 56 121 121 261 261 121 117 96 96 47 47 121 121 121 116 207 221

Leviticus 17:4 17:10-16 18:21 18:24-30 22:17-25 24:11

116 116 116 120 176 185

24:16 25:25-34 25:47-55 26:6 26:22

185 57 57 97 122

Numbers 12:8 13:33 21:16-18 22-24 22:1-35 22:1-6 22:7-14 22:7 22:8 22:9 22:10 22:11 22:12 22:13 22:14 22:15-21 22:15-17 22:15 22:17-18 22:18-19 22:18 22:19 22:20 22:22-35 22:22 22:23-27 22:23 22:28-30 22:31-35 22:31 22:32-33 22:32 22:34 22:35 22:38 23:7-10 23:7-8 23:7 23:9 23:10 23:18-24 23:18-20 23:18 23:19 23:21 23:22

166 106 31 1-17, 21 2 2 3, 8 2, 3 2 2, 8 2 8 2, 6 2 2 8 5 2 3 9 2, 6, 15 6, 7 2, 8, 9, 10 9 8, 10, 13 10 12, 13 11 11 12, 13 13 13 9, 13 2, 9, 14 15 20 6 21 24-25 26 20 6 7, 21 26-27 27 27-28

23:23 23:24 24 24:2 24:3-9 24:3 24:4 24:7 24:8 24:9 24:10-13 24:13 24:15-19 24:15 24:16 24:17 24:18-19 24:19 31 31:8 31:16 35 35:30-34 35:33

4 23, 34 20 21 20 21 5, 21 32-33 27-28, 34 23, 34 15 15 20 21 5 15, 23, 32-33 33 23 8 8 8 120 120 120

Deuteronomy 4:2 6:5 8:2-3 10:8 12:31 14:1-21 14:21 15:19-20 18:10 19:1113 21:1-9 22:6-7 28:38ff. 29:29 30:12

7 261 9 48-49 116 95 96 96 116 57 116 94 121 223 223

Joshua 21:44

4

Judges 6:21 7:2 9:24 16:18

48 4 115 4

Ruth 4:1-6

57

1 Samuel 6:6 9:9 13 15 15:24 16

17:34-37 2 Iff. 21:14 31 2 Samuel 1-5 2:3

6 7 14:4-11 24 1 Kings 1 5 5:17 5:21-26 7:13-47 8:11 12 8:54 9:3 10:29 11:9 11:14 11:18

11:23 11:25 13:24-25 16:29-33 22:22ff. 25:8 25:11 11:20

11 5 45 45 14 45 94 45 4 45

45 222 48 39, 66, 74 57 45, 47

46 45 46 47 47 47 48 48 4 10 10 10 10 10 94 175 117 196 196 196

23:10 24:18-20 25:27-30 1 Chronicles 1-9 6:16 1 Off. 10

10:13-14 13 13:3 13:14 14:10-17 15 15:1 15:13 16:4-7 16:37 17 18:6 18:8 18:11 18:13 21

21:26 22:1 22:8 22:9-10 22:11 24:1-6 28:3 28:5 28:6-7 28:10 28:11-18

29:1 29:20 29:23

96 197 41 116 202 133 94, 96 94 202 116

42 49 49 38, 44 45 48 45 48 46 48 48 48 49 49 37, 39 46 47 47 46 45 45, 48 45 46 39 46 224 46 46 39 46 47 46 219 219

2 Chronicles 1 - 6

2 Kings 2:23-24 5:29 8:19 16:3 17 17:13 17:25-28 17:26 19:37 21:6

116

41 90

3:1 5:13-14 6:16

6:42 7:1-3 7:3 7:12-22 7:12 7:16 7:17‫ ־‬18 13

49 45 46 39 39, 48 47-48 45 43 48 45, 48 39 40

13:4-12 13:5-8 13:5 15:2-15 15:3 21:6 21:7 21:12-15 21:13 22:2-6 23:3 24:13 24:17-22 29:5-11 30:6-12 35:3-6 36:10-21 36:11-14

175 39 40 175 175 175 39, 41 175 175 175 40, 41 4 175 43, 175 43 175 43 41

Ezra 4:6 6:22 9:1 9:11 9:14

198 195 173 173 173

Nehemiah 9:24 10:31 12:26

4 177 196

Esther 2:23 6:1-2

200 200

Job 9:32ff. 13:15ff. 14:13ff. 16 16:18ff. 16:18 17 19 19:21 19:25-27 38:39-41 39:13-18

53 53 53 53, 54, 57 53-55 115 55 53, 55, 58 57 53-59 94 95

Psalms 5 books of 1-72 1-50 1-2

61-82 73 70 6 2 - 6 7 , 69, 70, 72, 76

1 1:1-3 1:1 1:2 1:4-5 2 2:1-5 2:1 2:7 2:8-9 2:12 3ff. 3-41 3 9-10 9:12 10 16 18 18:26 19 20 21 23 25:22 33 37 37:20 41 41:14 42-83 42-49 42-43 42 45 45:8 48:15 49 title 49:15 50:13-14 51-100 51:17 55:16 61 63 68:3 68:12 69 69:23-28 71 72 72:18-19 72:20

6 5 - 6 6 , 69, 75, 76 65 64 64 65 6 6 - 6 7 , 69, 75, 76, 79, 225, 227 66 64 225 66 64 64, 67 68 64, 72 64 120 64 278 64, 74 118 64, 65 74 74 75 56 64 65 105 72 68 73 73 64 72, 73 64 218 210 210 56, 210 260 70 260-261 210 74 74 105 226 278 278 74 64, 72, 74, 79 68 73, 81

73-83 73 73:17 74 76 77 77:15 79 80 81 82 82:1 83 84-88 88 89 89:53 90 90:1 90:4 91 91:13 92:10-13 93-100 94 94:14-15 94:23 95 96 96:13 97 98 98:9 99:6 100 101-150 102 102:4 102:12 102:16 102:24 103 103:7 104 104:21 105:16-22 105:18-19 105:26 105:31 106 106:10 106:15 106:16 106:23

75 42, 75, 218 218 75 80, 81 75 56 75 75 76 80 225-226 73 73 75, 76 72, 73, 75, 76 68 72, 76 76 265 89 89 62 61 62 62 62 76 62, 77 62 62 62, 77 62 76 62, 77 70 54 105 54 54 54 77 76 77 94 5 5 76 106 72, 76, 77 56 10 76 76

106:32 106:48 107 108-110 109 110 110:3 111-119 119 119:154 120-134 135-137 137 137:7 138-144 139 140 140:1 140:4 141:7 143 144 145 145:21 146-150 148 149 150

76 68 72, 78 78 80 64, 78, 2 2 5 - 2 2 6 226 78 64, 65 56-57 77-78 78 80 264 78 58 78 115 115 210 78 78, 79 68, 72, 7 7 - 7 9 68 6 7 - 6 9 , 70 69 69 67-69

Proverbs 1:12 22:17 23:11 24:23 24:30-34 25:21 27:20 28:27 30:3-4 30:4 30:15-16 30:17 30:24-31

210 160 56 160 165 267 210 184-185 223 278 210 98 98

Ecclesiastes 1:1 1:2-12:8 1:2 1:12 1:14 1:15 1:18 2:13 2:24

151, 159 151 160 159 164 162 160 164 164

316 3 3:10 3:16 3:22 4 4:1 4:4 4:7 4:15 5 5:12ff. 5:12 5:17

INDEX OF SOURCES

6:10-12 7 7:11 7:13 7:15 8 8:9 8:10 8:17 9:11 9:13ff. 9:13 10 10:5 10:7 10:8-10 12 12:8 12:9-12 12:9-10 12:9 12:12

161 164 164 164 161 164 164 164 164 161 164 164 164 164 162 162 162 162 164 162 164 164 164, 165 164 164 164 162 164 164 162 159, 163 151 159 151 151, 160 159-160

Isaiah 1:11 1:14 2:4 5:14 6-8 6:3 6:5 6:8 6:10 6:13 7 7:8 7:10-17 9:6-7 10:5-12:6 11

261 261 83, 96 210 169 221 226 217 117 90 278 103-104, 262 90 226 88 89-91

6:1

11:1-9 11:1-5 11:1 11:6-9 11:6-8 11:6 11:8 11:9 11:10-16 11:10-11 11:12-16 13:21-22 17:3 22:4 24:4 24:21 24:23 25:8 26:19 26:21 33:1 40 40:6 40:12 40:15 40:17 40:21-24 40:22-23 40:22 41:2-4 41:23 42:5 43:1 43:18-21 43:18 43:20 44:7 44:22-23 45:12 45:18 48:13 51 51:1-8 51:4-5 51:6 51:10-11 51:12 51:13 51:16 52:3-4 52:7 52:9 52:13-14 53

88 89-91 90 83-99 89, 91, 92 88, 115 88 88, 89, 91 91 91 91 96 262 115 110 110, 224 225 209, 211, 213 213 115 263 109 108 110 109 109 110 109 107, 110 223 223 110 56 92 92, 93 92 223 56 110 110

110 109 109 109-110 101-111 56 109 110 110 56 226 56 222 219, 282

53:12 54:5 54:9-17 54:10 54:14-17 59:6 60:1-22 65:11 16 65:17-25 65:17 65:25

220 56 93 108 97 115 91 92 92 92, 110 91, 92

Jeremiah 6:20 9:20 18:7-8 18:9-10 31 38:11-12 39:3 39:13 40:1 40:5 41:5 41:10 43:6 44:30 52:12 52:15 52:26

260 210 263 263 278 104 196 196 196 196 4 196 196 199 196 196 196

Lamentations 3:58

56-57

Ezekiel 1:3 1:5 2:5 2:7 3:7 3:1621 3:18 3:20 5:10-12 5:10 5:11 5:17 7:2 7:4 7:10 7:11 7:23-27 7:23 7:27

118 227 117 117, 117, 123 121, 117, 122 116 119 122 124 122 121 115 114 113, 121

122 122 123 121

115, 120-121

8:17 8:18 9:4-6 9:9 12:2 12:19 12:27 12:28 14:12-20 14:14 ‫־‬20 14:14 14:15 14:20 15:2 16:20-21 18:9 20:8 20:11-13 20:21 20:25-26 20:26 20:30 20:31 21:31T. 21:3-4 21:26-28 22: Iff. 22:2 22:31T. 22:3 22:4 22:6ff. 22:8 22:15 22:26 22:27 22:31 23:39 23:45 24:3-14 24:6ff. 24:6 24:7ff. 24:8 24:9 24:11 24:12 24:13-14 25:12-14 28:16 33:1-9 33:6 33:7-9 33:8

115, 120 122 124 113-114 122 115 263 263 124 126 124 227 124 114 116-117 125 117 117 117 117 116-117 117 117 124 124 4 113 1 1 4 - 1 1 5 , 120 121 115 118 121 114 119 121 114 121 121 119 120 115 116 113 114- 115 115 115 114 116, 121 121 116, 122, 124 264 115 123 121 123 121

33:10-20 33:12-16 33:23-29 33:25ff. 33:25 33:26-29 33:26 33:27 33:28 36:13 36:17ff. 36:17-18 36:18-19 36:18 36:20ff. 36:20-23 36:25-27 36:25 36:26-29 36:26 36:30 36:33 37:21-23 40-48 45:9 Daniel 2 2:44 3 6:16-24 7

8 7:13 7:14 7:23 9:1 9:25 12

Hosea 1-3 1-2

1

1:1 1:2 2:15

2:18 2:20 2:23 3 3:1-4 3:1 3:3 4

123 123 121 113 115, 121 115 115, 115, 116 119 120 122 113 122 119, 125 119 125 127 125 119 125 125 115

119

122 121

122

297 241 285 96 279, 297 299 241 218, 241 240 198 227 278

130 166 168 166 167-168 167 167 97, 99 167 167-169 168 168 168 148

4:1-7:7 7:8-10:15 9-10 9:1-9 9:1 9:3 9:4 9:5 9:6 9:7-9 9:7 9:9 9:10-17 9:10 9:15 9:16 9:17 10 10:1 10:2 10:3 10:4 10:5 10:8 10:11-12 10:11 10:12-13 10:12 10:15 11:4 11:11 12:7 13:1 13:14

147 147 129-150 148 134 131, 135 135, 142 134 131 148 131 131 148 131, 135, 148 131, 135, 141-142 135 135, 144 147-148 140, 149 135 135 135 131 133, 135, 143 148-149 135 134 133, 141 132 147 167 149 209 56, 209, 211

Joel 3:9-10 3:19

96 1 15

Amos 1:1 4:7 5:21 7:1-9 7:10-17 8:1-3 9:1 9:13-15

166 184 261 169 169 169 169 184

Micah 5

278

Habakkuk 1:2-3 1:12

115 210

2:5 2:14 3 3:13

209 88 210 210

Zjphaniah 3:3ff.

113

Haggai 1:6 2

184-185 278

^echariah 1:9 9

166 278

Malachi 1:1 1:2-5 1:6-2:9

171 171 171

1:6-14 1:10 2:1-9 2:2 2:10 16 2:10-12 2:11 2:13-16 2:14-16 2:17-3:1 3 3:1-5 3:1-4 3:5 3:6-12 3:6-7 3:9 3:13-21 3:13-15 3:22-24

176, 178 175 176 185 172 171-172, 176 172 174 171-172 173 171 278 179 171, 176 171 176, 185 171 185 171, 185 171 185

NEW TESTAMENT Matthew 4:1-11 5:3 5:17 5:18 5:23-24 5:44 5:46 6:12 6:15 11:13 18:7 18:10 18:21-22

18:28 18:35 22:37-39 22:37 24 24:20 27:52ff. Mark 1 1:9-11 8:31-33 13 13:6 13:7 13:9-13 13:24-25

Luke 226 267 259 227 59 264 264 266 264 237 264 224 133 220 265

,256

257

253 ^ j j , 261 ζυι 7: 242-243 265 212

227 225 227 224 224 224 224, 231 224

2:46-50 3:22 4 : 1 4:5 4:18 6:27-28 6:32 6:35 6:37-38 14:11 17:3-4 21 23:30 24:26

2

2

225 225 7 261 265 264 264 265 264 259 237 269 264 265

‫ ד‬1‫ר‬ ‫?י‬, . ,224

οο ‫ן‬ "A

1:29 3:31-32 6:39 13:34 15:12 17:5

220 224 243 264 263 221

Acts 3:13 4:30 15:22-23

220 220 234

13

‫־‬

Romans 2:14 2:26-27 5:12 5:20 8:18-39 8:20-22 11

253 253 253 253 93 85 285

1 Corinthians 1:2 12:31 13:2-3 13:4-7 15:4 15:20 15:51 15:54-55 15:55

234 266 266 266 205-215 55 243 211 213

Galatians 3:13

56

Ephesians 1:7 2:14 15

56 260

Philippians 1:1 2:6-11

234 220

1 Thessalonians 4:16

243

2 Thessalonians 2:3 2:6-7

243 243

1 Timothy 1:9

253, 257

Titus 2:14

56

Hebrews 219

4:11 9:11-12 11:33

265 219 96

1 Peler 1:18 3:18-20

56 210

2 Peler 2:15

7

Jude 11

7

Revelation 1:1 1:2 4-5 4:8 4:11 5

223 224 217-227 221-222 221 219-220, 25 5:5 224 5:6 221 5:8 224 5:9 222 5:13 219 6:10 219 6:15-16 133 6:16-17 219 6:17 223 7 217 7:11 219,224 7:14 224 10:7 218 11:15 219 11:16 224 12 211, 298-299 13 297-298 14:3 224 17 297 19:4 224 20:6 219 2 0 : 1 2 2 1 1 22:1-3 265

SEPTUAGINT Genesis

28:16 41:4

24 24

41:7 41:21 49:9

24 24 23-24

14

‫־‬

Exodus 5:8 8:12-14 23:5

24 106 24

Numbers 10:35 22:7 23:6 23:9 23:10 23:19 23:21 23:22 23:24 24:2 24:3 24:4 24:7 24:8 24:9 24:15 24:16 24:17 24:18 19 24:19

24 3 21 23-26 25-26 26 27 28 28 21 22-23 22 32-34 28 34 22-23 22 32-33 33 23-24

Deuteronomy 28:20 Psalms 110:3

226

Proverbs book of 28:27

188 184

Ecclesiastes 1:1 7:27

163 151

Isaiah 51:6 52:13 14 53:11

104 222 220

Jeremiah 51:30

199

Jonah 1:2 3:2

195 195

Habakkuk 3:13

210

MINOR GREEK VERSIONS Symmachus Isaiah 51:6

104

Aquila Isaiah 51:6

VULGATE

104

Exodus 8:12-14

106

Proverbs 28:27

184

Numbers 22:7

3

Hosea 9:10

140

Deuteronomy 28:20

184

Malachi 3:9

185

PESHITTA Genesis 49:10 Exodus 8 : 1 2 - 1 4 Isaiah 24:23

242 106 225

Daniel Daniel 8

240 240 241

ARAMAIC TARGUMS OF THE PENTATEUCH Genesis

10:21 49:1 49:8ff. 49:9 49:26

Numbers

241 23 35 23 25

Exodus

3:14 8:12-14 12:42 15:1 15:2 15:3 15:7 15:11 15:16 15:18 17:12

221-222 106 221

28 28 29 29 29 29 29 25

23:7 23:9 23:10 23:18 23:19 23:21 23:22 23:24 24:2 24:3 24:4 24:7 24:8 24:9 24:15 24:17

21 24-25 26 21

27 27 28 23, 30 21 21 21

33 28 23, 34-35 21

33

Deuteronomy

33:15

25

TARGUM OF THE PROPHETS General Haggai 1:6

239

Habakkuk

184-285

3:2

185

Micah 7:14

185

TARGUM OF THE WRITINGS Job Targum

181

Proverbs

28:27

184-185

QUMRAN SCROLLS lQGen.Ap. 2:22 1QH 1QH 1.21 1QH 11.13-14 1QH XII.10-15 lQIs" Isaiah 51:6 lQIs" Isaiah 52:14 lQIs a Isaiah 53:11 lQIs b Isaiah 51:6 1QM l Q p Hab. 7 1QS 3:15 1QS 11:3-4 Community Rule

192 186 223 223 223 107 120 120 107 212 223 186, 222 186 186

2Q.18 4Q99-101 4QJ02-103 4QJ09-110 4Q.157 4QJ71.3 4Q185 4Q,184 4Q246 4Q298 4Q300 4Q403 4Q403.1 4Q413

181 181 181 181 181 223 181, 181, 240 226 217 223 224 181

4Q416.2 4Q417.2 4Q420 4Q421 4Q424 4Q425 4Q491 4Q508 4QJEnastr3 11Q5 21:11-17; 22:1 11Q10 1 lQMelch llQPs" 18:1-16 = Ps 154 Book of Mysteries CD 2:10 Songs of Sab. Sacrifice

217 217 181 181 181 181 225, 227 223 192 181 181 226 181 186-188 186, 190 224

Sapiential Work A (=) 1Q26 4Q415-418 4Q416 1

181-193 182 182 183

4Q416 4Q416 4Q416 4Q416 4Q416 4Q416 4Q416 4Q416 4Q416 4Q416 4Q417 4Q417 4Q417 4Q417 4Q417 4Q417 4Q417 4Q418 4Q418 4Q418 4Q423

1:10 1:13 2 2 iii.5-6 2 iii.8 2 iii.9-12 2 iii.12 2 iii.14 2 iii.15 2 iii.17 1 1:10-12 2 i: 18 2 i: 1 2 i:13-14 2 i: 14-18 2 1:15-16 2 i:22 2:2 2:5 126:1-10

183 183 183 184 184 184 184 186 184 186 186 182 182 182 187 185 187 183 183 184 182

APOCRYPHA Ben Sira 2:1 3:17-24 3:17 3:21-24 3:22 4:5-6 4:18 11:4 24:23 24:33 36:( 16) 19 36:(17)20 42:19 43:25 44-50 44:9 44:12 44:16 48:24 48:25 49 49:14

183-193 182 189 182 188-189 190 185 189-190 189 190 190 189 189 189-190 189 181

234 234 191-192 190 189-190 191 191

4 Ezra 7:10-12

83

Judith 1:1 2:14 4:3 5:1 14:2-3 14:12 15:6

195 195 195 195 195 195 195

Tobit 1-3 2 10 13 15 16 18

1 21 1:22

2:1

14:15

197 201 197 197, 201 197 201 201 197-198, 201-202 201 201 201

PSEUDEPIGRAPHA 1 Enoch 15-16 39:12

189, 192 217 221

47 47:2 51:3

219 219 218

INDEX OF SOURCES

324

61:8 92-105

218 185

Epistle of Enoch

186-187

4:17

192

Book of Watchers

188

Odes of Solomon

Book of Astronomy

188

Ode 42:11-14 Ode 15:9 22:1 5

211 213 213 213

2 Enoch 22

222

11:1

222

Jubilees

Testament of Levi 3 Enoch

10

218

2:10 5:1

217 217

JEWISH WRITINGS IN GREEK Eupolemus Fg. 2.30-32 Fg. 4

144 199 199

De Plant.

12 Ezekiel the Tragedian Philo

225 (Jewish, Philo etc.) 19-36

De Agr.

79 81

29 29

25

25

De Praem.

27 91-97 163-172

22 20 20

De Sob.

13

31

De Conf

56 72

22 22

De Dec.

De Somn.

1.129

22

De Virt.

49

26

De Ebr.

80

25

De Vit. Con.

82 104-121

22 31

De Gig.

7-8

10-13 84-88 89 90

31 31 31 31

25 Leg. ad Gaium

54

De Mig.

125 200 224

22 22 22

39 De Op.

132 134-35

Leg. All.

22

1.3 11.34 III. 172 III.186

25 187

II.5 III.3

De Mig. Ahr.

Mundi

25

20 22 22 22

Qu. Gen.

20 20

Quis Rerum 86ÍT. 115

25 25

Spec. Leg. III.36 IV. 14

25 25, 26

Vit. Mos. I 158 264-265 277 278-279 279

282 283-284 283 284 286 287 288 2 8 9 291 289 290-291 290 291

226 21 20 20, 24, 30 20

Josephus, Jewish Antiquities

29 20, 29 20,26 20, 23, 2 7 - 2 9 , 3 4 20 30 20, 35 20 20, 22 34 2 7 - 2 8 , 32 23, 34

11

199

RABBINIC SOURCES b. Ber. 2 0 b b. S h a b . 104a b. S h a b . 115a b. Y o m a 3 8 b b. R H l i a b. H a g . 13a b. S a n h . 105a b. M a k . 10b b. Nid. 31a j e r . S a n h 28b, 29d

m . Y o m a 1.5 m . Sukkah 5.7 m . H a g . 2:1 M e k h . de R. Ishmael A m a l e k 1 : 1 1 6 - 118 Exod. R . 16:8 N u m . R . 20:18 N u m . R. 20:19 T a n h . Balak 12

184 10 181 10 25 189 21 10 21 184

224 224 221

25 25 10 25 25

CHURCH FATHERS Aphrahat Demonstrations: I XXIII II

V V,1 XIV XXI XXIII XXII.25 XXIII Augustine Quaest. in Hept: Num., XLVIII

229 245 250 247 2 6 9 233, 236, 239 237 234 251 233 233

E p h r e m the Syrian Hymn on the Crucifixion 9:2 Hymn on Virginity 7:13-14 Hymn on Misibis 52

214

214 214

Eusebius Proof of the Gospel

218

Preparation of the Gospel 9.29

225

Ignatius, Philadelphians 9

223

7 236

Babai the Great 235‫־‬

Jerome

Clement Miscellanies 6.17; 7.17

De 223

scúpt0úbus ecclesiasticis

Justin Martyr Apology 1.20 Origen Celsus 3.37

223

Homily 1 On Ezekiel Pseudo-Clementine Homilies X I I . 2 9

225 237

Subhalmaran

229245‫־‬

NEW TESTAMENT APOCRYPHA Acts of Pilate (Gospel of Nicodemus)

212, 2 1 4

Acts of Thomas 1:10

214

OTHER ANCIENT GREEK AND LATIN AUTHORS Aristokritos, Theosophy Ctesias of C n i d o s , Perúca O r a c l e of Hystaspes

254 198-199, 202 255

Lactantius, Divine Institutions V I I . 1 4 - 1 7 Philo of Byblos Plutarch, Life of Romulus

254 208 29

ANCIENT NEAR EAST Ahiqar Amenemope Babyloniaca of Berossus Babylonian T h e o d i c y Bar P u n e s h F r a g m e n t Dialogue of Pessimism E l o q u e n t Peasant F a r m e r ' s Instruction Instruction by a M a n for his Son Instruction for M e r i k a r e Instruction of A m e n e m h e t Instruction of A n y Instruction of Onchsheshonqy Instruction of P t a h h o t e p Instructions of S u r u p p a k Ipuwer Khakeperreseneb

156, 2 0 0 - 202 164 199 156 200 158 157 155 155 153‫ ־‬154, 164 154, 157, 164 155 156 152- 153 152- 153 154 154

Lebensmüde P r o p h e c y of Neferti Sasobek Sheikh Fadl Inscription T a l e of S i n u h e

158 154 155 200 152

Ugaritic T e x t s , K T U 1.4 vi-vii 1.4 vi 12 1.4 vii 4 6 - 7 1.4 viii Iff. 1.4 viii 1 7 - 2 0 1.5 i Iff. 1.5 ii 2 - 4 1.5 v - v i 1.6 ii 1 7 - 1 9 1.6 ii 3 0 - 5 1.6 ν l l f f 1.6 vi 16ff. 1.6 vi 2 7 - 9 1.23 1.127:29

210 210 206 207 207, 2 1 0 211 207 206 207 206 206 207 207 207 210

INDEX

Abegg, M . G . Acjmelaeus, A. Albright, W . F . Alexander, P.S. Allen, L.C. Alster, Β. Alter, R. Anderson, B.W. Antonelli, N. Argall, R.A. Asad, T . Assemanus, J . S . Attenborough, D. Attridge, H . W . Avigad, N. Baarda, T. Ball, C J . Barker, M . Barnes, T . D . Barns, J . W . B . Barr, J . Barrington, S. Barthélémy, D. Barton, J . Baskin, J . R . B a u c k h a m , R. Baum, G. Baxter, R . Bebbington, D. Beck, È. Becker, J . Becking, B. Bedjan. P. Beentjes, P.C. Beer, J . S . Bergerhof, Κ. Bert, G.

Beuken, W . A . M . Bitter, S. Black, M . Blum, Ε. Boccaccini, G. Bockmuehl, M . N . A . Bonney, E.

182, 108 210 237 116, 123, 152 14 85 249 188 178 233, 83 208 192

OF

M O D E R N

186

121, 124

235

249 220 220, 222, 225, 227 233, 237, 241 155 87, 102 290 182 133 20-21 211, 213 130, 273 285 296 214 50 206 235 188 137 197 248 249, 251, 256, 257, 259, 262, 266 92 130 30, 191, 219 90 188 190 291

AUTHORS

Borgen, P. B o r n k a m m , G. Bosshard, E. Boyer, P. B r a n d o n , S.G.F. Brock, S. P. Brockington, L.H. Brooke, G J . Brooks, E.W. Brownlee, W . H . Broyles, C . C . B r u e g g e m a n n , W. Budd, P.J. Bultmann, R. Burstein, S.M. Butler, P. Butterweck, A. Calvin, J. C a q u o t , A. C a r p e n t e r , E.E. Carr, D.M. Carrez, M. C a t h c a r t , K.J. Cazelles, H. C h a b o t , I.-E. C h a p m a n , R. Charles, R . H . Charlesworth, J . H . Chediath, G. Chester, A.N. Chesterton, G . K . Childs, B.S. Christensen, A. Civil, M. Clements, R.E. Clines, D.J.A. Coats, G . W . Coggins, R.J. Colley, L. Collins, J J . Colson, F.H. Cook, J . Cooke, G.A. Cowley, A.

19, 20, 2 5 - 2 8 , 31, 3 4 - 3 6 214 171, 172 86 254 214 101-102 22 235 222 102 67, 69, 70, 75, 119, 122 14 205 199 139 22 12, 1 2 9 - 1 5 0 50 13 89 202 185 202 235 293 219 19, 188, 199, 213, 217 235 23 303 74, 106 238 208 88 90, 129 122 13 205 278 181 182, 1 8 4 - 1 8 7 , 193 25, 226 188 117 156

C o w p e r , B.H. Craigie, P . C . Cross, F.E. Cross, F . M .

249 209 212 240

Darwin, C. D a u b e , D. Davies, A. Davies, E . W . Davies, G . C . B . Davis, E.F. Dawkins, R. Day, J . de L a g a r d e de M o o r , J . C . de Sola Pool, D. de V a u x , R . deClaisse-Walfoord, Ν . Delitzsch, F. Di Lella, A.A. Dietrich, M . D i l l m a n n , A. Dirksen, P.B. D i r v e n , L. D o n a l d s o n , ]. Doré, J . Dorival, G .

84 14 273 14 291 115 84 61, 2 0 0 104 209 272 117 61, 72 12, 106 188 189, 297 197 106 46-48 212 223 202 21, 2 4 - 2 8 , 32-33 39, 50 198 102 105, 107 125 231 106, 109 251-252 93

Dörrfuss, Ε . M . Drews, R . Driver, G . R . Drive r, S . R . Duchesne-Guillemin, J. D u h m , B. Duncan, EJ. Dunn, J.D.G.

Eire, C . M . N . E i s e n m a n , R. Eissfeldt, Ο . Elgvin, T . Emerton, J.Α. Engammarc, M. Eslinger, L. Evans, C . A . Every, G . Ewald, H . G . A .

95 109 1 1 6 - 1 1 9 , 122, 124, 125 136 182, 186 108 183, 1 8 6 - 1 8 7 102 131 209 102 206 106

F a b e r , F.A. F a b e r , G.S.

293 287 3 0 4

Eades, K . L . Ehrlich, A.B. Eichrodt, W.

Fales, F . M . Fallon, F. Farmer, W.R. Faulkner, R . O . F e r r a r , YV.F. Fewell, D . N . Fiey, J . M . P'inkelstein, I. Fischer-Elfert Fishbane, M . Fitzmyer, J . A . Forget, J . Forrester, D . W . F . Fox, M . V . Foxe, G . Freedman, D.N. Frerichs, E. Friedman, L.M. Froom, L.R.E. Frye, R . N . Frymer-Kensky, T. Funk, S.

197 199 150 157 218 110 2 3 4 235, 238 177, 178 155 113, 123, 185 181, 201 248 139-140 159 287 36, 119, 211 19 271, 276, 2 8 0 297-298 230, 235, 242 119 251

Gabriel, I. Galling, K. G a r c i a M a r t i n e z , F. Gardiner, A.H. Garsoian, N. G a v i n , F. Gelb, I.J. Geller, M . Gelston, A. Gibson, J . G L . Gilley, S . W . Gilly, W . Gismondi, H. G l a n ville, S . R . K . G l a z i e r - M c D o n a l d , Β. Goldberg, J .

42 44 182 154 230-231 251 206 200 61 57, 206 291 291 235 156 173 273-274, 277-278 289, 291 30 185, 2 0 0 22, 102 249 86 83 157 14 196, 2 0 0 19 20 200, 202 192, 202

G o o c h , L. Goodman, M. G o r d o n , R.F. G r a b b e , L.L. Graffin, R. Graham, W. G r a h a m e , K. Graves, R . G r a y , G.B. Grayson, A.K. Green, W.S. Greene, J . T . Greenfield, J . C . Grelot, P.

Grossfeld, B. G r u e n w a l d , I. Gwynn, J.

‫׳‬21, 35 189 232-233, 2 4 8 - 2 4 9 , 251

Haag, H. H a h n , Α. Haile, M . Hall, C.A. H a m p s o n , R. H a r l a n d , P.J.

115 106 291 150 232 1 1 4 - 1 1 5 , 117, 122, 124, 126 181 184, 186-187 299 192 297 92 278 191-192 278 206 207 293, 2 9 6 19, 31, 36 117 153 155 108 304 189 212, 2 1 4 87 254 106 123 205 232 95 108 61, 62 158 271, 276 242 292 106

Harrington, D J . H a r r i s o n , J.F.C. Hart, J.H.Λ. H a r t m a n , L.F. Hausmann, J. Haydon, C. Hayward, C.T.R. Hazlitt, W . Healey, J . F . Heavisides, H. Hecht, R.D. Heider, G.C. Helck, W . Hempcl, J. Hempton, D.N. Hengel, M. . H e n n e c k e , E. Himmelfarb, G. Hinneils, J . R . Hitzig, F. H o f f m a n , Y. Holden, J.L. H o l m e s , R. H o u s t o n , VV.J. H o u t m a n , C. Howard, D.M. Hughes, G.R. H ü h n e r , L. Humbach, H. Husenbeth, F.C. Hyatt, J.P. I m , T.-S. Jacobson, H. Jagger, P J . J a p h e t , S. J a s p e r , L). Johnson, J.H. J o y c e , P. Jungreis, R.E.

38, 39 104 296 37, 43, 50 139 158 124 273

Kalimi, I. K a t z , P. K a u f m a n n , Y. K a u t t , J.L. Keil, C . F . Kelly, B.E. Kipling, R. Kippenberg, H. Kiraz, G.A. Klein, M . L . Kleinig, J . W . Kmoskö, M. K n a b e n b a u e r , I. K n i e r i e m , R. Knobel, A.W. K n o x , R.A. Koenig. J . Koenig, F . W . Kratz, R.G. KrŪ11, J .

38 104 113 251 12, 37 38, 42 232 177, 255 243 23 49 252 107 95 106 291 107 198 171, 172 211-212

L a b o u r t , J. L a c o c q u e , A. Lake, K. Lambert, W.G. L a n e , A.N.S. Lane, D J .

238 297 223 153, 136 231, 238, 185 12 33 200 123 272, 21

156, 158 235, 242

L a n g e , A. L a r g e m e n t , R. Le D é a u t , R. L e m a i r e , Α. Lemche, W.E. Levin, D. Levison, J . R . Le P a p p e de T r é v e r n , J.F. M . Levy, B.B. Levy, T . Ε . Lichtheim, M. L i d d o n , H.P. Lindenbcrger, J . M . Lingard, J . Linzey, A. Lipinski, E. Livesley, A. Livingstone, E.A. Lock, W . L o n g m a n , 'Γ. Loretz, O . L o w t h , R.

301 23 177 156 136139 156 291-292 85 197 144 212 136 164 197 106

Macholz, C. M a c i n t o s h , A.A.

90 97, 166, 168

275

Mack, B.L. Maitland, S.R. Mango, M.M. Marti, K. Martin-Achard, R. Mason, R. Mather, C Mathews, T.F. Matthew, H.C.G. Matthews, R. Mays, J.L. McCann, J.C. McKeating, H. McNamara, M. Meier, E. Meyers, C. Melugin, R.F. Mews, S. Middendorp, T. Middlekauff, R. Midgely, M. Migne, J.P. Milburn, D. Milgrom, J. Milik, J . T . Millar,' F. Millard, A.R. Miller, Perry Miller, P.D. Miscall, P.D. Mitchell, D.C. Mitchell, T.C. Moberly, R.W.L. Moore, C.A. Moore, M.S. Motyer, A. Mowinckel, S. Mosis, R. Mulder, M.J. Murray, D.F. Murray, R. Na'aman, N. Nedungatt, G. Neusner, J . Newton, T. Niditch, S. Nielsen, K. Nineham, D.E. Nitzan, B. Nockles, P.B. North, C.R.

191 304 230-231 106 31 174 271-285 230 140 299 62, 65 61, 72, 76 113, 119 20-21, 25, 33 106 119 93 291 191 272, 275 86 248 290 4, 8, 10, 12, 13 182, 191 30, 239 201 272-273 67, 69, 70 110 62 197 126 195, 197 20, 30 107 61 38, 44 237 43, 50 97, 214 178 234 19, 239-240, 242, 251 298 96 90 205 33 278 107

Noth, M. Nougayrol

14 155-156

O'Connor, M. Oden, R.A. Oden, T.C. Oeming, M. Ogden, G. Oliver, W.H. Oppenheim, A.L. Orchard, S.C. Orelli, C. von Oswalt, J.N. Owen, J. Owens, R J .

119 208 150 42 151 298 196, 208 298 106 102 130 239, 249, 259

Parisot, I.

Parry, D.W. Paul, S.M. Payne, D.F. Paz, D.G. Pereiro, J. Phillips, A. Philotea du Sinai, M. Ploeger, O. Pococke, E. Porten, Β. Potter, Β. Preuss, H.D. Prockter, L.J. Puckett, D.E. Pusey, E.B.

247, 249, 251, 256, 257, 260, 262, 266 232 130-133 152-154, 157-158 187 210 103 287 287 120 236 38, 42, 50 137, 140-143 200-201 83, 97-98 92 189 131-132 129-150

Raitt, T.M. Redditt, P.E. Reed, S.A. Reider, J. Reiner, E. Reiterer, F.V. Rendtorff, R. Reventlow, H.G. Richardson, E.C. Ricks, S.D. Riley, W. Roberts, A. Rosen, B. Rosenbaum, M.

122 171 95 107 208 102 90 123 248 187 43 223 178 3, 8, 21

Parisot, J. Parker, T.H.L. Parkinson, R.B.

Rost, L. Roth, C. Rouillard, H. Rowley, H.H. Rudolph, W.

108 283 21 210 42, 44, 49, 50

Salvesen, A. Samir, K. Sandeen, E.R. Sanders, J.A. Sandmel, S. Sarna, N.M. Schaper, J.L.W. Scheidweiler, F. Scher, A. Schiffman, L.H. Schneemelcher, W. Schoors, A. Schuerer, E. Scult, M. Seitz, C.R. Sewall, S. Sharpe, E.J. Sibley, J . Silberman, A.M. Simeon, C. Skehan, P.W. Skinner, J . Smelik, W.F. Smith, G.A. Smith, L.A. Smith, M.S. Smith, R.L. Smolinski, R. Sommer, B.D. Steck, O.H. Stegemann, E.W. Stier, R. Stone, Μ.Ε. Suggs, M.J. Sukenik, E.L. Sun, H.T.C. Suys, E. Sweeney, M.A. Syrén, R.

21 249 304 89 36 114, 115 23, 28, 33 212 235 181, 186-188 212, 214 197 30, 239 275, 285 76 271, 276, 285 254 273, 277, 285 3, 8, 21 8 188-189 109 221 129-150 145 208-210 173 285 93 91-92 90 106 36 243 107 95 155 88, 89, 93 23, 25

Taylor, C. Taylor, G. Taylor, R A . Teixidor, J . Thistleton, A.C. Thomas, F. Thomson, R.W.

192 209 240 214 2 197 230

Tischendorf, C. Toon, P. Torrey, C.C. Townsend, G. Tromp, N J .

212 294, 301-303 103, 107 289 206, 209-210

Uffenheimer, B. Ulrich, Ε. Umbreit, F.W.C. Unger, Ε. Utzschneider, Η.

123 107 106 196 172

Van der Horst, P.W. Van der Toorn, K. Van Lerberghe, K. Van Ruiten, J . Van Seters, J. Van Uchelen, N.A. VanderKam, J.C. Vermes, G.

206 206 197 92 13 25 192 8, 20-21, 27, 30, 36, 239 88-89 30 92 71, 73, 77 109 37, 39, 44, 119 208 108

Vermeylen, J . Versnel, H.S. Vervenne, M. Vincent, M.A. Volz, P. Von Rad, G. Von Soden, W. Vriezen, Th.C. Wacholder, B.Z. Ward, W. Watson, P.E. Weeks, S.D.E. Weis, R.D. Weite, E.F. Weitzman, M.P. Wenham, G. Westerman, C. Wevers, J.W. Whybray, R.N. Wiessner, G. Williams, R J . Williamson, H.G.M.

Wilson, G.H. Wise, M. Wolffe, J . Wolfson, H.A.

182, 186, 199 292 206 152 89 158 200 8 65 125 61, 62, 73, 107 252 158 37-42, 48, 109, 195, 199, 200 61, 62, 67, 72, 80 182, 186 288 19, 36

Wright, B.G. Wright, W.

Wyatt, N.

188-190, 192 232, 249, 251-252, 256, 268 226

Yadin, Y. Yardeni, A. Yarshater, E.

191-192 200-201 231, 235

Young, W.G. Yousif, B.

238 249

Zàba, Ζ. Ziegler, J. Zimmerli, W.

152 188 115, 116, 117, 123 92 107

Zobel, H.J. Zorrell, F.