Old Testament Exegesis: A Guide to the Methodology, Second Edition (Resources for Biblical Study 39)

Old Testament Exegesis

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE Resources for Biblical Study

Edited

by

Marvin A. Sweeney

N u m b e r 39

OLD TESTAMENT EXEGESIS A Guide to the Methodology by Odil Hannes Steck translated by James D.

Nogalski

OLD TESTAMENT EXEGESIS A Guide to the Methodology

by

Odil Hannes Steck translated by

James D. Nogalski

S C H O L A R S PRESS Adanta, Georgia

OLD TESTAMENT EXEGESIS A Guide to the Methodology Second Edition

Copyright © 1998 by the Society of Biblical Literature All rights reserved. No part of this work may bo reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by means of any Information storage or retrieval System, except as may be expressly permitted by the 1976 Copyright Act or i n w r i t i n g from the publisher. Requests for permission should be addressed i n w r i t i n g to the Rights and Permissions Office, Scholars Press, P.O. Box 15399, Atlanta, GA 30333-0399, USA. L i b r a r y of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Steck, Odil Hannes. [Exegesis des Alten Testaments. English] Old Testament exegesis : a guide to the methodology / by Odil Hannes Steck ; translated by James D. Nogalski. — 2nd ed. p. cm. — (Resources for biblical study ; ao. 39) Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-7885-0465-7 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Bible. O.T.—Oiticism, Interpretation, etc.—Methodology. I . Title. I I . Series. BS1174.2.B3713 1998 221.6Ό1—dc21 98-2095S

Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper

1 he growing precision of cur understanding should enhance, and not diminish our sense of wonder. Alfred Brendel, pianist

Contents ί Prefaie ta the English Edition Preface

xiii xv

Eoravord to the 12th Edition Translators Preface

xix xxiii

PART O N E : I N T R O D U C T T O N

1

§1 Foundation and Overview

3

A. The Task of Old Testament Exegesis 13. Imagination and Methodological Direcfion during Exegetical Work I . The Value and Limits of Methodological Direction I I . The Employment of Fantasy and Imagination ΠΙ. Results C. Overview of die Methods of Old Testament Exegesis .1. The Stock of Methods TL Grouping the Methods I I I . lnterdcpendenee of the Methods TVT Characterizing the Individua! Methods V Coneerning the Question o f the Expansion of the Stock of Methods 7

3 5 5 6 14 14 14 15 17 18 20

§2 General Bibliograph) for Exegetical Work

24

PART TVYO: T H E M E T H O D S

37

§3 Text Criticism A. The Task

39 39

víii

Contents

Β. Commentary on the Approach and the Method I . Relationship to Literary Criticism Π. The Procedural Steps ĪIĪ. Prineiples for the Text Critieal Decision ĪVT Summary o f the Text Crnica) Procedure C. Results Ü. Literature §4 Literary Criticism

40 40 41 42 44 44 45 47

A. The Task I . The Overarching Question of the Development of an O k i 'lèstamcnt 'lest I L Determining the Task of Literary Criticism I I I . Terminolog)—

47 51 53

B. Commentary on the Approach and Method

53

I . The Question of a Text's Literary Tnregrity I I . Methodological Prineiples for the Question of a Text's Literary lntcgrity I I I . The Question of Larger Literary Contexts I V Summary of the Literary Critical Procedure C. Results D. Literature §5 The Transmission 1 lístorical Approach A. T h e Task I . Determination I I . Terminolog) B. Commentary on the Approach and the Method I . Rclationsliip to Literary Criticism I I . Transmission TIistoric.il Processes ΙΠ. Methodological Questions for the Analytieal Process I V The Synthetic Process V Applications for the Transmission Historical Approach V I . Summary of the Procedure of Transmission History C. Results I . Jnsigln into the Origin and Changes of a Transmission U n i t within Oral Tradition I I . Transmission I listory as AcruaJizing Procedure I I I . Transmission History as the History of the Religion and Faith of fsrael TV Access to Historical and Religio-Historical Data D. Literature

47

53 54 57 58 59 60 63 63 63 64 65 65 66 68 69 69 70 71 71 71 71 72 72

Contents

§6 Redaction Historical Approach A. The Task B. Commentary on the Approach and .Method I . Relationship to Literary Criticism I I . Redaction Historical Processen I I I . Summary of the Redaction Historical Procedure C. Results I . Insight into the Changes o f a Text in Written Tradition I I . Redaction History as Actualizing Procedure I I I . Redaction History as the History o f Israel's Faith D . Literature

§7 Form Critical Approach A. The Task

ix

75 79 80 80 81 89 92 92 92 92 92

95 95

I . The Overarching Question o f the Presuppositions of a Text or Its Stages I I . Starting Point I I I . Determination TV. Terminolog}' Β. Commentary on the Approach and Method I . Constituent Questions I I . Concerning the Question of the Linguistic Shape Summary of the Procedural Steps I I I . Determining the Gerne I V The Question of the Genre l l i s t o r y Summary of the Steps V Regarding the Question o f the Life Setting Summary o f the Steps V I . Area of Usage C. Results I . Result of the Question o f ihe Linguistic Shaping and the Determination of Genre I I . Results of the Question o f the Genre History I I I . Results of the Question o f the Life Setting D. Literature

§8 Tradition Historical Approach A. The Task

95 96 100 101 102 102 103 105 106 109 109 110 114 11 5 115 115 116 116 117

121 121

I . Starting Point

121

I I . Determination I I I . Terminolog)'

123 124

χ Β. Commentary on the Approach and Method I . Differentiation from the Transmission Historical Approach I I . Areas o f Tradition Historical Inquiry I I I . Recognizing Ftxed Contents

125 125 125 128

IV. The Concept History Approach V. The Tradition Historical Approach as Historical Process

129 133

V I . The Tradition Historical Approach and the History of Motifs

134

V I I . Steps of the Tradition Historical lnvestigation of a Text C. Results I . Comprehending the Text's Profile Π. Tnsight into Connections D. Literature §9 Determining the Historical Setting A. The Task " B. Commentary on the Approach and Method I . Daring a Text I I . The Contemporary History and Social Environment of a 'lèxt I I I . Identifying the Externa! Reaüties Mentioned in the Text TV Determining Author and Addressee V Concerning Materialistic Historical Interpretation of Old Testament Texts V I . Overview of the Approach to the I listorical Setting C. Results D. Literature

PART T I TREF: PURPOSE §10 Interpretation as Determination of the Text's Historical Meaning

135 140 140 140 141 143 143 143 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 149

151 153

A. The Task B. Relationship to the Methodological Approaches

153 156

C. Commentary on the Exemtion I . Interpreting die Text in Its Own Formative Arena I I . Interpreting the Text in Its Old Testament Development D. Considering the Text's Historical Meaning in Light

158 158 163

of the Present E. Suggestion for Proceeding with the Acquisitum and Presentetion Ε Translation o f the Text G. Literature

166 167 168 169

Contents

PART F O U R : I L L U S T R A T I O N §11 The Exegetical Process Using Gen 28; 10-22 as Example

xí

171 173

A. First Provisional Translation of the llebrew Text B. Observations I . Concept of the Text as Component of Today's World I I . Concept of the Text as a Component of Its Historical World

173 174 174 175

C. Methodologically Directed Procedurcs I . Text Criticism I I . The Question of die Text's Development I I I . The Question of the Presuppositions of the Stages of Gen 28:10-22

182 183 183 193

D. Interpreting the Historically Deteraiined Meaning of Gen 28:10-22 in Its Various Stages of G r o w t h I . The Individua! Transmission Stages I I . The O l d Testament Development TIT. Considering the Text's Movement of Meaning in Light of Our Presem Time

Appendix: Literat/m Ulustrating the Exegetical Treatment of a Text

199 199 201 201

202

Preface to the English Edition

T h i s guide t o the m e t h o d o l o g y o f O l d Testament exegesis has been used i n the G e r m a n speaking w o r l d for 25 years. I n 1989 (for the 12th e d i t i o n ) , i t was t h o r o u g h l y revised and expanded. T h e 13th e d i t i o n f r o m 1993 is n o w presented i n E n g l i s h translation. T h i s b o o k is not an i n t r o d u e t i o n t o self-study, b n t presumes an academic setting (advanced seminar, etc.) i n w h i c h the p r i n e i ­ ples o f this m e t h o d o l o g y can be i l h i s t r a t e d to the student. Examples i l l u s t r a t i n g the various points o f the m e t h o d o l o g y ean he found i n the footnotes o f this w o r k b o o k . Changes have been undertaken for the benefit o f E n g l i s h readers regardi n g the bibliographic references i n the G e r m a n e d i t i o n . W h e r e translations o f G e r m a n works exist i n E n g l i s h , these are m e n t i o n e d (even i f they are n o t translations o f the most recent e d i t i o n o f that w o r k ) . I n addition, m o r e recent publieations t r e a t i n g eertain subjeets have been added t o the E n g l i s h version o f this guide. VVith the aid o f scientific exegesis, this manual shows one h o w t o ap­ proach the historical meaning o f O l d Testament texts d u r i n g the p e r i o d o f their produetive f o r m a t i o n . T h i s m e a n i n g is the original m e a n i n g o f an O l d Testa­ m e n t text w i t h i n the transmission r e a l m o f the O l d Testament. T h i s mean­ i n g must be proeessed because i t is the foundational m e a n i n g . T h i s mean­ i n g is constitutive i o r the t o r m u l a t i o n and the c o n t e x t o f an O l d Testament text. For this reason, this w o r k b o o k places particular emphasis u p o n t w o aspeets: (1) H i s t o r i c a l exegesis must proceed from the existing text and the final context rather than from diachronic hypotheses. (2) T h e c o m p l e x i l y o f the O l d Testament, i n its existing f o r m , however, forces one t o diachronic exegesis. I t does so because the o r i g i n o f the f o r m u l a t i o n (!) can o n l y be understood as arising i n a particular t i m e i n A n e i e n t Israel. T h e procedures o f § 6 and § 1 0

xiv

Preface to the E n g l i s h E d i t i o n

demonstrate that exegetically historical w o r k m u s t u l t i m a t e l y arrive at the shape o f the text and the context as i t exists i n the O l d Testament. T h e subject o f this guide is n o t the applieation o f O l d Testament texts or alternative, methods for understanding the O l d Testament. T h e s e alternative methods include reader response c r i t i c i s m , deconstruction, feininist, m a t e r i a l ist, and psychological approaches (seeJ.Ch. E x u m and D.J.A. Clines, eds. T h e N e w L i t e r a r y C r i t i c i s m and the H e b r e w B i b l e , J S O T . S 143, Sheffield, 1993; and below, p. - ) . T h i s guide concentrates o n historical exegetical methods. I wish to thank die translator, Prof. D r . James N o g a l s k i , and ali those w h o have helped h i m for t h e i r concerted efforts i n m a M n g this guide accessible to the E n g l i s h speaking w o r l d . Special m e n t i o n should be made f o r the help o f Prof. D r s . Pamela J. Scalise and M a r k Ε . Seifrid, as w e l l as R u t h F u n k , Peter Schwagmeier, and K o n r a d S c h m i d , w h o compared drafts o f this manuscript w i t h the G e r m a n . Finally, the O l d Testament C o l l o q u i u m o f T h e S o u t h e r n Baptist T h e o l o g i c a l Seminary and Prof. D r . Steven T u e l l read the E n g l i s h translation and offered helpfu] correetions and insights at k c y juncturcs. I n a d d i t i o n , I w i s h to thank the .Society o f Biblical L i t e r a t u r e , Scholars Press, and N e u k i r c h e n e r Verlag for h e l p i n g t o make this translation possible. Finally, 1 wish to m e n t i o n Prof. D r . M a r v i n Sweeney for his careful reading as e d i t o r o f the series Reources for Biblical Study. Z ü r i c h , M a y 1995 Odil Hannes Steck

Preface

D c a r Reader, You should w o r k w i t h this book. Perhaps y o u have already t h u m b c d througl) i t , and glanced t h r o u g h p o r t i o n s . The first I m p r e s s i o n was probably: it's all so c o m p l i c a t e d , so difficult. D o n ' t w o r r y . T l i i s b o o k w i l l n o t confuse \ ou, b u t w i l l help to clarify y o u r thoughts. r

I can p i c t u r e the Situation. A short t e x t lies before y o u f r o n i the O l d Testament—in H e b r e w . You must exegete i t . You desire to c o m p r e h e n d this text, b u t h o w should y o u proceed? I n the grasp o f this text, do we say w h a t we w a n t to hear, or does it teil us w h a t we should hear? O n e must ask the ques­ t i o n self-criticaUy, because an a n d e r n text cannot defend itself. Tt has l o n g outlived its author w h o c o u l d p r o t e c t i t . I t needs y o u r help. T h i s book can acc o m p a n y y o u as y o u become an attorney, mediator, and defender o f the text, i n order that i t can speak it? message, and come to life for us. W h a t is necessary for tliis task? U n d e r s t a n d i n g the words presumes knowledge. T h i s is certainly the case a m o n g l i v i n g people, but even m o r e so for an a n d e r n text. T h i s book w o u l d like t o s h o w y o u h o w one acquires such knowledge. T h e historical t o o l , developed over generations, w i l l be delivered t o y o u as precisely and exactly as we use i t today. Its service to y o u , and to die text, is to find the k n o w l e d g e neces­ sary for understanding, by means o f the clarification o f v e r y simple questions. Your text has been variously t r a n s m i t t e d i n the ancient manuscripts. H o w did i t read originallv? § 3 o f this b o o k w i l l help y o u w i t h this question. C o p y r i g h t s d i d not yet exist i n a n t i q u i t y . Even i n a short text, Statements from various times can stand next t o one another. T h a t is no deficiency. I t is the richness of an ancient text. T o take die text seriously means to distinguish the Statements i n the text, to separate that w h i c h was once separated, and also to listen separately t o each o f the voices i n the text f r o m various times as p o r t i o n s o f various l i t e r a r y w o r k s o f the O l d Testament t o w h i c h they once belonged. B u t one may n o t forget die r e t u r n t r i p , tfie t r i p f r o m the Separation

xvi

Preface

back again t o the u n i t y , t o the h a r m o n y o f the voices i n the text as i t Stands before us. T h a t is the path by w h i c h G o d has been manifested i n the course o f the text's development. § § 4 - 6 w i l l teach y o u h o w to distinguish various b i b l i ­ cal witnesses i n y o u r text; to hear t h e m separately; and then to hear t h e m again together. B u t n o w on to the goal o f understanding, w h a t is i t that these voices w a n t to sav? W h o c v e r speaks prudently, formulates precisely. T h e r e f o r e , understand­ i n g p r i m a r i l y means to listen t o the language; t o pereeive h o w s o m e t h i n g is said—and how i t is n o t said. I f y o u r text is f o r m c d a c c o r d i n g to a c o m m o n pattern, then i t provides insight i n to what i t wants t o say, like b i r t h announcements and menus i n o u r t i m e . § 7 seeks t o prepare the way tor the question o f the l i n g u i s t i c shape o f y o u r text. A text intends m u c h m o r e than just w h a t is there. W h e n c o n t e m p o raries wilh the same level o f k n o w l e d g e interchange linguistically, they can also understand one anodicr t h r o u g h allusions, associations, and connotations. W e are not contemporaries w i t h ancient Israel. W e must i n q u i r e i n t o those things connected w i t h a text w h i c h are left unspoken. § 8 formulates the ques­ t i o n o f the text's intellectual connotations. § 9 treats the question o f the ex­ pressed, h i s t o r i c a l h concrete associations from the t i m e o f f o r m u l a t i o n , i n c l u d i n g the date, author, and the addressee o f y o u r text. r

These are simple, necessary questions. T h e y help partially clarify how one can experience what the text has to sav, and how i t lived d u r i n g the t i m e when it was f o r m u l a t e d and transmitted i n A n c i e n t Israel. T h e goal and c u l m i n a t i o n o f ali exegesis is to determine and to t r a č e the contents o f the text's Statements in o r d e r to become its attorney, as far as diose o f us from a later t i m e are able t o do. § 1 0 w i l l make i t easier f o r y o u t o reach this goal. T h e questions are simple, even though the path t o elucidation i n this book is not quite as simple hecausc o f the great a n t i q u i t y o f the texts, the m a n n c r o f t h c i r transmission, and the f o r e i g n , u n f a m i l i a r w o r l d w h i c h one encounters d i e r e i n . T h i s difficulty is also related to die current status o f die t o o l w h i c h we m u s t lay before you i n all its refinement and precision. A n y o n e standing at the b e g i n n i n g o f one's study does n o t master i t i n the i n i t i a l encounter. However, w h e n using this book, one can concentrate on that w h i c h is most i m p o r t a n t i n every section. Teaching sessions, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t r o d u c t o r y exegesis courses, w i l l help y o u concentrate o n that w h i c h is most i m p o r t a n t . T h e y w i l l also help you t o g r o w w i t h this book. I t is so w r i t t e n that even at the end o f one's study (in exams, master's w o r k , o r even doctoral w o r k ) , i t can still servc as an o r i e n t a t i o n and as Stimulation i n the m e t h o d o l o g i c a l questions o f O l d Testament exegesis. Last but n o t least, please r e m e m b e r that this b o o k has all types o f O l d Testament texts i n view, but n o t every text asks all o f the questions e x p l i cated i n this book. Even the p r i n t type o f this w o r k b o o k w i l l m e e t y o u half-way, i n order that you can find y o u r way t h r o u g h the w h o l e t h i n g . As v o n w i l l see, one must dif-

Preface

xvii

ferentiate between the larger ( s e r i f ) and the smaller (sans s e r i f ) p r i n t . As y o u know, even the "small p r i n t " is i m p o r t a n t , b u t i n our case secondary, namely to be used for closer scrutiny, for exphcation and d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n . T h e shaded sidebars are a second help. They einphasige i n p r i n t the concrete procedural directions for the individual methods. I n exegetical w o r k w i t h tliis b o o k I w i s h y o u joy, courage, c o n c e n t r a t i o n , and t h r o u g h i t all, the discovery o f h o w r i e h a b i b l i c a l text is, and h o w rieh i t can still make us.

Foreword to the i2th Edition

Λ decade lies between the 8 d i e d i t i o n o f this book, w h i c h H e r m a n n Barth and I u n d e r t o o k , and the c u r r e n t l y revised 12th e d i t i o n . A revision has thus become necessary i n l i g h t o f the l i t e r a t u r e references alone. A t the same t i m e one m u s t consider numerous changes i n the specific development o f the discussion, at least briefly and selectively. Greater engagement and expansions have been undertaken in § 1 , i n order t o facilitate c n t r y and o r i e n t a t i o n , and in § 6 , i n order t o p r o p e r l y convey the b l o s s o m i n g o f the redaction-historical questions i n recent years. Kurther, there is an i n t r o d u c t i o n t o the inter-related m e t h o d o l o g i c a l steps o f § § 4 - 6 and § § 7 - 9 respeetively. Finally, the f o r m u lation o f conerete p r o c e d u r a l direetions for the individual methods should faciJitate the practical u t i l i z a t i o n o f the w o r k b o o k . A n u m b e r o f places have been shortened i n order t o keep the siže and cost o f a student b o o k m a n ageable. Above a l i , extensive dialogue w i d i o t h e r m e t h o d o l o g i c a l positions has been reduced. I t is sufficient i f o u r position f r o m the 8th e d i t i o n is d o c u mented. T h e overall strueture and, t o a large extent, even the t o r m u l a t i o n ot the w o r k b o o k , have n o t been ehanged f o r the 12th e d i t i o n . Feedback f r o m assistants and students indicates these elements have p r o v e n effective i n practical terms t o those w h o use the b o o k . Reesons o f c o n t i n u i t y i n the essential o u t look enable this, and reasons o f cost require i t . D r . H e r m a n n Barth asked me t o undertake and t o be responsible for the revision by myself. For some time, he has n o t been involved i n academic education, b u t i n the pastorate. H e is n o w e m p l o y e d by the Evangelical C h u r c h o f G e r m a n y i n Hanover. W i t h a heavy heart ΐ n o w follow his request t o take his name o f f o f the t i t l e page o f the w o r k b o o k . I n c o n t i n u i n g thankfulness and afíìliation 1 emphasize the extensive c o n t r i b u t i o n w h i c h he p r o v i d e d i n

XX

F o r e w o r d to the 12th E d i t i o n

the preparation and f o r m a ü o n o f this b o o k d u r i n g an e x t r a o r d i n a r i l y f r u i t f u l and pleasant collaboration. H i s c o n t r i b u t i o n remains preserved directJy o r i n d i r e c t l y even i n this new e d i t i o n . T h e purpose of this w o r k b o o k remains unehanged. I n this regard, what we said i n the f o r e w o r d o f the 8 t h e d i t i o n can o n l y be repeated. The w o r k b o o k , " n o w as before, proceeds f r o m the supposition that the goal o f the discipline o f O l d Testament studies n o t o n l y ineludes the acquisition o f certain factual k n o w l e d g e , b u t also ineludes the a d o p t i o n o f exegetical methods for deter­ m i n i n g the o r i g i n a l m e a n i n g o f O l d Testament transmissions. O n l y thus can one achieve discemment w i t h the results o f research and I n s t r u c t i o n i n proce­ dure w h i c h transcends nierc reception. T h e r e f o r e , as b e t ö r e , the w o r k b o o k is conceived p r i m a r i l v for use by teacher and student as a S y n o p s i s o f the i n d i v i d u a l methods: t h e i r d e n n i t i o n , t h e i r procedural steps, and t h e i r significanec for the t o t a l h i s t o r i c a l under­ standing o f an O l d Testament text. T h i s is done w i t h o u t d e t r i m e n t to die b o o k s c l a i m ot c o n t r i b u t i n g to the preselit discussion o f m e t h o d i n O l d Testa­ m e n t research. W i t h this decision about the purpose, the book docs n o t wish to be, indeed cannot be, an i n t r o d u e t i o n to sclf-study. Rather, i t is designed for use i n academic I n s t r u c t i o n . I t is related t o , indeed dependent u p o n , the processes o f the d e m o n s t r a t i o n and u t i l i z a t i o n o f the methods w h i c h take place there. I t w o u l d like to p r o v i d e a w r i t t e n basis f o r this p o s i t i o n . For the m o m e n t , i f we disregard the w o r k b o o k ' s approach and the adop­ t i o n o f its perspectives c o n c e r n i n g the purpose o f O l d Testament research, the f o l l o w i n g reasons present themselves for u s i n g the b o o k d u r i n g one's coursc o f study and oceupational practice: 1.

As a w o r k b o o k , its p r i m a r y f u n e t i o n lies i n classroom sessions and the processes o f exegetical education. Specifically, i t is used to aecompany die Student i n several areas: b e g i n n i n g exegesis courses and papers; d e m o n s t r a t i n g and p r a c t i c i n g a transparent process i n exegetical lectures and Seminars; advanced seminar papers and exegesis papers i n the discipline o f O l d Testament.

2.

As for the purpose, we envision that u s i n g this b o o k d u r i n g one's edu­ cation w i l l aid the user i n a c q u i r i n g basic exegetical capabilities. A m o n g diese capabilities, we inelude die m ä s t e n " o f die approaches and the padis t o w a r d S o l u t i o n s w h i c h are essential for exegetically d e t e r m i n i n g mean­ i n g . Relatedly, the capabilities inelude the competency t o detennine w h i c h results the specific m e t h o d o l o g i c a l approach t o the p r o b l e m produces w h e n d e t e r m i n i n g exegetical m e a n i n g . L e a r n i n g and p r a c t i c i n g these capabilities aids d i s c e m m e n t w h e n p r e p a r i n g O l d Testament texts exe­ getically and w h e n s i f t i n g t h r o u g h commentaries, etc.

3.

I n the exegetical practice o f pastors and teachers o f r e l i g i o n , i t is i m p o r ­ tant that onc master the basic capabilities acquired i n one's study. T h i s

F o r e w o r d to the 12th E d i t i o n

xxi

mastery protects one from u n d i s c e r n i n g surrender to available secondary literature, and aids one i n the critical use o f this l i t e r a t u r e . I t also enables one to pursue exegetical questions reasonably as they ariše i n p r a c ü c e . Be­ cause o f the p r e p a r a t i o n t i m e available, the w o r k b o o k itself n o longer serves, i n its entiretv, as a guide in many theological vocations. T h e r e f o r e , the basic capabilities acquired w i t h its help d u r i n g one's study become even m o r e i m p o r t a n t . N a t u r a l l y , one can freely consult the w o r k b o o k for I n f o r m a t i o n and as a reminder, even i n one's practice." M y heartfelt thanks go to the Z ü r i c h assistants, D r . R . G . K r a t z and E . Bosshard, w h o bave allowed mc to learn f r o m t h e i r teaching experiences w i t h the w o r k b o o k , and w h o have aided me w i t h advice and deed i n the re­ vision. Heartfelt thanks also go t o D r . H . B a r t h , w h o p r o v i d e d me w i t h critical insights f o r the revision, and t o B r i g i t t a Rotach, w h o helped me w i t h the e d i t o r i a l w o r k , and w h o , together w i t h students N i c o l e C h a r m i l l o t and M a r t i n Riwar, very conscientiously helped ine correet the galleys. I am no less grateful to M r s . R. F t u i k for all her care i n t y p i n g the manuscript, and to Ne/tkirehener Vertagter their d e t e n n i n e d effort to produec a elcar and econotnical teaching book for students. 1 hope this book, even i n its revised f o r m , aids the understanding and the awe o f the O l d

testament.

1

Z ü r i c h , N o v e m b e r 1988 Odil Hannes

Steck

i The mono of the book is taken from A. Brendel. Musical Tbtmgbts miti Afttrtbmghts (Princeton Univcrsity Press. 1976), 37.

Translator s Preface to the English Version, second printing

C o m m e n t s from students and colleagues w h o have u t i l i z e d this w o r k i n E n g l i s h underscore its usefulness and usability w i t h i n classroom settings. These comments have been o v e r w h e l m i n g l y positive, attesting t o the validity o f a historical exegetical i n t r o d u c t i o n w h i c h b o t h defines the m e t h o d o l o g i c a l components and teaches students how t o utilize t h e m for themselves. M o r e over, Steck's presentation illustrates h o w these components relate to one another, and m a n y have expressed appreciation for this I n t e g r a t i o n . T h e feedback has also indicated that the scope o f this w o r k must be given due consideration w i t h i n the didactic process, as Professor Steck states. A d ­ vanced students w h o have used this w o r k have c o m m e n t e d that i t has helped t h e m to p u t the pieces together. Rather t h a n seeing die exegetical components as an eclectic assortment w h i c h o n l y "specialists" o f the various components can " d o , " Steck's i n t r o d u c t i o n illustrates for t h e m h o w the perspective p r o vided by each m e t h o d o l o g i c a l lens adds d e p t i i to the w h o l e . T h e w o r k b o o k , w h i l e concise i n its f o r m a t , contains m o r e I n f o r m a t i o n than a b e g i n n i n g student can possibly absorb w i t h i n the confincs o f a typical course i n t r o d u c i n g the exegetical process. L e l t t o ü i e m s e l v e s , b e g i n n i n g s t u ­ dents w i l l struggle to c o m p r e h e n d this w o r k . C e r t a i n measures can, however, help insure that b e g i n n i n g students benefit from the b o o k at a level appropriate to t h e i r present skill. B e g i n n i n g students should concentrate u p o n die larger ( s e r i f ) t y p e and especially the summaries beside the shaded sidebars. T h o s e teaching b e g i n n i n g students can help by i n t e g r a t i n g the book's presen­ t a t i o n i n t o the class itself. T w o approaches have w o r k e d w e l l i n tliis regard.

XXIV

Translators Preface

T h e class can process G e n 2 8 . 1 0 - 2 2 since chapter 11 uses this t e x t t o i l l u s trate the m e t h o d . O r , one can lead the class t h r o u g h the various m e t h o d o ­ logical observations i n class as they relate to another text. B o t h approaches help b e g i n n i n g students c o m p r e h e n d the methods b y i l l u s t r a t i n g t h e m o n a familiär text. T h i s second p r i n t i n g has corrected several t y p o g r a p h i c a l errors, and i n response t o feedback, the e n t i r e b o o k has been r e f o r m a t t e d w i t h larger type t o make i t m o r e reader ffiendly. L o m b a r d , I L , 1998 James D.

Nogalski

Part One

Introduction

A n y o n e s t u d y i n g theology because o f the desire to address the people and the questions o f o u r t i m e may be puzzled when l o o k i n g at the syllabus o f an i n t i O d u c t o r y course on O l d Testament exegesis at the b e g i n n i n g o f die course and w h e n considering the table o f Contents o f tliis guide to die methodology. T h e d i r e c t i o n o f the w o r k o n biblical texts runs backwards. T h e biblical texts are n o t b r o u g h t ever nearcr to o u r present t i m e i n t h e i r authoritative significance for a Christian's faith, doctrine, and life. Instead, they are distanced fur­ ther and further f r o m today, and placed i n the Situation o f t h e i r o r i g i n , w h i c h lies well i n die past. D o diese t w o movements not cancel themselves out? N o — a necessary cormection exists between the t w o . T h e goal o f all theological w o r k is to b r i n g the biblical w o r d o f G o d to life, and to give i t d y n a m i c and relevant expression for h u m a n i t y today. T h e task o f all theological w o r k is to make sure, i n this process o f conveying tbe material, t h a t the w o r d o f the biblical G o d remains that w h i c h confronts and w h i c h speaks w h a t humans by themselves d o not always k n o w o r desire. W i t h i n the framework o f C h r i s t i a n theology, Old Testament exegesis also has a c o n c e n i for d e t e r m i n i n g the goal and task i n t r o d u c e d i n diis w o r k b o o k . Exegesis has a subservient, but at tbe same t i m e an undeniable role. W h y ? T h e biblical w o r d o f G o d i n d i e O l d Testament reeeived its f o r m u l a t i o n i n a certain t i m e and t h r o u g h h u m a n witnesses w i t h l i n g u i s t i c and experiential horizons w h i c h are more than t w o thousand years older t h a n ours. I i the f o r m u l a t i o n s o f these ancient texts are t o become understandable, then one must ask about their meanings w h e n these formulations arose and w h e n they c i r c u lated inside the O l d Testament. T h e r e f o r e , O l d Testament exegesis necessarily inquires i n t o the past for the original meaning o f the text. T h e i n q u i r y o f O l d Testament exegesis i n t o the o r i g i n a l historical m e a n i n g has fundamental significance i f these ancient texts are to be protected f r o m the caprice to w h i c h we o f today honorably, dishonorably, o r u n k n o w i n g l y subject t h e m i n order to hear w h a t we w a n t to hear f r o m t h e m . I t also has fundamental signiheance i f r

INTRODUCTION

the texts are t o be allowed t o speak their o w n message, i n contrast t o ali later recipients. These Statements are t r u e even t h o u g h , for us today, the i n q u i r y is o n l y a first step o n the path o f c o n v e y i n g the w o r d o f G o d t o w a r d w h i c h ali theological disciplines m u s t w o r k t o g e d i e r responsibly. O u r w o r k b o o k Stands w i t h i n this framework. I t sccks to i n t r o d u c e one c o n s t i t u e n t task o f die b i b l i ­ cal speaking about G o d i n the present, b u t i t is a fundamental and indispensable approach. T h i s approach asks about the o r i g i n a l m e a n i n g w h i c h maintains the o u d o o k , character. and richness o f an O l d Testament text against any p a t r o n i z i n g treatment o f the biblical message d i r o u g h a later message. A l i use o f the O l d Testament today, l o r t h e o l o g ) and the ehureh, m u s t be measured against diis approach. N o less so, d i e frequendymisused and painful reception h i s t o r y o f d i e O l d Testament d u r i n g t w o m i l l e n n i a must be measured against i t . O n e c o u l d object, especially i n the case o f the Bible, d i a t i t is p r i m a r i l y the reader w h o actively contributes t o the m e a n i n g o f the text. T h e objeetion contains s o m e t h i n g valid, b u t at the satne t i m e s o m e t h i n g dangerous. I t is undisputable that a reader p r o d u e t i v e l y cooperates i n the p e r c e p t i o n o f the text's dimensions o f m e a n i n g w h i c h cxceed the o r i g i n a l author's i n t e n t i o n . Nevertheless, the m e a n i n g o r i g i n a l l y given, p a r t i c u l a r l y w i t h b i b l i c a l texts, m u s t be proteeted over against reader associations about the t e x t . i n o r d e r that a h e r m e n e u t i c a l l y responsible r e c e p t i o n remains o n the text's path o f meaning, and does n o t allow the r e c i p i e n t t o c o n t r o l the t e x t . Should the his­ torical association disappear, then so w o u l d the o u t l o o k o f the biblical text for today, and i t w o u l d be fatally replaced by the subjeetive, a r b i t r a r y refleetions o f "the t e x t i n me." T h e r e f o r e , the principal task o f exegesis is t o p r o t e c t the text's o u d o o k .

Foundation and Overview

A. T H E T A S K O F O L D T E S T A M E N T E X E G E S I S O l d Testament exegesis is the endeavor t o d e t e r m i n e the historieal, sci­ entific, and documentable m e a n i n g o f texts w h i c h have been t r a n s m i t t e d i n the O l d Testament. Exegesis, therefore, confronts the task o f d e t e r m i n i n g the m e a n i n g and the i n t e n t i o n o f Statements i n the encountered t e x t . I t does so w i t h i n the text's historical sphere o f o r i g i n , and i n the d i f f e r c n t phases o f its O l d Testament development, so that today the t e x t manifests its historical eharacter. Exegesis is a scientific procedure to the degree that its u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f a text is grounded exclusively upon knowledge and arguments whose a p p r o p r i ateness t o die subject can be evaluated ( a p p r o v i n g l y o r d i s a p p r o v i n g l y ) by others, and whose rationale can be substantiated. Exegesis certainly does n o t m a i n t a i n its scientific eharacter by o r i e n t i n g itself to die experimental and e m p i r i c a l sciences, and by b i n d i n g itself to their ideal o f an ever m o r e precise o h jeetive k n o w l e d g e . Exegesis w o u l d then have to l i m i t itself t o the analysis and d e s c r i p t i o n o f die l i n g u i s t i c surface o f the texts. However, texts are a f o r m a l o u t g r o w t h o f life events y e t they supersede that life linguisrically. T h e r e f o r e , by means o f a d y n a m i c process, exegesis must understand texts as an event i n w h i c h die f o l l o w i n g Clements lead t o the cxisting l i n g u i s t i c expression, i n c l u d i n g t h e i r "unspoken h o r i z o n o f m e a n i n g , " ( J I . - G . G a d a m e r ) . T h i s process ineludes the historieal and social c o n d i t i o n s , intellectual conccptions, e x p e r i enees, irnpulses, the author's coneeptual purpose, and the eharacter of the 1

1

Qnoted literature will ojily be cited with an abbreviated title if the complete bibliographical reference can be taken trom the Literature section (D) of the current ehapter. or relatedly, in the case of literature on methodology, the introduction to the Old Testament, und thcology of the Old Testament (scetions H,G, and Ν in ehapter iwo).

§1

FOUNDATION A N D OVERVIEW

addressee. Exegesis can be evaluated against its subject m a t t e r o n l y i f i t can p r o v i d e an intersubjectivcly g r o u n d c d account o f the historical life w h i c h terminates linguistically i n the text. Scientific exegesis does n o t , therefore, consider the text as a defenseless object w h i c h submits itself t o the superior grasp o f the scholar. Rather, i t considers die t e x t as a l i v i n g e n t i t y w l i i c h appears in relationship to life. T h e fundamental attitudes o f scientific exegesis are therefore a t t e n t i o n , the rcadiness t o learn, the capacity to encounter, and the r e c o g n i t i o n o f l i m i t s i n relationship t o the text as s o m e t h i n g other, o r something foreign.

2

T o the extent that scientific exegesis relates to the historical d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f the text's m e a n i n g , i n the p e r i o d o f its produetive forma t i o n , i t is l i m i t e d t o d e t e r m i n i n g the o r i g i n a l m e a n i n g inside the transmission realm o f the O l d Testament. As noted above, its d i r e e t i o n of understanding is thereby d i f ferentiated f r o m the event o f a m o d e r n bible reader's personally encountered understanding. T h e i n d i v i d u a l i t y and depth o f a bible readers understanding has been determined esscntially by expericnces o f the present. Scientific exe­ gesis brings the text itself i n t o dircet relationship w i t h those expericnces. Scientific h i s t o r i c a l exegesis does n o t depreciate this d i r e c t l y applied under­ standing, b u t is able to clarify and to e n r i c h i t t h r o u g h the m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f the o r i g i n a l m e a n i n g o f the text: (1) b y c o r r e c t i n g arbitrary, subjeetive exp l o i t a t i o n o f tbe text; (2) by i n d i c a t i n g the central subject m a t t e r o f the text; and (3) by exposing the text's particular impulses w h i c h the present needs. Scientific historical exegesis is thereby an attorney f o r the o r i g i n a l m e a n i n g o f the text, p r o v i d i n g the fundamental c o n t r i b u t i o n i o r the clarification and e n r i c h m e n t o l applied understanding. N a t u r a l l y , applied understanding r e quires still m o r e extensive theological help. Clarifications o f meaning beyond O l d Testament exegesis are necessary to the extent that an O l d Testament text receives aspeets o f m e a n i n g w h i c h are expanded or m o d i f i e d t h r o u g h the witness o f the N e w Testament and t h r o u g h f'ar-reachitig ehanges i n the experience o f reality, These clarifications takc place i n the theological realrns o f the New Testament, C h u r c h H i s t o r y , the history o f dogma, and the h i s t o r y o f theology. A l s o , they take place t h r o u g h d o g m a t i c dieology, ethics, and practical theology, i n relationship t o the f o r m , validity, and O b l i g a t i o n o f the expanded o r m o d i f i e d m e a n i n g o f die text i n the face o f the present e x p e r i -

• In addition. Kaiser, Exegtthvl MelhvtL 40f. says eorreelly: "Scholarsliip requires diat we give reasons lor our judgments and avoid uniounded assertions; diat we inake clear our dependence on the work oi olhers; that we specitv tiie degrce ol probability of our results; that we pre­ sent unsettleil or presently iusoluble or ncwly arísun problems tor what thuv are and, it circuinstances perniit, gire the reasons why we have not gone into thein or given answers/' In. light of exegesis performed both orally and in wrirten tomi, one should einphasige that in addition to the supporting argiimcnts ot an opinion, one should undeniably inelude a reasoned deliberarion that exehides possiblc alternatives, in ones srienrifie inter-siibjeetively interpreted rationale (the prineiple of the exclusion of the oppositc).

I m a g i n a t i o n and M e d i o d o l o g i c a l D i r e c t u m D u r i n g Exegetical W o r k

5

ence o f reality. O n l y after these clarifications, i n w h i c h theolog)' has its undeniable task, can and should one t u r n back again to a higher plane. Specifically, one should be led by the content, d i r o u g h theological responsibility. to an ap­ plied understanding o f the text for today as the goal ot the totalily. T h e n , n o l i m i t s are placed before the vision of b r i n g i n g the message o f the biblical text p r o d u c t i v e l y i n t o play for h u m a n i t y in the present rime, w h e t h e r in the f o r m o f the traditional sermon, role plays, o r bible dramas. A l s o , scientific historical exegesis is always critical exegesis. Its execution necessarily ineludes critically r e c o g n i z i n g one's o w t i , o r alien, presuppositions c o n c e r n i n g the u n d e r s t a n d i n g o l the text (above all as they eome to l i g h t i n Β 11 1). I t also ineludes the necessity o f r e c o g n i z i n g any preconeeptions i m posed by exegetical t r a d i t i o n or b y constellations f r o m the h i s t o r y o f research, b y w h i c h everyone a d m i t t e d l y remains influenced. Once recognized, critical exegesis must c o n t r o l the preconeeptions b y r e l y i n g u p o n the original mean­ i n g o f die text. A t the same time, the critique is directed at the text itself. T h i s Statement does not mean arrogant criticism o f the text, rather i t means an a t t i tude o f methodological doubt, w h i c h leads to a distinetive historical f o r m a t i o n o f j u d g m e n t o n various pereeptions, approaches, a n d conclusions i n the face o f a text 's eharacter. I t also interrogates the text's c l a i m o f t r u t h in its h i s t o r i ­ cal S i t u a t i o n .

B. I M A G I N A T I O N A N D M E T H O D O L O G I C A L DURING EXEGETICAL WORK

DIRECTION

I . T h e Value and L i m i t s o f M e t h o d o l o g i c a l D i r e c t i o n Scientifically established exegetical w o r k is m e t h o d o l o g i c a l l y transparent w o r k . Nevcrtbeless, it is n o t exhausted by the c o r r e c t a p p l i c a t i o n and evaluation o f the methodological Steps for a given text. T h e process o f d e t e r m i n i n g the historical meaning of the text i n its life Situation is m u c h more c o m p l e x . T h e r e f o r e , the value and l i m i t s o f the m e t h o d o l o g i c a l Steps must be more closely d e t e r m i n e d . A n y o n e u t i l i z i n g m e t h o d o l o g i c a l i n t r o d u e t i o n s must be conscious o f the facttlrat the individual methods derive f r o m an arsenal o t elementary questions about the historical understanding o f a text. These questions were already m e n t i o n e d i n the preface and inelude the f o l l o w i n g : T h e transmission o f the text i n the ancient manuscripts is not consistent; w h a t is the original w o r d i n g (see § 3 ) ? ; T h e O l d Testament w r i t i n g s have f r e q u e n t l y g r o w n by means o f a p r o t r a c t e d transniission process; h o w far do the oldest parameters reach, and w h a t are later expansions and contexts (see § § 4 - 6 ) ? ; E v e r y l i n g u i s t i c u t t e r ance partieipates in the imellectual w o r l d o f its audior; what patterns o f speech and coneepts does the text presuppose (see § § 7 - 8 ) ? ; I n the same manner,

6

§1

F O U N D A T I O N .AND O V E R V I E W

every text participates i n the historical and socio-historical realities o f its rime; h o w can one determine the t e x t s historical realm, i n c l u d i n g t h a t o f its author and addressees (see §9)? T h e methods w h i c h are c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y elaborated (text c r i t i c i s m . l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m , the transmission-historical and r e d a c t i o n historical approaches; the f o r m critical and t r a d i t i o n historical approaches; and the d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f the historical setting) then constitute the development o f an intellectual path where these questions w i l l find answers. B y its questions and by w e i g h i n g observations and arguments, tbe description o f mediods pays a t t e n t i o n to insights and possibilities w h i c h have proven effective o n m a n y i n d i v i d u a l texts. I n its p r e h m i n a r y sketch, the description o f methods presupposes images o f expectation and the a n t i c i p a t i o n o f results as suggested by the c u r r e n t State o f exegetical science. B u t t h c r e i n lies the p r o b l e m o f m e t h o d o ­ logical exegetical w o r k . U t i l i z i n g methods w h i c h depend u p o n the State o f re­ search and w h i c h antieipate results must neither patronize the texts, n o r allow the texts t o p r o v i d e answers o n l y aecording t o the manner o f the questions. The text does not have to subjugate itself to the c u r r e n t State o f the descrip­ t i o n o f methods. Rather, the u t i l i z a t i o n of the methods must r e m a i n steadfast to die data o f die text. B u t w h a t access does historical exegesis have t o the data o f the text except die access o f questions, observations, and a r g u m e n t a t i o n guided b y the m e t h ­ ods? H e r e , the exegete's i m a g i n a t i o n plays a decisive r o l e i n l o o k i n g at the selected text, b y e m p l o \ d n g fantasy i n the desire t o understand a text historically. T h i s fantasy is n o t obstrueted and n o t vet r i g i d l y c o n t r o l l e d b y m e t h o d o l o g i ­ cal Instructions. O n the basis o f the original hermeneutical u n i t y berween the text and today's reader, one's fantasy and imagination must thereby move i n t w o directions d u r i n g constant reading and reflection. (One should first read and reflect u p o n the text i n E n g l i s h . O n e should also read the H e b r e w text, w h i c h should be p r e l i m i n a r i l y processed and translated at die b e g i n n i n g of the exegetical w o r k , w i d i the help o f a grainmar, dictionary, and i f need be, a concordance.) O n (he one hand, the exegete envisions how die text offers itself as a c o m p o ­ nent of today Huber, ρ. 54-57. attenipts to elassily the resulting possibilities.

C o m m e n t a r y on the Approach and M e t h o d

55

2. L i m i ta t i on s T h e validity and effectiveness o f the questions about the t e x t produced by 1 a-h are subject t o l i m i t a t i o n s i n certain cases: a. Observations from I a and b remam ambiguous without additional support by I d,e.f. and/or g. For today's exegete, a danger exists with I a which is obvious. One presupposes a strictly logical, consistent train of thought, in our ser-se, as the ideal (the exorbitant demand of modern iogic upon an ancient text). However precisely for that reason one is able to scrutinize that danger This prescpposition of a strictly logical text, however, would imscortstrue the histoccal chcmacter of the texts as much as if the ques­ tion of a text's particular stylistic devices were neglected (e.g. repetition, and the complex use of images and metaphors). Under certain circumstances, lb, taken by itself, can too quickly give way to a modern perception about a text's multiple appearance.b. Moreovei: the strength of the facts mentioned in / b also depends upon the cnarGcter of the work under investigation (intention, strueture, acquaintance with the transmission). Double and multiple transmissions weigh heavier in a ciosed work that is fashioned by a unified concept (such as if the Succession History of David contained such a concept) than in a work which is dependent upon pre-existing text matenal, and which collects, composes, and reworks transmissions which have been passed down (such as the History of Davids Ascendency in I Sam 16-2 Sam S). M

c. The criteria of Id-h llkewise do not.operate without limitations. (!) A t any rate, with early Old Testament texts one may frequently observe that the authors of larger literary works ineorporate various types of oral transmissions which come to them, virtuaily unehanged. They even protect the ancient, Transmitted wording, Thus, within the same i'rterary work, tensions in vocabulary, manner of speech, style, and content can be due to this coliecting and codifying (by contrast, the Priestiy writing and the Books of Chronicles arc different). Thus, these tensions do not derive from literary disunity. (2) The facts mentioned in ( I ) apply not only m view of the collective eharacter of the larger work as a whole, but even more for the individual secf/ons of such works. Here, one may demonstrate that a list of criteria used by literary criticism at the turn of the Century, which continue to be partally operative today. cannot be utilized unconditionally in literary critical analysis. Certain features can akeady derive from processes •η the oral pre history of a text and ihus find a transmission historical Solution.' These features inelude diffenenc.es in language (words, style), in nistoncal and chronological details, in the presupposrtions of legal, social, and religious (cult and piety) conditions, in ethical and theological understanding, and in material contradictions'' Likewise, the impression of literary disunity can be misleading in redactionaily formulated texts be­ cause the compiexity of the statements. or the order of the Statements, stems from their relatedness to the entire wrrtmg (see below, §6), Observing tensions of the type mentioned m Id-h therefore demands, for meth­ odological reasons, that one suspend judgment during a text's literary critical treatment 35

0

,4

• Cornpare Gen 12:1 Off and 26:lff within the Yahwist's narrative and the consequences of the undifferentiated appraisal by exegetes who ascribe Gen 12 and 26 to two sourees. -5 Cornpare again Gen 12 and 26. •iΛ C f Noth, t'enhtMtchal Irailitium, p. 20f. '" F. Baumgärtel, "Bibelkritik 1. AT." in R G C , vol 1, colurnn 1186 (literary mricism). ,

56

§4

LITERARY CRITICISM

untii one concludes the transmission

historical and the redacVon historical investigation. As

a resiilt of the interdependence of the methods, even the procedures in §§7-9 can once again provide viewpoints for the question of the literary integrity. Ί he intention of this Ob­ servation is not to dvveli on our impressions of the text's inconsistency (or consistency). Rather, the intention is to push forwaivt to the emergence of the text itself. Statec slmply: Literary criticism is not persuasive just because one can use rt, rather it is persuasive where the text forces one to use rt. Only when the tensions cannot be explained in favor of literary unity must the literary criticai consideration be applied anew. Then the criteria cited in section I can be evaluated for the formative layer without impediment d. The convmcmg proof that a literarty fixed Vortage (e.g. source text) has seen used, can only be presented if the copy's original formulation can be extricatec as an adequately closed entity, free of influence from the borrowing author. Acceptance of several (actors will necessarily weaken such proof, although it must not eíiminate it. These factors inelude: aeeepting that the author has only taken up the copy mcompletely, aeeepting that numerous places adapt their formulation to the new context, or aeeepting that transposrtions of the original text occurred with the borrowing. e. In order to counterartthe danger of analytical oversensitivrty, one should. by com trasi, attempt to undersiand and to interpret a given text synthetically, as a si/pstomive toto/ity, in the sense of synchronic reflection. In the course of such a process, individual threads, which appear to be füll of tension. can also be seen eiachronieally and devclopmentaüy as complimentary aspects added t o a complete and thoughtfully construeted totalfty. Here, one must also observe the interdependence of the various methodologi­ cal approaches. The Old Testament author's genre, opinion, and the type of presentation play an important roe as the subject of cross-checking questions. They can deümit the lit­ erary critical endeavor because literary analysis cannot depe-nd upon that which appears inconsistent t o the modern reader's logteal, stylistic. and material demands upon a text. Rather, the historical approach oflrterary analysis has t o infer what was literarily possible at the time of the text's literary formulation. and what was not, f. One critically correctlve funetion of the literary critical anaiysis. similar t o the ap­ proach in section e ) , finally requires a procedure by which one must test whether the achieved result is even ivslorically conceivab'e for the development of an Old Testament text. In so doing, one must consider the diverse eharacter of Old Testament transmis­ sions/Generaliy in those places where longer transmission historical growth of material becomes apparent on a braad basis (as for example in Genesis), comprehension has to make room for the thoughtful transmission historical perspective. In light of the mdependent narrative unrts it « difficult to coneeive histoncaliy that the texts are combined from literary sources even t o the level of half-verses. By contrast the literary critical view has proven itself in the Pentateuch in those piac.es where entire narrative units have been Ifterarily distinguished/' ' If texts provide utile in the way of reference points for a transmission histoncal development tnen, on the basis of observations which indicate disunity, one may 38

1

5S Cornpare O.H. Steck. Wahrnehmungen, ρ. 16-35 (especially 26ff), for Gen 2:46-3:24. Also, Steck, Der Seböpfimgsberkbt der Priestersrbrift, -'1981 (especially p. 26-30, 244-255); also I I . Barth, Die Jesaja-Wbrte in derjosiazeit, 1977. p. 10f, 86-88, 187-1 »9, for Isa 28:7h- 22; 29.1-7;

and 31:l-4+8à. W Comparc also §5 Β II 1 (p. 66f). 40 Comparc, Koth, Pcntatcuchal Tiadirions, p. 24f.

C o m m e n t a r y o n the A p p r o a c h and M e t h o d

57

reckon historically with the literary adaptation of a fixed, written text. These observations afow one to confirm short explanatory additions and giosses. They also confirm expansions, revision into collections, ar.d supplemcntal redactions. Those places where one must accourrt for fixed Statements already in oral tsaaüon (prophetic speeches, partia! psalms. legal sayings, wisdom speeches. and apparently even in prophetic narratives) create a particularly dlfficult problem for literary crilicism and transmission history. In these cases it is scarcely possible to decice from the text. rtseif whether the processes represent written or oral expansion. Overlapping viewpoints must be taken into account regarding the place of origin. the tradent. and purpose in order to reach a decison. If ma­ terial arguments dictate an oral development of the text. then the analysis must insure critically that the results correspond to the growth process as it would be possible in oral trädition. I I I . T h e Q u e s t i o n ot L a r g e r L i t e r a r y Contexts I f the t e x t u n d e r investigation is itself n o t already the larger l i t e r a r y c o n t e x t (as for example, i f an entire p r o p h e t i c book w i l l be analyxed), d i e n the text 's relationship to the preceding and the f o l l o w i n g c o n t e x t should be examined l i t e r a r y critically. T h i s procedural step begins by taking stock o f the given i m m e d i a t e and broader context. T h i s step is pursued by the literary critical inquiry i n t o the context. I t takes i n t o ac­ c o u n t this context's Contents, its arrangement (in the sense o f strueture and composition—see footnote 80), and its t h o u g h t progression. I t does so i n order t o distinguish that w h i c h o r i g i n a l l y belonged together l i t e r a r i l y f r o m m o r e recent contexts i f necessary. This process leads to the determination ot the o r i g i n a l l i t e r a r y layer as w e l l as, it necessary, d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f m o r e recent layers to w h i c h the entire text under investigation belongs." T h u s , the task o f classifying a text i n t o the respeetive l i t e r a r y c o n t e x t to w h i c h i t belongs must even be p e r t o r m e d i f the t e x t u n d e r consideration is l i t e r a r i l y homogenous. I n the beginners praetice, l i t e r a r y critical results w i l l be applied f r o m the present State o f d i e discipline ot i n t r o d u c t i o n . T h i s discipline w i l l provide I n ­ f o r m a t i o n for the historical i d e n t i t i c a t i o n o f the l i t e r a r y layers ' as w e l l as results regarding l i n g u i s t i c c o n t o u r and f o r m ( § 7 ) . 4

41 Kxamples: The larger literary context ol Arnos 8:1-2 (die harvest basket vision of Arnos) was originally the vision cycle ot Arnos 7:1-8; 8:1-2; 9:1-4. This cyck was later expanded and has hecn combined with other transmission complexes to roakc the current book of Arnos (cf Kaiser, Old Testament bitroduetion, p. 217f). The larger literary context of 1 Sam 26 is first the history of the ascendancy of David. Later, the context becomes a narrative work which combines the histoiy of the ascendancy widi the Succession History to the throne. Later still the context becomes the Deutcronomistic history. The larger literary context of Gen 9:1-6 is first the Priesdy writing, dien developmental stages in which die priesdy writing has been worked into larger literary works. Naming the layer. author, date and place of composition, material profile, etc. 4 2

58

§4

LITERARY CRITICISM

T h e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f larger l i t e r a r y contexts essentially occurs w i t h i n the frame o f l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m . However. these results require expansion, d i f ferentiation, and verification by the r e m a i n i n g m e t h o d o l o g i c a l procedures. T h e s e procedures w i l l evaluate the result o l the t e x t — i m m a n e n t l i t e r a r y analysis for its historical plausibility. I t is i m p o r t a n t to pay attention to die f o l ­ l o w i n g : the unified profile o f Statements o f a larger l i t e r a r y context; the transmission process standing behind that context i n c l u d i n g the redaction his­ torical perspective; the f o r m and the historical setting o f that context. IV. S u m m a r y o f the L i t e r a r y C r i t i c a l Procedure 1. The question o f die t e x t s l i t e r a r y integrity: a. Is the t e x t understandable by itself, or does i t represent o n l y a segment w h i c h requires the context? E x a m i n a t i o n o f the edges o f the text, examination o f the corpus w i t h regard t o linguistic reference signals w h i c h relate the text to the context (e.g. suffixes, u n i n t r o d u c e d persons, presuppositions o f the action). b. Is the f o r m u l a t i o n o f the corpus l i t e r a r i l y homogeneous or not? Use o f the g u i d i n g question and the C o n t r o l l i n g question above in Β I I . c. I n the case o f l i t e r a r y disunity: — precise d c l i n c a t i o n and division o f the text f o r m u l a t i o n s i n t o different l i t e r a r y layers. — content relationship o f die layers t o one another: F o r example, t w o originally independent formulations are combined secondarily w i t h o r w i t h o u t redactional f o r m u l a t i o n s c o n n e c t i n g and compensating t h e m . A l s o , an existing l i t e r a r y f o r m u l a t i o n receives a gloss, isexpanded, or enlarged ( i n c o n j u n c t i o n t o what?). — relative c h r o n o l o g i c a l relationship o f the layers t o one anodier, i f the l i t e r a r y critical analysis offers indices for this task. Observe: Possible alternatives m u s t be expressly e l i m i n a t e d w i t h ra­ tionale, and a revision o n die basis o f the procedures o f § § 5 - 9 must be held open d u r i n g the process. 2. T h e question o f the larger l i t e r a r y contexts o f the unified text or, re­ latedly, o f the different l i t e r a r y layers: a.

Reconsidcration o f question l a : W h i c h passage o f the i m m e d i ­ ate c o n t e x t (previous o r subsequent) does the text ( o r the particular l i t e r a r y text layer) specifically presuppose?

b. For w h i c h O l d Testament l i t e r a r y w o r k was the t e x t (or the i n d i ­ vidual l i t e r a r y layer) first formulated? H o w is this l i t e r a r y w o r k arranged, and where does the t e x t (or text layer) stand w i t h i n t h a t arrangement? ( p r e p a r a t i o n for the

Results

59

redaction historical question r e g a r d i n g the intended p o s i t i o n o f the text (or text u n i t ) i n the l i t e r a r y w o r k , c f § 6 Β I I 2). D o the m o r e recent layers o f the text have parallels i n other places o f this l i t e r a r y work? (preparation for the redaction his­ torical question: D o these internal stages relate to one another as individual expansions or redactional processes? C f § 6 Β I I 2.) C o r r o b o r a t i n g question: T o w h a t extent d o the l i t e r a r y critical Undings in the text under investigation correspond to the l i n g u i s ­ tic and material eharacter o f the larger l i t e r a r y framework? c. I n what broader literary contexts was the text under investigation transierred w i t h its l i t e r a r y layering, even if this transferring d i d n o t affect the f o r m u l a t i o n o f this particular text? ( C o r r e l a t i o n with §6) The c o m p o n e n t questions b and c stnve t o w a r d the larger c o n t e x t in w n i c h a Statement has been formulated or the context in w h i c h iL e n t e r e d the Old Tes­ t a m e n t . They prepare t h e redaction historical investigation (§6) and the deter­ mination o f an :ndividual s t a t e m e n t s meaning within the frame of its entire con­ t e x t (§ i 0). Practically, o n e must rely u p o n s e c o n d a r y literature (Oid Testament introduetions, c o m m e n t a r i e s and their introductions, m o n o g r a p h s ) for clarification o f b and c. Even f o r t h e beginner. this reiiance η no w a y excludes t h e possibiiity of limited contributions o n t h e basis of the text under investigation.

C. R E S U L T S T h e results o f l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m can be seen i n the fact that i t performs the necessary groundwork for other exegetical stages. Transmission history can begin its analysis w i t h the oldest l i t e r a r i l y homogenous version o f the passage under considerarion (or relatedly its [sourcel c o m p o n e n t s ) w h i c h was obtained by l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m . Redaction history employs the results achieved by l i t e r a r y critical analysis when i t coberently riresents the history o f die encountered text i n the realm o f w r i t t e n transmission and w h e n i t coherently presents the oper­ ative w o r k i n g procedures and motifs. A t the p o i n t i n w h i c h the larger l i t e r a r y context o f a text is demonstrated, and at the p o i n t i n w h i c h the t e x t s place in the context is d e t e r m i n e d , l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m makes i t possible to inquirc into the author, place, and time for the l i t e r a r y version. Simultaneously, this d e m o n strarion provides the respeetive l i t e r a r y c o n t e x t i n whose f r a m e w o r k the t e x t can be m a t e r i a l l y i n t e r p r e t e d i n the c o n e l u d i n g section o t determining the his­ torical meaning.** 43 Examples: Arnos 8:1-2 should first be interpreted in the context of die vision cycle, Cor­ respondingly, the components of the Yahwistic prima! history should be interpreted brst and foremost in the (rame of die Yahwistic work, etc.

60

§4

LITERARY CRITICISM

D. L I T E R A T U R E I. I N T R O D U C T I O N , FOUNDATION, A N D OVERVIEW J. Barton. "Sumte Criticism." ABD, vul. 6, 162-165. G. Fohrer. Exegese, § 5 (Ε H ü b e t ) , § 9B (G. Fohrer). Ν . Habel. Literary Criticism of the Old Testament. Guides to Biblical Scholarship. Old Testament Series. J.C. Rylaarsdam, ed. Philadelphia, 1971. Ο Kaiser. Exegetical Method, ρ. 11-16. K. Koch. The Growth of tbe Biblical Tradition, p. 68-78. M . Notli. A History of Pentateuchal Traditions. p. 5-41 (esp. p. 20-25). Atlanta, 1981 (reprint, 1972 translation).

II. EXPANSION A N D CRITICAL ALTERNATIVES I . Engnell. Methodological Aspects o f O l d Testament Study. VT.S 7 (1960); 13-30 (esp. 21 ff). K. Rcraltorff. "Literarkritik und Traditionsgeschiehte." F.vTh 27 (1967): 138-153. . 'Die Problem of the Process of Transmission in the Pentateuch JSOT.S 89. Sheffield, 1990. VV. Richter. Exegese, p. 49-72. H . Ringgren. "Literarkritik, Formgeschichte, Überlieferungsgeschichte. Erwägungen zur Methodenfrage der alttestamentlichen Exegese." T h L Z 91 (1966): col. 641-650. S. Segert. "Zur Methode der alttestamentlichen Literarkritik." A r O r 24 (1956): 610-621. H J . Stoebe. "Grenzen der Literarkritik i m Alten Testament." T h Z 18 (1962): 385-400. J.H. Tigay, ed. Empirical Models for Biblical Criticism. Philadelphia, 1985. ΠΙ. E X E M P L A R Y E X E C U T I O N I I . Gunkel. Genesis. TTK Ϊ / 1 . p. 137-140. (Literary criticism on Gen 6:5-9,17,28f.) G ö t t i n g e n , 1 9 1 0 (=T977). I I . - J . Ilermisson. Deuterojesaja. BK X I . Fascicle 7. p. 1-80. Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1987. W Richter. Die Bearbeitungen des »Retterbuches« in der deuteronomischen Epoche. B B B 2 1 . p . 1-62 (Literary criticism o n j u d g 2-12). Bonn, 1964. C R . Seitz. "The Crisis of Interpretation over the Meaning and Purpose of the Exile." F T 35 (1985): 78-97 (Literary Criticism. on Jer 21,24,27,37-43). Κ. Seybold. Bilder zum Tempelbau. Die Visionen des Propheten Sacharja. SBS 70. p. 11-23. (Literary criticism on Zech 1-8). Stuttgart, 1974. 3

TV H I S T O R Y O F R E S E A R C H R.E. Clements. Α Century of O l d Testament Study. Rev. ed. Guildford, 1983. O. Eißfeldt. "Literarkritische Schule." R G G ' , vol. 4, col. 388-390. Η . G r e ß m a n n . "Die Aufgaben der alttestanientlicben Forschung." Z A W 42 (1924): 1-33 (esp. 2-8).

Literature

61

N . C . Habel. Literary Criticism of the Old Testament. Minneapolis, 1971. H.F. Hahn. "The Critical Approach to tbe Old Testament." Old Testament in Modern Research, p. 1-43. Philadelphia, 1954. R. Knierim. "Criticism of Literary Features, Form, Tradition, and Redaction." Tn D.A. Knight and C M . Tucker, The Hebrew Bible and Tts M o d e m Interpreters. Philadelphia-Chico, 1985, p. 128-136. D.A. Knight, ed. Julius Wellhausen and His Prolcgomemi to the History of Israel. Semeia 25 (1983). K . Koch. The Growth of the Biblical Tradition. p. 68-76. H.-J. Kraus. Geschichte der historisch-kritischen Erforschung des Alten Testaments, (see die subject index under "Literarkritik."). Neukirchen-Vluyn, Τ 982.

The Transmission Historical Approach

Λ. T U E T A S K L Deicrniination I f ari O l d Testament text o r text complex developed i n the realni o f oral speech before its t r a n s c r i p t i o n , then one utilizes the transmission historical approach. Above all, the f o l l o w i n g state o f affairs offers the reason for inquiry b e l i i i i d a text's oldest asccrtainable w r i t t e n phase i n t o the realm o f its previous oral transmission. T h e content o f a text, or even parts o f a text, appears to be independent o f its i m m e d i a t e c o n t e x t ( i n c l u d i n g aspects o f b o t h f o r m and genre, i n a n t i c i p a t i o n o f § 7 ) . T h u s , i n the t i m e o f its first utterance, the text was originally understandable w i t h o u t additional text material. One dius appears to encounter the phenomenon o f a "stmill unii." O n the one band, l i t e r a r y e n t i ties so small i n siže were n o t t r a n s m i t t e d in w r i t t e n f o r m separately, and their c o m b i n a t i o n w i t h other "small u n i t s " i n t o a c o l l e c ü o n is a secondary process. O n e the other hand, such phenomena arise i n conjunction w i t h spoken actions (eult, school w i s d o m , legal o r a t i o n , prophetic p r o n o u n c e m e n t , narrative act i v i t y ) . For these t w o reasons, die assumption is oftered that here one encounters the r e c o r d i n g o f small, o r i g i n a l l y oral speech units. Indeed, i n special cases i t even appears that these small units experienced changes d u r i n g oral t h e i r transmission w h i c h is still detectable, as t e x t observations can suggest (along w i t h investigation on die basis o l § § 7 and 9). T h e transmission historical approach concerns itself w i t h such justifiable deductions f r o m the oldest w r i t t e n f o r m o f the text back i n t o die arena o f die oral development and transmission. A c c o r d i n g l y , the precision o f these trans­ mission historical deductions manifests itself differently d e p e n d i n g u p o n the extent o f the first w r i t t e n r e c o r d i n g u p o n the f o r m u l a t i o n o f the text. O f t e n

64

§5

T H E TRANSAIISIUN HISTORICAL APPROACH

i n the area o f eult, w i s d o m , and law, one can situate the given f o r m u l a t i o n i n the oral phase for reasons o f usagc. W i t h p r o p h e t i c logia, i t is f r e q u c n t l y n o t possible t o reconstruet the coinplete, o r i g i n a l l y oral f o r m u l a t i o n b e h i n d the Condensed, w r i t t e n f o r m . T h e w r i t t e n f o r m can even tako aecount o f the ef­ fect o f die prophetic w o r d . W i t h individual narratives, the possibility d i a t one can t r a č e the f o r m u l a t i o n 's oral phase is generally even smaller, as w i l l be shown below. A t the same time, the transmission historical approach is o f essential significanec. I t provides insight i n t o the development and o r i g i n o f die text, i n t o the text's purpose and use i n conerete situations, and i n t o die i n s t i t u t i o n s o f Israel. E u r d i e r , the transmission historical approach i l b m i n a t e s the appearanec, independence, and c o n t o u r o f "smaller u n i t s " w i t h i n the w r i t t e n trans­ mission o f the O l d Testament. T h e task o f transmission h i s t o r y is therefore to d e t e r m i n e the f o n u and development o f the text i n diis oral transmission phase, i n as m u c h as that is possible, and to e.xtract any other supportable conelusions from this area. 44

Transmission h i s t o r y first proceeds analytically. I t begins w i t h the oldest l i t e r a r i l y homogenous version o f a t e x t , or relatedly its c o m p o n e n t (source) parts, as established i n the l i t e r a r y critical stage. I t then inquires further, back i n t o the realni i n w h i c h the t e x t has been orally t r a n s m i t t e d and i n w h i c h i t was o r i g i n a l l y f o r m u l a t e d . Transmission h i s t o r y thereby aims at a p h e n o m e ­ n o n f r e q u c n t l y encountered i n A n c i e n t Israel: a m a j o r i t y o f texts have d i e i r o r i g i n in the realni ol" l i v i n g speech (such as individual narratives, legal s t i p u lations, prophetic speeches, and cultic songs). T h e y are first conveyed i n oral transmission. D u r i n g this oral transmission, changes can also enter die trans­ m i t t e d material. A. synthetic stage begins w i t h the analytical results, b u t reverses the direct i o n o f i n q u i r y . T o the extent that i t is possible and that i t is suggested by e v i dence, this stage atrempts to p o r t r a y the development o f the t r a n s m i t t e d text, i n its historical derivation and context, f r o m its first recognizable oral form t o die oldest w r i t t e n f o r m u l a t i o n . I t h i g h l i g h t s the effective changes and his­ torical factors. I I . Terminolog)

7

Elsewhere in exegetical l i t e r a t u r e , one also finds the t e r m "transmission h i s t o r y " l i m i t e d t o the h i s t o r y o f a transmission u n i t , o r the merger o f i n d i ­ vidual pieces, d u r i n g the stage o f oral t r a n s m i s s i o n .

45

I t m u s t also be n o t c d ,

44 The task is thus a constituent question within the framework of the overarehing question about the development of an Old Testament text (see above, §4 Λ I [p. 47ffj). 45 Gompare Fohrcr. Introduction, ρ. 2 9 0 1 (ehart). Recently Fohrer {Exegese, p. 119ff) has

modified his rlcfinition in so far as hc also atrributes "possible earlier, and therefore "precursory", stages of codification" (p. 120, cmphnsis ours) to transmission history. However, for Fohrer, diis

C o m m e n t a r y on the A p p r o a c h and the M e t h o d

65

however, that "transmission h i s t o r y " w i l l often be perceived i n another sense w h i c h ineludes redaction h i s t o r y or w h i c h is related t o the analysis o f a spe­ cific text's w r i t t e n or oral p r e h i s t o r y . M a n y use the t e r m " t r a d i t i o n h i s t o r y " as a s y n o n y m for "transmission h i s t o r y " i n the n a r r o w e r sense, as used by us. L i k e w i s e , m a n y use the t e r m "transmission h i s t o r y " i n a broader sense w h i c h ineludes w r i t t e n t r a n s m i s s i o n . Finally, i n o r d e r t o differentiate be­ tween the m e t h o d o l o g i c a l process and die subject w h i c h i t investigates, the designation for the m e t h o d contains the c o m p o n e n t o f ' ' c r i t i c i s m " , w h i c h m a n y researehers use i n the sense o f f o r m i n g scientific j u d g m e n t (transmis­ sion c r i t i c i s m , t r a d i t i o n c r i t i c i s m ) . T h e same goes for die methods ot redaction history, f o r m history, and t r a d i t i o n h i s t o r y . ' 4 6

47

43

49

0

Β. C O M M E N T A R Y O N T H E A P P R O A C H A N D T H E M E T H O D 1. Relationship to L i t e r a r y C r i t i c i s m

51

1. Expansion M e t h o d o l o g i c a l l y refleetive l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m and transmission h i s t o r y c o m p l e m e n t one another meaningfully. A n a l y t i c a l l y d e t e r m i n i n g a text's de­ v e l o p m e n t d u r i n g the w r i t t e n transmission stage is conducted b y l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m , w h i l e d e t e r m i n i n g the oral transmission stage is conducted by the transmission historical approach. 2. D e l i m i t a t i o n W h e n critically distinguished f r o m l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m , the transmission historical approach should b r i n g the f o l l o w i n g to bear: a.

T h e o r i g i n and f o r m a t i o n o f numerous O l d Testament texts derive from the arena o f oral transmission.

b.

T h e prineiples o f oral transmission can be considerably differentiated f r o m those of w r i t t e n transmission. ' 5

expansion has a purely theoretical eharacter, since the "precursory" codification stage is no longer something which is "'immediately available." 4* Classic examples: Nodis The Druteronvmistk History and Tbe Chroiiiclcr's History (see below, §6 D 111 [p. 93]) and Pentateuchtil Tradilwns (see above, p. 60). 47 Su Koch, íirtnetb ofBiblictd 'Tradition, ρ. 38,51,531,57. 48 So, for example, Κ Baumgärtel, R G G \ vol. 1, col. 1187. 4? So, for example, von Rad, Old Testament Theology, vol. 1, ρ. I lf,187,306f. etc.; A.H..J. Gunneweg, B H H , vol. 3. col. 2018-2020. 50 Cornpare, for example, Fohrer, Exegese, p. 7,12 If. 51 C f also §4 Β II 2f (p. 55). 52 Cf. §4 A l l (beginning on p. 51) with §4 Β I I 2f (p. 55). See also Koch, Grmsth of Biblical Tradition, §7 (especially, p. 89-91.) 1

66

§5

T H E TRANSMISION HISTORICAL APPROACH

O n e should dius certainly note the f o l l o w i n g : Frequently, die outline, contour, and e s s e n ü a l traits are determined i n the reahn o f oral transmission, especially i n narrative texts. However, n o t every specific f o r m u l a t i o n is d e t e r m i n e d therein. ' 5

I I . Transmission H i s t o r i c a l Processes'

4

55

Transmission h i s t o r y can be applied w i t h a prospect for conerete results to those texts w h i c h arose i n the r e a l m o f oral transmission and to those w h i c h were also occasionally subjected to certain changes and formarive i n f l u ences d u r i n g oral transmission. 1. l y p e and M ä n n e r o f Changes I n order to understand the t y p e and manner i n w h i c h the transmission S e g m e n t s (small units) were changed d u r i n g oral transmission one must c o n sider d i a t O l d Testament texts derive f r o m extremely diverse formative rela­ tionships. T h e means o f influence u p o n individual segments are v e r y different depending u p o n the formative circumstanccs. I n those places where traditions had been populär narrative material before they were recorded i n w r i t t e n f o r m , one should consider d i a t o n l y the C o n ­ tents were i n i t i a l l y fixed d u r i n g the oral phase.' T h u s , these transmissions were still relatively open for r e f o r m u l a t i o n , broader development, correlat i o n , and i n t e r t w i n i n g w i t h o t h e r narratives and w i t h p o r t i o n s o f other nar­ ratives. T h e c o m p o s i t i o n of different elements necessarily produces certain tensions. B y contrast, i t is less apparent that the o r i g i n a l w o r d i n g was c o n stantly changed d u r i n g oral transmission w h e n i n s r i t u t i o n a l frameworks ( o r relatedly reflective procedure) lead to fixed f o r m u l a t i o n s w h i c h c o u l d t h e n be o r a l l y t r a n s m i t t e d . " I n those cases, the effect o f the transmission tradent 6

5

5' The following is valid in diese cases: If verse numbers are assigned during the course of a transmission historical analysis, then, in contrast to literary criticism. die isolation of verses or verse parts does not generali}' intend a tixed voeubulary. Radier die assignation iudicates the extent of transmission components they contain. 5+ Hermisson. Jakobs Kampf am Jabbok, 251-257, offers important. extensive reflecüons upon the presuppositions for the origin and transmission of orally transmitted produets in hght of narratives.

55 Cf. section V below, p. 69. ' Sociologically: in die main, die period of die tribal System of Israel before l ü ü ü BCt, bul still in die Nordiern Kiligdoin; tradems: perhaps travelling story tellers. "lexts in the Old Tes­ tament: especially i n Genesis to Samuel; Example: Gen 32:23—33 (cf. Eiliger, Der Jaivbskampf am Jabbok, and Hermisson, cited above). J.R Floß, Wer schlügt s w ? , demonstrates that one may rrack a preliterary phase of this text bv linguistic investigation, in contrast to E . Blum, Komposition (p. 140f}; 175ff).' 57 Sociologically: in tbe monarchial period of Israel and under the influence o f courdy culture diese institutional frameworks are expanded; rradents: schools and school-like groups. Texts in tbe Old lestament: especially cult songs. legal sayings. and, in pari, prophetic logia, wisdom sayings, but also theologically conteniplativc narratives about prophets.

C o m m e n t a r y o n the Approaeh and die M e t h o d

67

m o r e l i k e l y m a n i f e s t s i t s e l f i n the o r d e r i n g o f the c o l l e c t i o n , i n i n t e r p r e t i v e a n d a c t u a l i z i n g i n t r o d u c t i o n s , e x p a n s i o n s , appendixes, o r c o n n e c ü v e p i e c e s (as l o n g as these are n o t b e t t e r a t t r i b u t c d t o the w r i t t e n t r a n s m i s s i o n p h a s e ) .

2. M a t e r i a l Character o f the Changes T o u n d e r s t a n d the Substantive m a t e r i a l e h a r a c t e r o f the c h a n g e s w h o s e t r a n s m i s s i o n s can be a t t r i b u t e d to the c o u r s e o f the t r a n s m i s s i o n history', o n e must consider a broad array o f possibilities:

a.

n e w material accents" (especially narrative);

b.

Substantive t h e o l o g i c a l t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s (for e x a m p l e , the m e o r p o r a t i o n o f

e.

c h a n g e s o n the basis o f d i s p l a c e m e n t ( r e g a r d i n g p o p u l a t i o n s , t e r r i t o r y ,

pre-Israelite m a t e r i a l i n t o the s p h e r e o f Israelite r e l i g i o n T ' ' ;

s e t t i n g , l e a d i n g f i g u r e s ) o r p a r t i c u l a r ( h i s t o r i c a l ) events i n the r e a l m o f 60

transmission ; d.

c h a n g e s o n the basis o f i n s t i t u t i o n a l o r t h e o l o g i c a l

a l t e r a t i o n s i n the

6 1

tradent circle ; e.

changes associated w i d i uniting individual pieces into a collection (assiniilations, harmonizations, tetherings, enrire c o n n e c ü v e pieces).

62

58 Example: In the Pemiel saga of Gen 32:23-33, the namine scene (32:28-30a) is a secondarily added narrative modi because it Interrupts tbe demand and the bcstowal of blessing (32: 27b,30b) and forms a second ebmax to the narrative beside the namingof the jilace (32:51). " Example: bi the pre-lsraelitc/Canaanitc form of the Pernici saga, the man liad reallv threateneil Iiis divine counterpart (as 32:26f dcmonstiatcs). However, the Israelite version, through its additions of 32:29,31bß (even clearer in the version of Hos 12:4f), cxprcsses that Jacob was fundamentally the loser in this balile. He had only endured (y/Win 32:29), and thus is his life spared (32:31). The formulations of 32-.26f have been implicitly transformed widiout change to the word­ ing (these are also transmission historical changes). Richter rejects argumentation solely on die basis of content criteria for transmission his­ torical analysis (Exegese, 44.152-163; there under the tenu "tradition criticism," c f discussion above, p. 65). Such caution is warranted. However, one should also doubt whether deduetions concerning preliterary stages of a text are possible exclusively on the basis of linguisuc-structural indices. It is not eonceivable why material tensions, history of religions phenomena, or culrural history phenomena (that is to sav phenomena related to the content of the text) may not be evaluated as signs of an oral prehistory of the text unit as such, especially since linguistic-structural tensions can be missing trom a text widi a preliterary prehistory. Reaching beyond the transmis­ sion historical process to odier exegetical processes is therefore again essential. t> bor examples. sce footnote 26. 65 Again, the interdependence of the methods is revealcd! 66 Example: the multiple elimax of Gen 32:23-33 (see above, footnotes 58 and 61). 6" Example: die presentation of Y H W H ' s wrestling with Jacob in Gen 32:26f (see above, footnote 59). Example: the Jolling of the Baal priests in 1 Kgs 18:40 in distinetion to the historical set­ ting of the Gannel scene as a «hole (see above, footnote 60). 4

6 S

C o m m e n t a r y on the Approach and die M e t h o d

69

5. Does the homogenous genre p r o p e r t y ( § 7 ) necessitate the acceptance o f the oral o r i g i n o f a small u n i t for a text whose f o r m u l a t i o n is fixed because o f die artna in which it is utilized (cult, w i s d o m , law)? 6. Does a corresponding Unding simultaneously necessitate f u r d i e r i n q u i r y i n t o an oral transmission f o r m despite redactional rrworking o f the f o r m u l a t i o n ( p r o p h e t i c logia)? I V T h e Synthetic Process B y m o b i h V i n g historical ( § 9 ) and f o r m critical ( § 7 ) considerations, die synthetic presentation o f a transmission u n i t s path i n oral t r a d i t i o n should i l l u m i n a t e the reasons for the o r i g i n o l d i a t transmission u n i t . T h e synthetic presentation should endeavor t o explain the historical necessities and the i n t e n t i o n s w h i c h have d e t e r m i n e d the transmission u n i t s development and the changes w i t h i n the frame o f oral transmis­ 6

sion. " T h e same is t r u e for the process o f the c o n n e c t i o n o f several such transmis­ sion units i n the realm o f oral transmission i n t o a larger transmission complex (collections, narrative cycles). W i t h the question o f the i n t e n t i o n s o f trans­ mission, the synthetic process o f the transmission historical approach already furnishes elements for d e t e r m i n i n g historical meaning ( § 1 0 ) . V. Applications for the Transmission H i s t o r i c a l A p p r o a c h I n d i v i d u a l texts as well as large text complexes (for example, pentateuchal sources) allow themselves to be treated transmission historically r e g a r d i n g die transmission components assimilated i n t h e m and their shape i n oral tra­ d i t i o n . A m o n g the O l d Testament w r i t i n g s , the historical books generally prove productive for a transmission historical investigation. I n a d d i t i o n to the narrative transmission, i t is especially i m p o r t a n t to consider the legislative material as w e l l . By contrast, changes scarcely appear i n o l d e r w i s d o m and cult texts i n the phase o f oral transmission. W i t h p r o p h e t i c logia, the trans70

71

W A close correlation thus cxisrs between the transmission historical approach and the deter­ mination of the historical setring of transmission layers! 0 For example, one has to consider the problems which the Book of the Covenant creates in this regord. Sce tbe recent work of F.. Otto, Wandel der Rechtsbegründungen in der Gesellschaftsgeschtchte des antiken Israel. Eine Reebtsgescbicbte des ^Bundesbitcbes« Ex XX 22-XXIH ] 5, Leiden, 1988. '1 In the Psalter, however, transmission historical and literary critical problems are nevertheless settled in die arena of the formulations of individual psalms". This fact is demonstrated, for example, in the invesngarions of W. Beyerlin and K . Seybold. Cf. K . Seybold, lntroducing tbe Psalms. Edinburgh, 1990, p. 255ff (more extensive bibliography in tbe German edition, Die Psalmen. Eine Einführung, 1986, p. 208ff). 7

70

§5

T H E TRANSMISĪON HISTORICAL APPROACH

mission historical i n q u i r y is i n p r i n c i p a l necessary, b u t progrcss t o w a r d the p r e l i t e r a r y formulations is frequently blocked. V E S u m m a r y o f the Procedure o f Transmission H i s t o r y 1. A n a l y t i c a l Questions a. Does the l i t e r a r i l y homogenous text, or one o f its l i t e r a r i l y independent layers, suggest materinireasons i n d i c a t i n g an orally trans­ m i t t e d piece existed previously? A n d can one exclude a p u r c l y literary (!) i m i t a t i o n o f the eharacter o f small units (perhaps i n relation t o the genre)? 7

b. Does Β I I I 1-6 provide analytical text indicators which strengdien this supposition? I

c. W h a t sbape d i d the oral transmission take? — Possibly, the f o r m u l a t i o n is reeeived c o m p l e t e l y intact (for example, i n cult songs, sacral and profane legal stipulations, w i s d o m sayings, even, w i t h qualification, the i n c o r p o r a t i o n o f prophetic logia). F r o m the other side, can one isolate elements o f the f o r m u l a t i o n w h i c h m o r e l i k e l y b e l o n g to the w r i t t e n recording? — Less o f the f o r m u l a t i o n is reeeived intact (for example, w i t h prophetic logia). W h a t can one isolate as a l i n g u i s t i c or material presupposition o f the literarily-compressed p r o p h e t i c logia w h i c h comes closer t o d i e i r oral l i n g u i s t i c shape? — T h e f o r m u l a t i o n is p r o b a b l y n o t reeeived intact, b u t possibly the o u t l i n e , perspective, or emphases are reeeived (for ex­ ample w i t h individual narratives). 2. Synthetic Questions a. W h a t are die reasons for the origin and transmission o f the text's reconstrueted oral phase, and w h a t are the conditions o f its i n s t i t u t i o n a l framework (§9)? b. A r e Uiere indeed indicators o f a change (transmission h i s t o r y ) w i t h i n the oral t r a d i t i o n , and w h a t arc the reasons and the m a ­ terial signals o f tliis change (see Β I I 2)?

•

#vK

c. A r e there compositional indicators i n the context that the text, o r text laver, was i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o orally t r a n s m i t t e d collectiotis of correspondingly small units? I f so. w h a t material change does this process produce? N o t e : Transmission historical investigations are necessary, b u t they are to a large degree reconstruetions. F o r this reason, they require S u p p o r t f r o m similar Undings according to § 7 and § 9 .

Results

71

C. R E S U L T S I . l i i s i g h t i n t o the O r i g i n and Changes o f a Transmission U n i t within Oral Tradition I f one is able to t r a č e a text's o r i g i n and, i f necessary, its formative changes back i n t o the realm o f oral t r a d i t i o n , then transmission h i s t o r y prepares indis­ pensable insights for understanding this text. One can detect locality, t i m e , rationale, and the arena o f usage c o n c e r n i n g the o r i g i n and the changes. T o gether w i t h the transmission form's characteristic components, these insights Ieave traces i n oral t r a d i t i o n up to die oldest l i t e r a r y version o l the text. A l s o , o n the basis o f diis prehistory, diese insights make the text understandable. Π . Transmission H i s t o r y as A c t u a l i z i n g Procedure Transmission historical research makes the transmission procedure under­ standable as a process o f continual realization and actualization b e g i n n i n g w i t h die realm o f oral tradition. -' I t does so even w h e n this process p r i m a r i l y shaped the present t e x t i n die subsequent w r i t t e n phase (see § 6 ) . T h i s p r o ­ cedure may be classified i n three aspects: 7

1.

T h e revision o f older transmission pieces and, at times, t h e i r new r e a l i ­ zation is a conspicuously frequent feature i n the O l d Testament. T h o s e responsible for such transmission apparently operated f r o m the convict i o n t h a t b o t h texts and speeches are n o t s i m p l y " f i n i s h c d " i f t h e i r con­ erete ehronologieal reference has faded. N o w , as before, these texts c o u ceal an i n n e r actuality " w h i c h c o u l d always have fresh m e a n i n g extracted f r o m t h e m " i n a changed Situation.''

2.

T h e o l d transmission piece gains its actuality i n the changed S i t u a t i o n , b u t o n l y t h r o u g h r e a p p r o p r i a t i o n and interpretation. Simple r e p e t i t i o n does n o t suífice. T h e strueture o f the transmission process inside the O l d Testament, i n a certain respect, can stimulate and o r i e n t the task o f r e a p p r o p r i a t i n g and actualizing O l d Testament texts i n the present.

3.

I I I . Transmission H i s t o r y as the H i s t o r y o f die R e l i g i o n and E a i d i o f Israel T h e analytical p o r t i o n o f the transmission historical investigation o f texts 4

can p r o v i d e access to historical dara.' T h e synthetic aspect o f the transmis-

Comparc- especially von Rad, Old Testament Tbeology, vol. 1, p. 3-5.129f, and Vol. 2, p. 42-44,45-49, and context. 7J V. Rad, loc. rit., Vol. 2, p. 46. •4 Cf. IV below.

§5

T H E T R A N S M I S I O N H I S T O R I C A L .APPROACH

sion historical investigation creates the c o n d i t i o n that one may f u r t h e r m o r e observe a v e r y particular k i n d o f h i s t o r y . U n d e r transmission historical Ob­ servation, even a small text u n i t like G e n 32:23-33 presents itself as a series o f developmental stages w h i c h eonceal a kind of r e l i g i o - h i s t o r i c a l e o m p e n d i m n . F u r t h e r m o r e , one may recognize the h i s t o r y o f IsraePs faith f r o m the trans­ mission h i s t o r y of larger text complexes. O n e recognizes this h i s t o r y as a re­ 75

sponse to specific historical experiences understood as C o m i n g f r o m Y I I Y V H , and as the I n t e g r a t i o n o f n e w l y encountered intellectual conceptions- T r a n s ­ mission h i s t o r y thereby opens the possibility o f r e t r a c i n g the p a t h o f Israels f a i d i and its i n c l i n a ü o n s , especially i n tbe r e a l m o f Israelis beginnings. IV. Access to H i s t o r i c a l and R e l i g i o - H i s t o r i c a l Data I n their final f o r m w h i c h n o w lies at hand, Statements f r o m O l d Testament texts frequendy stand i n tension w i t h the im3ge w h i c h the h i s t o r i a n must depict for the h i s t o r y o f Israel. T h i s fact at first appears to d i m i n i s h greatly die value o f the O l d Testament as a source o f research for the h i s t o r y o f I s r a e l . Transmission history, however, has changed this Situation. O n e must differentiate the question o f the text's historical content, to the degree that t r a d i t i o n h i s t o r y allows one to pereeive the t e x t i n various developmental stages. N o w each o f the developmental stages allows itself t o be investigated separately f o r its historical content. O n the one hand, the historical c o n t e n t can relate d i r e c d y to details offered i n the text. O n the other hand, however, i t is given i n d i r e c t l y i n the relationships and the processes by w h i c h those responsible for transmission were d e t e r m i n e d i n their o w n time p e r i o d . O n l y then do eross references between archaeology, o r die h i s t o r y o f r e l i g i o n , and reports o f die O l d Testament texts o f t e n become clear. 76

77

D. L I T E R A T U R E 1. I N T R O D U C T I O N , F O U N D A T I O N A N D O W . R V T E W G. Fohrer. Exegese, § 9A+B D.A. Knight. 'Tradition History." A B D , Vol. 6, p. 633-638. K . Koch. The Growth of Biblical Tradition, p. 38-57. VV.E. Rast. Tradition History and the Old lestament. Guides to Biblical Scholarship. Old Testament Series. J. C. Rylaarsdam, ed. Philadelphia, 1972.

s

" Cornpare Rendtorff, Geschichte und Überlieferung, especially ρ. 83,85,88ff. 16 This fact should not be cvaluated as negative too quickly. For the problem, cf. von Rad, Old Testament Theolgy. vol. 1, p. 3-5,105-111. T> For discussion of the whole question, sec especially Koch, Growth of Biblical Tradition. p. 54-56.

Literature

73

Π. E X P A N S I O N A N D C R I T I C A L A L T E R N A T I V E S I I . Birkeland. Zum hebräischen Traditionswesen. Die Komposition der prophetischen Bücher des Alten 'lestaments. A N V A O 11. Hist.-Filos. Klasse. 1938 N o . 1, Oslo, 19.38. E. Blum. Die Komposition der Vätergeschichte. W M A N T 57. Ncukirchcn-Vluyn, 1984. K. Jeppesen and B. Otzen. eds. The Productions of Time. Tradition History in Old Testament Scholarship. Sheffield, 1984. D.A. Knight, ed. Tradition and Theology in the Old Testament. Philadelphia, 1977. S. Mowinckel. Prophet)- and Tradition. A N V A O I I . llist.-Eilos. Klasse. 1946 N o . 3. Oslo, 1946. G. v. Rad. Old Testament Theology, Vol. 1, esp. p. 8-10,12-14,121-135; Vol. 2, everywhere. R. Rcndtorff. Geschichte und Überlieferung. I n : Studien zur Theologie der alttestamentiiehen Liberlieferungen (Festschrift. G. von Rad), p. 81-94. Neukirchen, 1961. . Literarkritik und Traditionsgeschichte. E v T h 27 (1%7); 1 38-153. W. Richter. Exegese, 152-165. H . Ringgren. Literarkritik, Formgeschichte, Uberlieferungsgeschichte. T h L Z 91 (1966): 641-650. Works Dedicated to the Discussion o f Oral Tradition: R.C. Culley. "Exploring New Directions." In U.A. Knight and G.A. Tucker. The Hebrew Bible and Its Modern Interpreters. Philadelphia, 1985. p. 167-200. , ed. Oral Tradition and Old Testament Studies. Seineta 5 (1976). G. Fohrer. Introduction to the Old 'lestament, § 3: p. 36-41 (see also additional liter­ ature on 568f). R. Knierim. "Criticism of Literary Features, Form, Tradition, and Redaction." I n : D.A. Knight and G.A. Tucker, The Hebrew Bible and Its Modern Interpreters. Philadelphia, 1985. p. 123-165. K. Koch. Tbe Growth of Biblical Tradition, 78-91 (note especially the most impor­ tant literature on ρ. 78f). A.B. L o r d . Tbe Singer of Tales. Cambridge, M A 1960. H. A. Stolz and R.S. Shannon, eds. Oral Literature and die Formula. A n n Arbor, 1976.

I I I . EXEMPLARY E X E C U T I O N G. W. Goars. Genesis. FOTT. I . Grand Rapids, 1983. K. Elliger. Der Jakobskampf am Jabbok. Gen 32,23ff als hermeneiitisches Problem. Z T b K 48 (1951): 1-31 (also in: Elliger, Kleine Schriften zum Alten lestament. T h l î 32. ρ. 141-173. Munich, 1966). J. P. Floß. Wer schlägt wen? Textanalytische Interpretation von Gen 32,23-3.3. B N 20 (198.3): 92-132; B N 21 (1983): 66-100. H . -J. Hermisson. Jakobs Kampf am Jabbok (Gen. 32,23-33). Z T h K 71 (1974): 239-261. J. Jeremias (s. § 6 D I I I ) .

74

§5

T H E TRANSMĪSION HISTORICAL APPROACH

Μ . N o t h . A History of Pcntateuchal Traditions. Atlanta, 1981. O . H . Steck. Überlieferung und Zeitgeschichte in den Elia-Erzählungen. W M A N T 26. Neukirchen-Vluyu, 1968.

I V H I S T O R Y OF RESEARCH H.-J. Kraus. Z u r Geschichte des Überlieferungsbegriffs in der alttestamendichen " Wissenschaft. E v T h 16 (1956): 371-387. . Geschichte der historisch-kritischen Erforschung des Alten Testaments. Neu­ kirchen-Vluyn, 31982 (See tbe subject index under "Uberlieferung", "Uberlie­ ferungsgeschichte").

Redaction Historical Approach

T h e i n t r o d u c t i o n to § § 4 - 6 above ( § 4 A I ) offered an ideal m o d e l c o n ­ c e r n i n g die o r i g i n o f an O l d Testament w r i t i n g . I n most cases, this o r i g i n does n o t oceur i n a single act w h i c h conceives and composes a w r i t i n g i n the final f o r m w h i c h comes to us. Rather, this o r i g i n oceurs i n a multi-stage process over an extended p e r i o d d u r i n g w h i c h an older p o r t i o n is occasionally ex­ panded and n e w l y aecented. As a r u l e , the origin of an Old Testament literary n-ork therefore means the history of origin! T h i s h i s t o r y o f o r i g i n o f an O l d Tes­ tament w r i t i n g can even stand o u t sharply i n a specific text. T h i s contrast is particularly true i f transmission historical and literary critical analysis establish that the text contains transmission Clements, and especially formulations, f r o m different times. T h e m o r e recent material is thereby attached t o older, p r e existing material and enriches die older material w i t h new accentuations w h i c h change the older material. Exegesis cannot neglect this aspect i f i t wants to do justice to the i n t e n t i o n o f the Statement, o r more precisely, to the m a j o r i t y o f v i c w p o i n t s i n a series o f Statements w h i c h follow u p o n one another. A n d exegesis cannot neglect this aspect i f i t wants to make accessible the k e r y g m a t i c riches o f the text's final t o n n w h i c h are articulated as a w o r d f r o m vari­ ous transmission witnesses f r o m different O l d 'lestament times. T h e r e f o r e , one has to t r a č e the course o f a w r i t i n g ' s developmental h i s t o r y i n the v i e w points ehanging w i t h i n the text. I t is possible that transmission historical analysis demonstrated that the text goes back t o an oral transmission f o r m (old individual narratives) or t o an oral speech f o r m (individual sayings or c u l t i c texts). Further, one may have to aceomit for a subsequent transmission phase, still w i t h i n oral t r a d i t i o n , w h i c h arranged o r collected these units and p r o v i d e d t h e m w i t h new accents o f meaning. I f so, t h e n one calls u p o n the transmission historical synthetic approach to elucidate this process, as we n o t e d i n § 5 . As we saw, i t appears c x t r e m c l y diffieult to make progress t o w a r d this oral p r e h i s t o r y o f the components o f

76

§6

REDACTION HISTORICAL APPROACH

O l d Testament w r i t i n g s and to encounter historical findings w h i c h are even plausible w i t h i n that prehistory. Today this d i f f i c u l t y is recognized even i n those places where one must undoubtedly aecount for a prehistory, u n l i k e the times w h i c h euphorically u t i l i z e d form criticism under the supposition i t could almost access die original biblical act o f proelamation. T o backtrack behind the formative material o f a text's f o r m u l a t i o n is m u c h m o r e d i f f i c u l t tban one diinks, b u t i f necessary, one must do so hypothetically, using careful, reasoned deduetions. By contrast, one encounters relatively f i r m g r o u n d w i t h the developmen­ tal phases o f a text i n an O l d Testament l i t e r a r y w o r k on the written level-— phases (3) and (4) i n our ideal pattern. H e r c , as l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m analytically elucidates, one encounters fixed f o r m u l a t i o n s and literary contexts for the i n ­ dividual text. H e r e one sees l i n g u i s t i c and material inconsistencies w i t h i n the individual text itself or regarding its immediate o r its w i d e r context. Fixed v o cabularies may be separated f r o m one another and arranged c h r o n o l o g i c a l l y in relation to one another, possibly even i n a single l i t e r a r y u n i t . H e r e , even w i t h a l i t e r a r i l y homogenous text, one may often observe d u r i n g the w r i t ­ ing's developmental history, that the text comes t o stand i n diverse contexts w i t h different accentuations. Redaction h i s t o r y concerns itself w i t h the area o f w r i t t e n transmission, above ali w i t h the analytical materials f r o m l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m . I t envisions these analytical materials synthetically as elements o f a h i s t o r i c a l , transformationaJ process w i t h i n the framework o f a text's devel­ opmental history—hence the component "history" i n redaction history. T h e c o m p o n e n t "redaction" i n r e d a c t i o n h i s t o r y iniplies that a linguistieally p r e existing text w o u l d be revised i n this process, in the sense o f a changed c o n ­ s t r u e t i o n . T h u s , one discerns the eharacter o f the redactional measures. P r e existing text material (also n o w newly integrated) or several l i t e r a r y entities are j o i n e d i n t o a new w h o l e , by means o f r e o r d e r i n g ( c o m p o s i t i o n ) a n d / o r d i e redactor's o w n , new, textual i n s c r i p t i o n s . As a r u l e . these measures have also been carefully conceptualized. Ehe new is therefore constructed by c o n s t i t u tive j o i n i n g t o the o l d , o r relatedly, i n k e e p m g w i t h die o l d . C o r r e s p o n d i n g l y , redactional and pre-existing material f o r m a n e w l y understood whole i n die r e s u l t i n g w r i t i n g . I n this respect, redaction is a t e x t - b o u n d shaping w h i c h is characteristically differentiated i n m e t h o d and perspective f r o m a w r i t i n g ' s more original formulation.

Such changing, redactional processes of revision appear in different ways with wideiy divergent literary horizons. Severe.! important cases of redactional proceedings are mentioned

bere as typicai

exampies.

I. When formeriy oraiiy transmitted material is first written down {"first written version"), it may already mvolve meanmgfu! redactional processes. These processes are evident in the deiiberate ordering in which the transmitted material has now been incorporated. They are evident in the revision of the formulations by which the transmitted

T h e Task

material is acclimated to the entire writing and its sequence of Statements. As a result, the transmitted material is now only understandable within the framework of the writing as a whole. These procedures are evident in new redactional formulations which were first formulated for the developing wnting without a transmission historical basis. and which may directly express the redactionai intention. These new expressions range from small. commentary-like insertions into sma'l sections of a text, to more comprehensive new formulations (such as superscriptions and subscriptions) which have the entire wnting in view and which serve to strueture that wnting. 2, If an Old Testament writing alneady exists, then its "continuation" {"Fortschrei­ bung") can appear subsequently, for example in the following procedures: a.

b.

c.

d.

Occasionally, individual commentary-iike additions are utiüzed in light of small text sections. These additions range from glosses (linguistic or historical) to speech formulas and to additions of content and theology. They are attached to the immediate context linguisticaliy and/or by content. Over time, such additions, whose honzons are limited to the immediate context mstead of the entire writing, can develop further with particular Lhemes, They may be atxached in Clusters onto passages of the origi­ nal literary entity. However, if it is not recognizable that additions are components serving an expanded rcstructuring of the whole (!) writing (that is, if they are treated as isolated additions). then the redaction historical approach finds application only in the narrow .framework of the additions immediate context. In the text bemg exegetically treated, more recent additions, which literary criticism elucidates. can also be pan ofthe total redaction ofthe writing. This is the case when corresponding additions are found elsewhere in the wnting. Included among these corresponding additions are those which are aüke in content, in the redactional method. or which come from the same historical period. They shed new light on the reeeived writing as a whole. In this case, the task of the redaction historical approach is expanded to determine what the continuation found in this particular text wants to contribute to the total redactional profile. As a rule, only one variety of (b) constitutes literarily homogenous additions, frequently somewhat larger in size. They not only represent an expansion of a pre-existing im­ mediate context, but also have been formulated speoficoily foi the writing es redac­ tional productions. These additions were alneady mentioned under section I). They are of greatest significance for the redactional profile because here the concerns of the redaction can unfold freely through new accents or detailed material expansions. Precisely because these newly formulated Statements also wish to revise something, it is not astounding that they take up many formulations from the entire writing, pointing backwaixis and forward. They referto other redactional formulations in the writing. They restrueture and reaccent the context with older formulated material. And thus they provide direction to the reader for the entire writing in its redactional sense. Also, one shouid observe the position of the specific formulations. They often have a materially strueturing Function for the whole. The redactional revision of a writing can also be aecomplished with or without addi­ tions to the text by resttveturing the entire reeeived writing. This restrueturing changes the perspective by shedding a different light upon the text being treated because, in some cases, a writing's newly available macrostrueture (reaügned into struetured sections) wants to understanc the text differently (as well as the associated text).

78

e.

§6

REDACTION HISTORICAL APPROACH

Finally. in addition to cases in which the redaction historical process not only continues the existing wnting by restructuring and by specific formulations, one must also account for those cases which conneci where with the given writing to prcduce

pre existing

transmitted

material

from

else­

a new entity. This pne-existing material may

be of a type which is oral or written. Conjoining two writings into one new redac­ tional whole can provide a new dimension of meaning for each text component in both writings when the conjoming occurs with deliberation and with redactional structuring. The preceding list of possibilities manifests the redactional processes o f revision. ft seeks to make dear what must be taken into account in this methodological stage. It is a bnoad field in the true sense of the word. The beginner snould not become discouraged with this breadth, and should limit himself/herself more precisely to potentiell redactional manifestations within the assigned text f o r the most part, additions and the immediate context are the working horizon. For the wider literary horizon of the assigned text (the redactional development c f the Old Testament literary work from which this text ongmates), the beginner may rely prirnanly upon Information from Old Testamen* introduetions, upon recommended secondary literature, and upon directions from the instruetor, The task of independently investigating texts redaction historically in the framework ofthe history of development for an entire literary work requires a precise knowledge of this work down to its particular formulations. And it invoives tedious, detailed concordance work. Practicaliy, it can only be undertaken with special concentration in the discipline o f t h e Old Testament in the coneluding phase of one's studies. The following comments for this area can only be given as initial Instructions, H e r e are three d e l i m i t i n g remarks to close this i n t r o d u c t i o n i n t o the redac­ t i o n historical approach: First, b o t h the r e v i s i n g and that w h i c h is revised b e l o n g t o " r e d a c t i o n " . Accentuations w h i c h have been ineorporated in the redaction process, do n o t allow themselves to he elevated t o the p o i n t that one investigates o n l y the re­ v i s i n g i n t e r v e n t i o n s (restrueturings, new f o r m u l a t i o n s ) . Rather, these i n t e r ventions are eonstantly plaeed i n r e l a t i o n s h i p to that w h i c h was revised. Its m e a n i n g m u s t therefore be d e t e r m i n e d as tbe new understanding ofthe revised. T h a t w h i c h is revising certainly direets h o w that w h i c h is revised is n o w to be u n d e r s t o o d and to be read. T h e redactors o f O l d Testament w T Ì t i n g s were generali}' n o t o f the o p i n i o n that t h e i r redactional S t a t e m e n t s invaliilated the older, revised Statements. F o r d i e m , the w r i t i n g is vaiid i n the t o t a l i t y o f ali of its Statements. T h e redactional S t a t e m e n t s show die reader, however, d i a t the older (now revised) t e x t n o w has o n l y a parrial v a l i d i t y w h i c h is h m i t e d c o n c e r n i n g rime, persons, and/or content. For example, older j u d g m e n t State­ ments and redactional salvation Statements can stand side by side on the r e ­ 7

dactional level o f a p r o p h e t i c w r i t i n g . However, the revised and the re\ ising m a t e r i a l do n o t stand o u t f r o m one another by the typeface used i n the devel-

T h e Iask

79

o p m e n t o f an O l d Testament w r i t i n g . T h e n h o w d i d an ancient reader recognize die redactional meaning? T h e ancient reader recognized the redactional m e a n i n g by continuous reading o f the w r i t i n g , above a l l , in the m a c r o s t r u c tural and i n the m i c r o s t r u c t u r a l position i n w h i c h the redaetionallv revising Statements are placed. T h e s e Statements are recognized especially at the be­ g i n n i n g and end o f the w r i t i n g , the b e g i n n i n g and end o f the major section o f the w r i t i n g , or the b e g i n n i n g and end o f the individual pericope. A1J o f this has i m p l i c a t i o n s for exegetical praxis, namely, that the meaning o f redactional ad­ ditions must be d e t e r m i n e d i n relationship to the pre-existing text element w h i c h was revised. (See footnote 205 below.) Second, i t is necessary to offer a w a r n i n g against the o p i n i o n diat one can, or even should, l i m i t oneself solely t o exegesis o f die final form of tbe text reached i n B H and thereby avoid the h y p o t h e t i c a l i n q u i r y i n t o older stages. I n numerous cases, the final f o r m o f an O l d Testament text indicates complex, even c o n t r a d i c t o r y Statements w h i c h must be clarified. T h e r e f o r e , these State­ ments force one to diachronic analysis ( l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m , see § 4 ) and synthesis (redaction h i s t o r y ) . O f course, the m e a n i n g intended i n the final f o r m m u s t also be d e t e r m i n e d . However, i t is o n l y diseernible i f one can grasp the p r o ­ ductive reaccentuation o f the last hand. T h i s task, however, presupposes clarification o f the previous stages w h i c h have the same status as the final f o r m o f the text i n the riches o f the O l d Testament witness. A so-called " h o l i s t i c exe­ gesis" must ask itself h o w i t w i l l avoid exegetical arbitrariness w i t h o u t dia­ c h r o n i c textual perspective. T h i r d , the redaction historical approach may also be pereeived t h o r o u g h l y as an approach to the p r o b l e m o f the history of reception (cf C h r . ü o h men, see D b e l o w ) . However, one must be sure to k e e p i n m i n d that exegetical interest is n o t l i m i t e d t o the r e c e p t i o n , the p r o d u c t i v e a p p r o p r i a t i o n . A l o n g side the reception, o f equal value, Stands the question o f the older material's o w n meaning, o f the m e a n i n g o f the reeeived. B o t h must be secn i n r e l a t i o n ­ ship t o one another i n order that a text's productive transmission process releases a movement o f meaning (see § I O C I I ) . I n k e e p i n g w i t h the exegetical praxis w i t h i n one's studies, the f o l l o w i n g development o f the redaction historical approach concentrates p r i m a r i l y on the redaction historical processes w i t h i n the framework o f a specific text to be treated.

A. T H E T A S K W i t h the redaction historical approach, exegesis continues the trans­ mission historical w o r k , i n reg-ard to its synthetic aspect, b u t for the realm o f written transmission. I t thereby eoncludes the investigation o f the productive

80

§6

REDACTION HISTORICAL APPROACH

7S

transmission process o f die text i n the O l d Testament. T h i s approach traces the text's h i s t o r y from its first w r i t t e n f o r m t h r o u g h its expansion, o r relatedly c o m m e n t a r y , by means o f additions. Tt also traces a text's h i s t o r y t h r o u g h its i n c o q i o r a t i o n i n t o larger complexes all the way up t o its final version i n the c u r r e n t literary context. T h i s approach thereby determines the operative his­ torical factors and the i n t e n t i o n s o f the Statements. " 7

T h e redaction historical approach as such brings i n t o focus the course o f the development and the p o s i t i o n i n g o f a text w i t h i n a w r i t i n g by die relative c h r o n o l o g i c a l order o t the redactional actions. T h e approach thereby w o r k s t h r o u g h the older t e x t phases, new relationships, changes i n f o r m u l a t i o n s , and changes i n context. Ehe r e d a c t i o n historical approach understands these elements as redactional process. T h e procedural steps o f § 7 and § 8 w i l l t h e n c o n t r i b u t e f o r m critical and t r a d i t i o n historical perspectives w h i c h f u r t h e r clarifies this process. T h e procedural step o f § 9 w i l l also a t t e m p t t o pursue ab­ solute c h r o n o l o g i c a l , historical necessities and i n t e n t i o n s for the r e d a c t i o n historical development as described. A s w i t h the procedural steps o f § § 3 - 9 as a w h o l e , all o f this preparatory w o r k is undertaken for the final, decisive p r o ­ cedural step o f § 1 0 . I n § 1 0 , d e t e r m i n i n g the historical m e a n i n g is undertaken for the individual redactional text stages (see § 1 0 C I ) as w e l l as for the course o f the redaction h i s t o r y as such (see § 1 0 C I I ) .

B. C O M M E N T A R Y O N T H E A P P R O A C H A N D M E T H O D I . Relationship to L i t e r a r y C r i t i c i s m The redaction histoncal approach works closely with literary criticism and evaiuates its results. Both exegetical Steps concentrate upon the wntien stage of transmission. Lit­ erary criticism processed partial conclusions on the analytical level. Redaction history now has the specific task of syntheticaüy coordinating those partial conclusions with the aspect of the historical progression. As already accented at the end of §A, the goal is therefore to comprehend the merging of the materials separated by literary criticism; to pinpointthe Signals of processing which were likewlse designated by literary criticism; and to trace the material motives and intentions in this redactional processing. In the latter aspect. redaction history lays the groundwork for determining historical meaning (§ 10) under the particular oerspective of the assimilation and processing of older material. Recaction history is thereby contrasted with the earlier widespnead negative evaluation o' additions and redactional work ("secondary" in the derogatory sense). It utilizes the redactional history of a text and the new Interpretation bound to it precisely because of its notable characteiistics.

"8 See above, § 4 A I (ρ. 470. Redaction history also yields a closc correspondcncc to the procedure of determining the historical setüng. 7 9

C o m m e n t a r y o n the A p p r o a c h and M e t h o d

81

Redaction history also comes into play with a literarily homogenous text. Even in this case one must ask in which phase of the writing's developmental history the text's formulation took place. One must ask how ihe text relates to other redactional measures of the same phase. One must ask how it Stands in its relationship to immediate and broader context. And one must ask how its Statements are changed as the wrrting grows into its final f o r m . Moreover, in the case ofthe first written version, one has the task of determining the material relationship to the oral transmission material which >s now writ­ ten down. Tl. Redaction H i s t o r i c a l Processes 1. Processes for the I n i t i a l R e c o r d i n g o f O r a l T r a n s m i s s i o n

80

W e begin, so to speak, w i d i die case o f the oldest recoverable redactional process, the w r i t t e n registry o f material previously transmitted orally. T h e fact that a n oral transmission phase precedes is suggested by fundamental Observa­ t i o n as follows (see § 5 ) : T h e text to be treated is comprised o f a "small u n i t " o r it fonns a sinall u n i t along w i t h the context; the text is presented as a sfring o f such units; o r the text contains such a u n i t w h e n liberated from additions. Tn o r d e r to validate this u n i t , it must stand by itself, f o r m a l l y and materially, and n o t require the s u r r o u n d i n g text as an o r i g i n a l l y planned context necessary to the understanding. A t the same t i m e , these small units are n o t given to u s by themselves. Rather they are encountered o n a larger l i t e r a r y level w i t h i n a w r i t t e n c o n ­ text. h ö r example, they are encountered as n e i g h b o r i n g psalms, w i s d o m say­ ings, legal sayings, ancestral narratives, woe oracles, o r s a l v a ü o n Speeches (e.g. Isa 41:8-13,14 -16,17-20). T h e ereation o f this j u x t a p o s i t i o n / c o m p i l a t i o n , by its strueture and occasionally by its formulations, is a formative act o n the

mit­

ten level w h i c h is fixed for posterity. T h e r e f o r e , it is a subject for die redaction historical approach. I f the first w r i t t e n version p r o d u c t i v e l y shapes older trans­ mission, then the first w r i t t e n version c o u l d also be scen as the last step o f the transmission h i s t o r y . I f so, it n a t u r a l l y leads to die new status as w r i t t e n m a ­ terial. T h a t new status now leads i n t o the field o f redaction history. SO The fact that Fohrer (Fjcegcse, p. 140) does not ascribe the terai "redaction" to this process is, in part, a tenninological problem. We pereeive even compositional literary processes (like those noted below in "a") to fall under and "redaction"

(Exegese,

"redaction." Fohrer

differentiates h c r e between "composition"

p. 139-142). However, when Fohrer eliminates tbe revision of oral

trans­

m i s s i o n that is undertaken with die act o l w r i t i n g (described below in "h") from redaction criticism, it vaise* die

question

in

which methodological

step he then pereeives this process, w h i c h

is by no means a process ol "pure literary ereation" (Exegese, p. 140). For us, "composition" means the entire available context and tbe purpose of tbe

Statements w h i c h

possibly grow out of diat

context. T h i s context, in w h i c h a particular text Stands at die developmental phase of the w r i t i n g ,

may be preliterary or literary. The synthetic approach, transmission history and redaction history, concentrates u p o n the ereation and extent of a composition, o r of an intended text sequence in its respective totality. W i t h regard to the entire « O r k , it concentrates on each o f its developmental stages.

82

a. T h e first w r i t t e n version can be p u r e codification, i n w h i c h the form o f the first w r i t t e n r e n d e r i n g o f the specific section corresponds precisely w i t h the final oral stage. I n this case, one asks the redaction historical question o n l y w i t h regard t o the f u n e t i o n of this text. I f necessarv, one also asks about the i m p l i c i t change ot the text's m e a n i n g w i t h i n die p e r t i n e n t l i t e r a r y context, i n sofar as the text enters i n t o such.*" b . B y contrast, the first w r i t t e n version o f p r e - e x i s t i n g oral transmission can also signify its extensive (or m o r e l i m i t e d ) r e f o r m u l a t i o n and

ravording

by the author o f the w r i t t e n m a t e r i a l . " T h i s r e w o r d i n g is recognizable b y the linguistic characteristics as w e l l as the convergence o f the relevant l i t e r a r y c o n t e x t w i d i the redactional profile (to die degree d i a t the text enters a b t e r a r y c o n t e x t w i t h the first w r i t t e n version). T h e p r o b l e m o f " t r a d i t i o n and redac­ t i o n " dien presents itself, n a m e l y d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g older transmission elements f r o m the p o r t i o n b e l o n g i n g t o the t r a n s c r i b i n g author and d e t e r m i n i n g

the

motives for a d o p t i n g the transmission piece. c. b i diis regard, one should note that when d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g between " t r a ­ d i t i o n and r e d a c t i o n " one should b y no means expect the t r a d i t i o n t o consist o n l y o f transmission pieces w h i c h are clearly defined, detaehable, and w h i c h previously were t r a n s m i t t e d i n d e p e n d e n d y O n e should n o t expect t h a t t r a d i tions are l i m i t e d t o the transmission historical p r e h i s t o r y o f the text as already elucidated. Rather one should consider that an author w h o is reconceptualizi n g by u s i n g older transmission pieces can also articulate the redactional i n t e n t i o n and coneeptions w i t h additional educational elements. T h e s e ele-

81 Examplcs: Individua] legal sayings as in Exod 21:18ff in the growingliterary trame uf the Book of the Covenant and of the Sinai perieopc (before the Pricstlv, Deuteronomic, and finally Pentateucbal material); individual wisdom sayings as in Prov 15 in the frame of tbe book of Proverbs introduced by Prov 1-9 (wisdom as a living person'); individual cultic texts like Pss 46 and 47 in the frame of literary collecdons of psalms and finally of the theologically strucrured Psalter. S2 Contrary tu current upinion, diis process appears to be of greatest significanec for under­ standing the recording of prophetic transmission. W i d i prophetic literature, it is insignificant, from a methodological standpoint, that the author of tbe oral material and die writing redactor may be identical. Compare especially U l i . Steck, Wahrnehmungen Gottes im Alten Testament. T h B /O.Muních, 1982, ρ. 171-186 (particularly pages 179ff on Isa 7:3-9). In addition, seeH.-J. Kraus, Z A W 8 5 (1973): 39 to the woc-sayings of Isa 5:8-24; Barûijesaja-fPorte, ρ. 10f, on Isa 2S:7b-22. Working on Hosea, J. Jeremias bas produced grotmd breaking insights into die processes of the first written version of prophetic speeches. He shows how the older material bas been arraiiged into a planned, stxuctured composition using redactionally available parallel forms, thematíc expositions, catchword connecrions, cross-rererences (backward and iorward), bridge Statements, abbreviations, and. through the written formulation, by concentration upon larger material subjccts in the context under the presupposition diat the reader of the prophetic writing already knows the preceding material. The first written version ineorporates the older material into a form which is only understandable for a reader by Observation on the entire written context because of its cross-refcrcnced words, word plays, and pattems of construetion. Cf. in its entirety, J.Jeremias, Der Prophet Hosea, A T D 24/1, Göttingen, 1983, and also his Hosea studies from 1979 and 1981 mentioned on page 10 ol diat book.

C o m m e n t a r y o n the A p p r o a c h and M e t h o d

83

9

ments can have represented m o b i l e , isolatable material known by the author. ' These procedures w i l l be studied f u r t h e r i n the frame o f t r a d i t i o n history'. cl. T h e c o m p o s i t i o n o f a pre-existing oral transmission i n t o a larger w o r k by a revising author presents its redactionallprofile variously. O n d i e one hand, the redactional profile presents itself w h e n i t seleets, orders, and coordinates the o l d U'ansmission as well as when i t reformulates and rewords the o l d trans­ mission (see above, " t r a d i t i o n and redaction"). O n the other hand, w o r k i n g o u t the i n t e n t i o n s o f the redactor should especially rely u p o n d i e p u r e l y redac­ tional components o f the w o r k (i.e. r e f o r m u l a t e d components w i t h o u t basis in transmission pieces).*"' These redactional components appear m o s t l y i n the following: —

F r a m i n g F o r m u l a t i o n s ( i n t r o d u c t i o n and conelusion)

—

C o n n e c t i n g pieces

—

Speeches and prayers (concentration o f central theological points)

Based o n the transmission historical investigation, i f a t e x t under c o n sideration suggests itself as the first r e c o r d i n g o f oral material, then i t is e n t i r e l y sufficient f o r an exegetical exercise ( l i k e an exegesis paper) to pursue t w o questions i n this difficult

field:

1. R e g a r d i n g the t e x t f o r m o f this phase, what c o u l d be attributed to the first written version? O n e should aseertain redactional measures w h i c h eonsolidate, strueture, and adapt a text t o t h e framework of a l i t e r ­ ary e n t i t y . Indeed one should aseertain these measures by extracti n g a earefully deduced oral f o r m o f the text, and by ascertaining agreement w i t h similar measures i n other places i n the same w r i t i n g . M o r e recent secondary literature should p o i n t t o these places. 2. W h a t material intentions are expressed i n these redactional measures of the first written version i n view o f the total o r d e r i n g , aetualization, and acceiituation o f the transmission as n o w shown? A g a i n , parallel

>*î Thus the Yahwist, when forniing the paradise narrative (Gen 2:4b-3:24), used an older paradise story which entered Gen 2:4h-3:24 as a clearly defined transmission piece and therefore belongs to the transmission historical prehistory of Gen 2:4b—3:24. Alongside this older story, he also used knowledge such as the concept ot ereation lying behind 2:7 or the concept of the trec of life, Undouhtedly, hc also leamed these materials through the medium of texts, but hc did not bring tbese texts into his paradise narrative with their original contexts. As a rcsult, they can only bc methodologically pereeivcd on die tradition historical path (cf. Steck, Wahrnehmungen, ρ. 48-51). 84 Examples: Gen 6:5-8 + 8:20-22 and Gen 32:10-13 (Yahwist); 1 Sam 23:14-18 and 26:25a (author of die History of the Ascendancy, cf. R. Rendtorff, "Beobachtungen zur israelitischen Geschichtsschreibung anhand der Geschichte vom Aufstieg Davids," in Probleme biblischer The­ ologie. Festschrift Gerhard v. Rad, 1971, p. 428-439 especially 43 I footnote 17).

84

appearances i n die same w r i t i n g , at the same i n i t i a l l i t e r a r y layer, serve a substantiating f u n c t i o n . 2. Snbseqnent Stages Tnsofar as a text has a further l i t e r a r y h i s t o r y after its first w r i t t e n c o m p i l a t i o n , then one should ask the redaction historical question anew for each o f die text's redactional stages. The directions given for the first written version apply correspondingly to the redac­ tional processes which play a role in the redactional stages. When creating a literary context, a nedacto can simultancously mcorporate written texts alongside oral transmis­ sions. in some circumstances, this new usage nepresents a second redactional stage. A redactor can unite two or more individual texts (or relatedly complexes), which already ex;st in written form, into a larger entity. hese transmission pieces may be combmed either by interweaving the accounts. or by aitaching them to one another in blockst Fi­ nally, the redactional activity can manifest rtself in pre-existing wrrtten texts which may be expanded and revised by the redactor's o w o formulations. This activity may occur in the procedures already noted but may also occur independently ofthe formation of larger" lit­ erary compositions (or relatedly literary works). Ii redaction history is directed toward an extensive text complex o f several literary layers, then it seeks to recognize connections between the redactional work o f each individua! text. From that recognition, it seeks to reconstruct entire redactional layers and to situate these historically ard theoiogically. r

115

T

8b

7

m

39

Tn the redaction historical t r e a n n e n t o f a t e x t s stages w h i c h are subsequent to the first w r i t t e n version, i t is best to differentiate between diose texts w h i c h present themselves analytically (according to § 4 ) as l i t e r a r i l y composite and those w h i c h are l i t e r a r i l y homogenous. 85 Example: The incorporation of die memorial of Isa 6-8* into a more extensive collection ot lsaiah transmission (see Rarüi, Die Je.siijii- Wime in derjosiiizeit, 282 284). 8* For cxamplcs, sce above footnote 29. 8? For cxamplcs, sec above footnote 28. 8* For cxamplcs. sec footnote 30. For die Classification of glosses (small, clarifving additions which, in certain circumstances, may be only a single word), see G. Fohrcr, "Die Glossen im Buche Ezechiel," ZAW6Ì (1951): 33-53. In those places where die redactional work Stands in die context of tbe first written version of an extensive work (especially a narrative), then that which was said in "Id" above, p. 83, applieü. For example, in tbe case of the Deuteronomistic History,

comparc the position and tbe type of redactional formulations injosh 1*; Judg 5:31b; 1 Kgs 8: 14fr, 2 Kits 17:7-23; 22.1 f; 23:24-30, etc.

sv Examples: Isolation of Deuteronomistic redactional layers in the complex of Deuteronomy—2 Kings (cf Kaiser, introduction to the Old Testament, §16): a Deuleionoinistic redactional layer in Arnos ( b y H.VV. Wolff, Joel and Arnos. Henneneia (Philadelphia: 1977 [1969]) or relatedly die Deuteronomistic material in Jeremiah ( b y W Thiel, Die denteronomistische Redaktion von Jeremia 1-25, 1973). Isolation of a redaction of the lsaiah transmission in the time of Josiah (by Barth, Die Jesafa-Worte in der Josiazeit). Isolation of redactional layers which produce a connection be­ tween lsaiah 1-39* and lsaiah 40-62* ( b y O H . Steck, Bereitete Heimkehr, SBS 121, 1985).

C o m m e n t a r y on the Approach and M e t h o d

a. Literarily

85

Composite Texts

L e t us examine the case i n w h i c h a w r i t t e n t e x t (first w r i t t e n version) later reeeives further

additions and changes. I f these additions and

changes do n o t derive f r o m the same l i t e r a r y level, then, i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m , one seeks t o determine t h e i r relative sequence. I n order to profile the redaction historical process, the f o l l o w i n g i l h i m i n a t i n g questions are asked for each stage which has been extracted: •

I n w h i c h position is dre change/addition placed i n the text? Does i t exhibit a material f u n c t i o n t o w a r d the pre-existing text w h i c h is structural, a m p l i f y i n g , c o r r e c t i n g , and/or connective?

•

How is the change/addition formulated? Does i t take u p f o r m u l a t i o n s f r o m the i m m e d i a t e c o n t e x t for reference, m o o r i n g , strengthening, o r reaccentuation? Does i t w o r k w i t h f o r m u l a t i o n s w h i c h are f o u n d i n dre immediate or broader context i n order t o create i n t e n t i o n a l re­ lationships to the pre-existing text and t o direet the reader t o notice these relationships? M a y one understand die change/addition as a conscious, a m p l i f y i n g c o u n t e r - f o r n i u l a t i o n to these f o r m u l a t i o n s f r o m die i m m e d i a t e o r n e i g h b o r i n g context? Concordance w o r k is indispensable for this task. I t should consider characteristic words and w o r d ensembles. T h e goal o f this aspect is again: W h a t new aecent, and in what manner, does this redactional change bring?

Because o f the interdependence o f the m e t h o d o l o g i c a l steps, the m e t h ­ odological approaches o f § § 7 - 1 0 must also be ineluded t o elarify these ques­ tions. T h i s fact is self-evident here as elsewhere. More far-re?.ching are the aspeets wnich pertain to the ordering of these redaction h;storical manifesrations found in the text under consideratien. Düring a student's exe­ gesis, these aspeets should only be traced with support of secondary literature: • Does this ehange/aedition revise only the specific text and, if need be, its immediate context from the same literary level? Does it therefore concern only a specific disruption whose horizon is a limited context? Are there related mamfestations from the same literary level? How does the literary work appear wnen it reeeives these spe­ cific additions? • O r is the change/addition to the text a cornerstone for an expanded reformulated lit­ erary work as a whole? In other w o r a s , is it an element of a comprehenstve redaction of this work? Tbs possibility is suggested, for example: — if the redactional disruption gives the text a prominent position in the macrostructure of the writing (e.g, the addition of Isa 51:1 I = 3 5 : 1 0 ) , or if a bridgmg function between larger sections of the wnting should be observed; — if the redactional disruption makes the text stand out as the bearer of a material concern ofthe redaction which provides significance for other redactional disruptions in the writing;

86

§6

REDACTION

fflSTORICAL

APPROACH

— if the text thus produces untntelíigíble trains of thought regarding the text's for­ mulation and its sequence of Statements, but these thoughts point beyond them­ selves and Droduce their function in reference to the total redactional profile of the wnting. An essential cnterion for an assignation of this type, as for ali redactional manifes tations, occurs when the text concerns processes which do not stand aione. Rather, these processes expressiv serve the purpose of accentuating a larger literary entity which is thus being revised. This purpose is similar to superscriptions, structural blocks, and larger coherent, redactional formulations. l'he formulation of concepts or word ensembles can also offer help in recogniz­ ing redactional measures on older text material when it can be demonstrated that they are also characteristic for a writing's redaction. Deuteronomistic formulations in the Deuteronomistic History and in jeremiah present a striking example of this aspect. How­ ever, one must guard against overvaiuation at this point In non-Deuteronomistic prophetic redaction the same line of thought from the same irterary layer may be formu­ lated quite differently because the language is bound to the existing immediate context (for example, cf. Isa i I: I I I 6 to 27:1 2f; and Isa 35 to 62:10-12!). insofar as possible, one should attempt to situate a text's redactional m a n i festation w i t h reference to its p o s i t i o n and f u n c t i o n i n the redaction o f the en­ tire w r i t i n g and the w r i t i n g ' s compositional strueture. Insofar as possible, one should also attempt to ga in m o r e detailed historical determinations about this redactional layer according to § 9 . b. Literarily Homogenous Texts T w o cases should be considered: In an Old Testament literary w o r k which has experienced a multi-layered develop­ ment into Its final form, the procedures of §§4-6 can establish that a text had probably already reeeived its iiteraniy homogenous

form with the prsi written version More recent dis-

ruptions do not appear in the text even though the writing to which it belongs has grown considcrably after its initial phase. If so. the redaction historical approach is not profitable for this particular text in regard to subsequent developmental stages. However. the redaction historical approach does prove helpful by asking whetherthe position and func­ tion of the integrated text have subsequenlly changed with the growth of the wriiing (by restrjeturing, expand>ng, or recreating the context o f t h e writing). Even after its initial insenption, contextual reaccentuations of an lsaiah text like 5:8-10 can thus be traced through ali stages ofthe developing lsaiah book. T h e second case is m o r e i m p o r t a n t . A l i t e r a r i l y homogenous t e x t has no background i n orally t r a n s m i t t e d material before the w r i t i n g o r i g i n a t e d , n o r has the t e x t been incorporated as w r i t t e n material d u r i n g any stage o f the w r i t ­ i n g . Rather, the t e x t has been composed i n its entirety, from the b e g i n n i n g , for some phase o f the c o n t i n u a t i o n o f that w r i t i n g . T h e t e x t is thus a redauional formulation. T h i s p h e n o m e n o n was already m e n t i o n e d i n the i n t r o d u c t i o n t o § 6 , and i t appears that, u n t i l now, n o t enough consideration has been aceorded to this facet i n O l d Testament research, especially i n die area o f the Prophets, b u t also die Psalms. I n certain circumstances, i f causes one to reexamine the

C o m m e n t a r y o n the A p p r o a c h and M e t h o d

87

l i t e r a r y critical analysis once again. M a n y texts appear to be composites be­ cause one observes t h e m in I s o l a t i o n , and because one does not takc i n t o account a unified redactional text's diversity of perspective over the entire re­ vised w n t i n g . O n e must therefore consider w h e t h e r a l i t e r a r i l y homogenous t e x t i s really a redactional f o r m u l a t i o n . Section "a" spoke of changes/additions which literary criticism uncovereo within a literarily composite t e x t If these changes/additions exhibit a redactional eharacter related to the whole work, rather than just a narrow contextual horizon, then the redactional formulation is differentiated from them. The redactional formulation is difierentiated by the fact that it does not appear as an intrusion into the older text. Rather, the text represents an original, unified text created fortne redaction of the wnting. On a large scale, the redactional formulation funetions in the framework of the entire re­ vised writing like the addition/change funetions in an older text on a small scale. I f one represents the reeeived l i t e r a r y material f r o m an earlier phase o f the w r i t i n g by using an e m p t y box, and the new redactional additions by a shaded box, then the f o l l o w i n g schematic d r a w i n g results:

4

1

2

1 = Redactional addition to older texts 2 = Older texts without redactional intrusion

3

1

3 = Redactional formulations 4 = Supersciiption

W h a t characteristics could suggest a redactional formulation? • Such texts prefer l i t e r a r y seams. TTiey oceupy an explanatory posi­ t i o n i n the total strueture o f the w r i t i n g . T h e y have an explanatory, b r i d g i n g , or coneluding f u n c t i o n i n view o f die entire revised w o r k . N o t infrequently, several o f these texts refer to one another. • As w i t h ali redactional f o r m u l a t i o n s , these texts do n o t stand o n their o w n . T h e y constantly stand i n r e l a t i o n to the l i t e r a r y surroundings w h i c h are b e i n g revised and i n r e l a t i o n to the entire w r i t i n g w h i c h is being struetured. • These texts coineide w i t h redactional accentuations w h i c h the w r i t ­ i n g also demonstrates i n this layer as a w h o l e and i n other redac­ tional places. T h e y do so i n strueture, sequence o f Statements, and subject profile. •

Regarding t h e i r f u n c t i o n i n the entire revised w r i t i n g , these texts serve t o strueture and enrich the w h o l e i n the sense o f preeision, reaccentuation, c o r r e c t i o n , and later expansion.

88

§6

R E D A C T I O N HISTORICAL APPROACEI

T h e r e f o r e , w h a t facilitates the acceptance o f a l i t e r a r i l y homogenous text as a redactional formulation? • The literarily homogenous text appanently represents a "text for the book" according to those characteristics already mentioned. It shows -itself from the outset to be created for a larger literary framework, The text gains its function solely from this framework, Correspondingly. when observed in Isolation, it. is not really understandabie. One comprehends betten however, if one sees it in connection with the entire literary work for which Ί was created. Also, one can see how the text, in the mmd of the redactor, wants to direct its appropriate reader reception. Redactional formulations are directed toward the contmuing reader reception ofthe entire writing. The deter­ mination of a redactional formulation therefore presupooses insighi into the origin and construetion ofthe relevant redaction for the entire wnting. Also, it gains essen­ tial support by demonstratmg corresponding redactional intrusion in other places of the writing. • Redactional formulations are differentiated from new fermulations which are not bound to the transmission of a wnting, because the redactional formulations are cotrelared to the literary entity which they revise. This conscious referencing is expressed in the contextual position in which ii is placed, but especially in the thoughtful ere­ ation of references to the context ofthe wnting (preceding and/or subsequent). The iatter is true even though the redactional formulation (depending on the scope of the amplifying intention) must by no means consist solely of these references. The eharacter of these references :S at first ambiguous. Perceiving them as a liter­ ary cevice can only be aceomplished through foundational concordance w o r k Hence a series of perspectives come into view: — Does the text's formulation point to interrelotionships wilh other formulations in the frame of the same work? W i t h heuristically exposed evidence, the following comes into view: irterally repeated formulations (unintroduced quotes), eharacteristic word ensembles, charactenstic words, allusions, counter-formulations, and references to content. — How do these inrerrelationships operotel Which is the older contributing text? Which is the more recent, receiving and assimilating text? - If the text is to be treated as a redactional cross-reference (i.e. a conscious liter­ ary cross-reference) which serves the reader reception, then tnree alternatives must be eliminated: I-

2.

3.

One must eliminate the possibrity that the reference is only a widely used, tradrtional phrase. For example, the messenger formula in a prophetic wnting is not, by itself, a literary cross-reference in this writing. One must eliminate the possibility that the references are not treating stock language within the scope of small units in the pre-iiterary phase. For example, these appear in various psalms, and inside lsaiah - or Deutero-lsaiah—logia. One must eliminate the possibility that the reference simply draws upon knowledge ofthe older reference without implying that it must presume a iiterary/redactional adoption within ine framework and within the service of a book's cohesion. For example, do the cross-references of Trito-lsaiah demonstrate on oceasion. that Trito-lsaian knows Deutero-lsaiah, or do they mark redactional connections in the framework of a literary continuation?

C o m m e n t a r y o n the A p p r o a c h and M e t h o d

89

— The following can serve as evidence that the reaactiona! eharacter of a cross-refer­ ence operates within the frame of the literary work; 1.

2. 3. 4. 5.

The redactional adoption musi be shown to be literarily dependent upon the older (or at least redactionaily contemporary) contributing text within the framework ofthe writing's developmental history. The redactional adoption also implicftly presupposes the contnbutmg text's literary positon and context for the redactor and reader The receiving text elsewhere exhibits characteristics of a redaction t e x t The reference is reconciled with the procedure and the matenai concept as manifested in this redactional laycr elsewhere in the wnting, The reference produces its meaning for the author, and the reader (!), m conneetion with the contexts of the redactional formulation and with the strueture of the revised wnting. Also, it consequently presupposes the continuing reader reception ofthe redactional work as a whole.

One must therefore think literarily and, for the benefit of a redactional formula­ tion, one must continually ask the basic questions: In order to understand lins texl do the redactor and reader presuppose the writing's preceding or subsequent context? And should this text strueture and illummate the entire wnting? — Here, as elsewhere, it is methodologically important to eliminate other options. Constellations of the alternatives (2) and (3), mentioned above, do not lead to redaction texts relating to the entire writing. Rather, they lead to "smaller units," that is to texts without an ongmal relationship to the context. texts which stand alone. texts which are understandable by themselves, and which are selfcontained literary transcription; of texts which were orally transmitted. I t is self-evident that when d e t e r m i n i n g redactional f o r m u l a t i o n one may o n l y gain suffieient c e r t a i n t y by means o f a redaction historical investigation o f the entire l i t e r a r y w o r k . T h i s l i t e r a r y w o r k must also have gained a clear picture o f the redactional process, strueture, Organization, and subject profile o f the redactional phase for diat w r i t i n g i n whose c o m p o s i t i o n diese re­ dactional f o r m u l a t i o n s have t h e i r setting. A c c o r d i n g t o § 9 , m o r e detailed h i s ­ torical d e t e r m i n a t i o n m u s t also come i n t o plav at this p o i n t r e g a r d i n g the redactional layer f r o m w h i c h this f o r m u l a t i o n derives. A l s o , redactional f o r ­ m u l a t i o n s can be intluenced by o t h e r elements, apart from t h e i r internal ref­ erences to the b o o k (traditions according to § 8 , k n o w l e d g e o f f o r m u l a t i o n s f r o m other w r i t i n g s , influence of n e i g h b o r i n g canonical books, etc.).

I I I . S u m m a r y o f die Redaction H i s t o r i c a l Procedure T h e redaction historical approach investigates the i n t e r n a l ( l i t e r a r y c r i t i ­ cism) and the external (context) processes w h i c h may be observed from the text's development d u r i n g the w r i t t e n transmission. T h e t i m e p e r i o d eovered by the investigation Stretches from the first w r i t t e n version o f orally t r a n s m i t ­ ted material u n t i l the last productive change o f a text and/or its context at the

90

§6

REDACTION HISTORICAL APPROACH

conclusion o f O l d Testament w r i t i n g s . W h e n t r e a t i n g the realm o f the first w r i t t e n version, the redaction historical approach begins w i t h the results o f §5 (transmission units and, i f necessary, the j o i n i n g o f these oral units). T h e ap­ proach turns to the productive process o f tbe r e c o r d i n g o f these transmission u n i t s i n relationship t o f o r m u l a t i o n and/or O r g a n i z a t i o n . W h e n t r e a t i n g the r e m a i n i n g stages, the redaction historical approach begins w i t h the results o f § 4 ( l i t e r a r i l y homogenous o r l i t e r a r i l y composite text). Redaction historical investigation can be guided by the f o l l o w i n g ques­ tions: For the first written version: a. D i d § 5 determine that the text had already essentially been f o r m u ­ lated i n oral tradition? I f so, t h e n one does n o t expect a significant p o r t i o n to be redactionally f o r m u l a t e d , o r redactional f o r m u l a t i o n s are m i n i m a l . T h e redactional p o r t i o n may t h e n consist o f the c o d i f i cation, and after that, the c o l l e c t i o n and o r d e r i n g o f the m a t e r i a l i f this had n o t already occurred in oral t r a d i t i o n (catchword connect i o n , transitional f o r m u l a t i o n s , superscriptions, and subscriptions). b. D i d §5 determine that the text's f o r m u l a t i o n c o u l d , i n practical terms, h a r d l y be gieaned exclusively f r o m oral tradition? I f so, t h e n the text essentially results f r o m and for the first w r i t t e n version ( h o m o g e n e i t y over against the redactional profile o f the entire l i t e r a r y context). Tt is then necessary to determine m o r e precisely the signifi­ cant redactional p o r t i o n i n the f o r m u l a t i o n , c o l l e c t i o n , and o r d e r ­ i n g i n l i g h t o f the pre-existing material. For the remaining stages: c. D i d § 4 determine that the text was a literarily composite text? I f so, t h e n one must evaluate t w o possibilities: aa. Does the text indicate t h a t w r i t t e n materials o f diverse o r i g i n have been redactionally u n i t e d i n t o a single e n t i t y (e.g. the c o m p i l a t i o n o f sources) and then j o i n e d (or c o m p a r e d ) using redac­ tional transitions, etc.? bb. Does the foundationaJ t e x t e.xist i n a w r i t t e n f o r m w h i c h has been expanded by p a r t i c u l a r f o r m u l a t i o n s p r e c e d i n g the text, w i t h i n i t , o r c o n c l u d i n g it? D o diese f o r m u l a t i o n s concern i n d i v i d u a l i z e đ glosses and additions w h i c h are solely focussed o n die n a r r o w h o r i z o n o f die i m m e d i a t e context? O r are the additions pa r t o f a redactional c o n t i n u a t i o n ot the entire w r i t i n g (concurrence w i t h other redactional f o r m u l a t i o n s , a n d w i t h the c o n ­ struetion and the macrostrueture o f the same layer)? I n either case, for each developmental stage, o n e should h i g h l i g h t die type of compilation leading to the current text i n its e n t i r e t y (revising and [!] revised). I f the processes are redactional, then they should be

C o m m e n t a r y o n the Approach and M e t h o d

91

placed i n relationship to parallel manitestations and t o the c o m p o s i ­ t i o n o f the redactional layer (setting o f the t e x t i n the w h o l e ) . d. Does § 4 determine that the t e x t is literarily homogenous} f f so, then one should again examine t w o possibilities: aa. Is die text a c o m p o n e n t o f an older w r i t t e n transmission whose f o r m u l a t i o n was not changed even to the final f o r m o f the w r i t ­ ing? I f necessary, this w r i t t e n transmission c o u l d have had oral t r a d i t i o n background as described i n (a) and ( b ) . I f i t was part o f an older w r i t t e n transmission, then redaction h i s t o r y should de­ t e r m i n e the o r i g i n a l l i t e r a r y c o n t e x t o f this text along w i t h the t e x t s setting and f u n c t i o n in that context. T h e same is t r u e for all other contexts i n w h i c h the text is used i n the course o f t i m e , and the indirect changes w h i c h the text de facto experienced as a result o f the change o f context. D u r i n g these c o n t e x t changes, the text becomes revised. bb. Is die text o f a type w h i c h has been w r i t t e n just for its l i t e r a r y context, for the purpose o f e o n t i n u i n g , o r i e n t i n g , o r s t r u e t u r i n g the w o r k b e i n g formed? I f so, redaction h i s t o r y should deter­ m i n e the entire redactional level i n w h i c h this c o n t r i b u t i o n is admitted t o a redaction o f the w r i t i n g . Further, redaction his­ t o r y should determine the redactional attributes w h i c h characterize this redaction text. I t shoidd also specifically determine the eompositional and material f u n c t i o n o f this type o f text for the w h o l e . I n this case, the text belongs to the revising c o m ­ ponent o f a w r i t i n g . I f there are m o r e recent, productive devel­ opmental phases o f the entire w r i t i n g , then n a t u r a l l y the revis­ i n g text of an earlier phase itself becomes part o f that w h i c h the m o r e recent stage revises. T h e l i t e r a r y h o r i z o n in w h i c h a unified t e x t was first f o r m u l a t e d is most pivotal for the redaction historical investigation. A redaction historical investigation constontiy has to ask: 1. D o redactional processes manifest themselves by the formulations and/or the t h o u g h t f u l composition o f the context ( i m m e d i a t e and entire)? 2. F r o m diese processes, w h a t belongs t o the same literary layer, that is to the same redaction o f the work (eorrelation w i t h §4)? 3. W h a t eharacteriz.es this redaction regarding the way it works and its material traits} 4. T o w h a t degree do the redactional processes signify a change o f the whole, even o f the work's revised text material? 5. I f different redactional processes follow u p o n one another (in the text and/or its context), w h i c h changes show diis progression as such?

92

§6

REDACTION HISTORICAL APPROACH

C. R E S U L T S I . I n s i g h t i n t o the Changes o f a T e x t i n W r i t t e n T r a d i t i o n T h a t w h i c h was said f o r transmission h i s t o r y i n § 5 C I also applies to redaction history. I I . Redaction H i s t o r y as A c t u a l i z i n g Procedure That w h i c h was said for transmission h i s t o r y i n § 5 C I I also applies t o redaction history. I I I . Redaction H i s t o r y as die H i s t o r y o f Israels F a i t h T h a t w h i c h was said for transmission h i s t o r y i n §5 C I I I also applies t o redaction h i s t o r y

D. L I T E R A T U R E I. I N T R O D U C T I O N , F O U N D A T I O N , A N D OVERVIEW J. Barton. "Redaction Criticism."' A B D , Vol. 5, p. 644-647. G. Fohrer. Exegese, § 9B. Κ. Koch. The Growth of Biblical Tradition. p. 57-67. II. EXPANSION A N D CRI'IICAL ALTERNATIVES Η . Birkeland. Z u m hebräischen Traditionswesen (see § 5 D I I ) . Chr. Dohnien. Rezeptionsforschung und Glaubensgeschichte. T T h Z 96 (1987): 123 134. M . Fisbbane. Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel. Oxford, 1985. I I . W H e m b e r g . Die Nachgeschichte aittcstanienthchcr Texte innerhalb des A k e n Testaments. In: Werden und Wesen des A k e n Testaments. B Z A W 66. Berlin, 1936. p. 110-121. (also in: H e m b e r g , Beitrage zur Traditionsgesehichie und Theologie des Alten Testaments. Göttingen, 1962. p. 69-80). Chr. Levin. Die Verheißung des neuen Bundes in ihrem thcologiegeschichtlichen Zusammenhang ausgelegt. F R L A N T 137. Göttingen, 1985. S. Mowinckel. Prophecv and Tradition (see § 5 D I I ) . G. v. Rad. O l d Testament Theology. Vol. 2, p. 33-49. W Richter. Exegese, p. 165-173. O.H.Steck. "Prophetische Prophetenauslegung." I n : H.F. Geißer. et al, eds. Wahrheit der Schrift—Wahrheit der Auslegung. Zürich, 1993. ρ. 198-244. R. Wonneberger. Redaktion. Studien zur Textfortschreibung i m Alten lestament. F R L A N T 156. Göttingen, 1991. Works Dcdicated to die Discussion of Intertextuality U . Broich and M . Pfister, eds. lntertextualität. Formen, Funktionen. Anglistische Fallstudien. T ü b i n g e n , 1985.

Literature

93

Κ. Nielsen, "lntertextuality as Biblical Scholarship." ScandJOT 2 (1990): 89-95. D . N . Fewell, ed. Reading Between Texts: lntertextuality and the Hebrew Bible. Louisville, 1992. bor the "Canonical Approach," see: J. Barr. Holy Scripture: Canon, Audiority, Criticism. Oxford, 1983. B.S. Childs. Old Testament Theolog)- in a Canonical Context. Minneapolis, 1989. . Biblical Theology of the Old and New Testaments. Minneapolis, 1993. G. T. Sheppard. "Canonieal Criticism." A B D , Vol. 1, 861-866. Cornpare also tbe contributions t o J S O Τ 16 (1980).

Ul. ILLUSTRATIVE EXECUTION H . Barth. Die Jesaja-Worte in der Josiazeit. Israel und Assur als Thema einer pro­ duktiven Neuinterpretation der Jesajaüberüeferung. W M A N T 48. NeukirchcnVluyn, 1977. T. Collins. The Alande of Elijah. The Redaction Criticism of the Frophetieal Hooks. BiSe20. Sheffield, 1993. E L . Hossfeld and E. Zenger. Die Psalmen. Psalm 1-50. N E B . YVürzhurg, 1993. De Vries, S.J. Front OKI Revelation to New: Α Tradition-IIistorical and RedactionCritical Study of Temporal Transitions in Prophetic Prediction. Grand Rapids, 1995. J. Jeremias. »Ich bin wie ein Löwe für Efraini . . . Compare the detailed methodological discussion by Steck, "Theological Streams of Tra­ dition,'' in Tradition and 'Theolog)' in ihr Old Testament, p. 183-191; and Steck, Scböpfimgsbericht, p. 26ff,272ff. 141 Exaniples: Λ tradition historical investigation of Jer 7:1-15 must ask about the coneepr of the imparted protection in the Jerusalem remple which is presupposed in 7:4,10. By contrast, transmission historv asks about the previous stages of the current Denteronomistic version of the text in Jer 7:1-15 itselt. In Judg 4, the tradition historical question treats the coneept of die exclusive activity of Y1IW1I in the aft.miment of victory (4:14f), while the transmission historical approaeh tn(]iiires into the oral prehistory of the oldcst litcrarily homogenous version of the text of Judgcs 4. In both cases, the tradition historical approaeh concenis die coneepts which have ti3turally obtained linguistic shape in specific, concrete texts (and are still ascertainable onlv in diese texts). However, these coneepts have not entcred as one of these concrete texts in Jer 7 or Judg 4. (

142 Examples; the coneept of a cause and effect relationship (cf. Koch, Vergeltungsdogma). 1*J -See especially, Koch, Formgeschichte, p. 333-336 (bibliography, but not available in the linglish tninslation).

126

2.

§8

TRADITIONAL HISTORICAL APPROACH

Fixed contents o f the k i n d presented b e l o w are also situated i n a particular intellectual w o r l d inside A n c i e n t Israel (and the ancient Orient): i n specific geographica! realins, w i d i specific social groups, at specific locations, i n stitutions, and even w i d i a specific circle o f persons. Even here, one should p r i m a r i l y lake characteristic t h o u g h t patterns i n t o consideration. These patterns reflect religious and theological convictioiis w h i c h determine the p e r c e p t i o n o f reality and the experiential and intellectual processing o f r e a l i t y . m

3.

Further, die reservoir o i knowledge andawareness belongs t o the fixed c o n ­ tents w h i c h stand at the author's disposal as a c o m p o n e n t o f the author's education. T h i s reservoir is k n o w n t o the author f r o m i n d i v i d u a l t r a d i ­ t i o n pieecs, and these m i g h t even occur to the author, b u t they are n o t i n ­ tegrated i n t o the author's statement as a t r a d i t i o n p i e c e . N a t u r a l l y , this reservoir ineludes m o r e extensive material w h i c h die author k n o w s and considers w h e n f o r m u l a t i n g a text. As a r u l e , the vocabulary and die strue­ t u r e o f f o r m u l a t i o n o f these b a c k g r o u n d contents are seldom fixed. F o r tliis reason, they are freely shaped w h e n they are adopted i n t o a text. T h i s free shaping makes the contents m o r e difficult to pereeive m e t h o d o l o g i ­ cally. Ehe constancy o f the f o r m u l a t i o n is greater w i t h fixed images and comparisons, idioms, and linguistic Conventions. These elements must also be considered h e r e . 145

Ι4Λ

4.

W i t h i n a particular intellectual w o r l d , terms can attract a special mean­ i n g w h i c h greatly surpasses the lexically pereeived m e a n i n g . H e r e , as already m e n t i o n e d , sebo/astie language and speciaiized language, w i d i t h e i r characteristic words and w o r d associations w h i c h w e r e shaped b y A n c i e n t Israel, play an i m p o r t a n t role. A b o v e all, o n e should m e n t i o n die royal court, the m i i i t a r y , legal concerns, priesthood, temple poetry, w i s d o m , the D e u t e r o n o m i c / D e u t e r o n o m i s t i c s c h o o r s language, a n d a d e v e l o p i n g p r o phetie language. A t times, even a single characteristic t e r m may desire t o MT

'** Examples: the conviction that seeing (Jod leads to death (Gen 32:31; Exod 33:20; Judg 6:23, etc.) or diat the world is dividcd into an arena of the elean and the unclean (cf. Num 19:ll-13;Hag2:ll-13). > See above, p. 82 + footnote 83, and examples from Gen 2:4b-3:24. Further. see Steck, Schöpfungsbericht, p. 28f, and passages concerning Gen 1:1-2:4a (e.g. the Statements about the re­ alities before the ereation in Gen 1:2. Stbapfimgphricbt, 228ff). " A Store of knowledge, awareness, and materials is then methodologically observable if one inquires into die statement's contents. Then one can sec whether those contents reflect training and education or whether they concern knowledge which the author gained from experience. This is especially significant widi materials when literarily independent parallel texts can be found which suggest die employment of a broader circulation of common contents, in spite of a differ­ ent formulation and usage. W Examples: g'r, rebuke (cf, Gen 3": 10: ,1er 29:27 with the references in Ps 104:7 and Isa 17:13 which stand in die framework of a larger conceptual context); mithseh/miihāseh, " rehige" (cf. Ps 104:18; Job 24;8; with Ps 46:2; 61:4). I4

, 4

C o m i n e n t a r y o n the Approaeh and M e t h o d

127

H l i

evoke associations i n this i n t e l l e c t u a l w o r l d . T h e r c f o r e , analysis o f a t e r m can frequently not be l i m i t e d t o its semantic explanation in the c o n ­ text o f its various occurrences w h i c h results f r o m reference to lexicon and coneordance. A n explanation must be expanded by an "investigation o f the theological, material context i n w h i c h a t e r m is anehored (vocabulary r ä n g e ! ) , as w e l l as an investigation o f the t e r m s home and its o r i g i n " . Recent theological dictionaries provide i m p o r t a n t suggestions at this p o i n t . " As the g r o n n d breaking investigations o f O. K e e l have d e m o n strated, ensembles ofStrands frmn andmt orientalpictorialsymbols somerimes ofTer absolutely essential aids l'or i l l u m i n a t i n g the intellectual w o r k l w h i c h shapes a text. 1 4 0

15

5.

1

1

2

Finally, fixed contents also appear as tbemes '' and coneepts. '' These themes and coneepts, however. should be those w h i c h A n c i e n t Israel itself formed, not those w h i c h were s i m p l y taken f r o m the exegete's o w n w o r l d and attaches to texts. U n l i k e the images mentioned i n " 3 , " they are not exclusively niaterial k n o w l e d g e . Rather, these themes and coneepts are compact processes o f refleetion w h i c h i n t e r p r e t reality. The vocabulary and the strueture o f f o r m u l a t i o n are also considerably m o r e fixed. T h e y differentjate themselves from the conceptually loaded terms treated under " 4 , " w h i c h are themselves o f t e n components o f themes and coneepts. T h e y differentiate themselves naturally by the seope o f the t h o u g h t patterns and convictions discussed i n " 1 " and " 2 " by greater thematic i n clusivity, stronger mental adaptation, and c o r r e s p o n d i n g , fixed l i n g u i s t i c entities. T h e m e s and coneepts then are distinguished by a thematic p o i n t o f crystallization, by a fixed subject o f Statements, and by the extent o f their shaping i n respect to vocabulary and strueture o f f o r m u l a t i o n . These characteristics appear even w h e n the l i n g u i s t i c version continues to fhictuate w i t h i n a certain frame. Coneepts transcend themes by t h e i r theologically refleetive elaboration, and b y t h o u g h t f u l d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n . T h e y also transcend themes by c o n f i r m i n g a specific i n e l i n a t i o n o f the stare-

Ηβ Exaniples: Y T J W H is nârâ' (Ps 47:i; 76:8, etc.) as an abhreviation of Y H W H ' s victorious activity aceording to Jerusalem cultic theology: or mahàšàbiib as an indieation of \visdom influenec upon die formulation of die Yahwistic prologue to the flood story. HV Steck, "Das Problem theologischer Strörmuigen," E v T h 28 (1968): 447, footnote 4. 150 See above, §2 Μ. '5' Exaniples: die ihcnic of die exodus from Kgypt: compare. for example, Deut 6:12: Judg 2: 12; l's 136:10 15. which use the fonnulauon of "bringing out" (yāsā'in h i f il) of Israel, with Judg 6:13; Hos 12:14; Ps 81:11, etc., which use the formulation of "bringing up" ('Müh in hif'il) of Israel. Also compare Hos 12:10; Isa 10:24-26: 5 l:'>r; 52:1 lf. The thetne of the "day of Y I I W H " (cf. Arnos 5:18-20; Isa 2:10+12-17; 13:2-22). T h e theme of "return" in prophecy (cf. Hos 5:4; 14:2ff; Arnos 4:6-12; Jer 3:1-4:4; Isa 10:20-23). 152 Exaniples; the coneept of die batrle against the nations (cf. Pss 48:2-9; 76:2-7; Isa 17: 12-14); the Jerusalem coneept of lang (cf. Pss 2; 72); die Deuteronomistic prophetic Statement (cf. 2 Kgs 17:13-17; Jer 7 25f; Neil 9:26^30). :

128

§8

TRADITIONAL HISTORICAL APPROACH

1

m e n t and by a specific profile o f l i n g u i s ü c w o r d i n g . " T h e question o f the concepts is an especially i m p o r t a n t area for t r a d i t i o n historical w o r k w h e n presupposed b y a text, taken u p i n t o a text, o r m o d i f i e d b y a text. T h i s question w i l l be expressly treated below i n section I V I I I . R e c o g n i z i n g Fixed Contents H o w can one recognize whether, and i n w h a t fashion, fixed contents are presupposed, assimilated, o r modified i n a text? Here one must consider f r o m the b e g i n n i n g that iixed contents do n o t manifest themselves i n any text i n a manner i n w h i c h they are completely unveiled and explicated. I t is m u c h m o r e characteristic for die phenomenon treated by die t r a d i t i o n historical approach that die i n t e l l e c t u a l and conceptual background o f a text is taken i n t o view. T h u s the t r a d i t i o n historical approach treats the elements o f a shaped, i n t e l ­ lectual w o r l d w h i c h are n o t f o r m u l a t e d i n the text, b u t w h i c h , w i t h o u t d o u b t , were considered, intended, and understood a l o n g w i t h die text. T h e y are also inevitably indicated by explicit text elements. T h u s , fixed contents stand i n the text like the t i p o f an iceberg. 1) T h e best presuppositions for r e c o g n i z i n g a text's fixed contents exist where ( i n a hermeneutical cirele!) the intellectual w o r l d o f A n c i e n t Israel (and o f the A n c i e n t N e a r East), o r the various expressions o f an i n t e l l e c t u a l w o r l d , have already been p r e l i m i n a r i l y reconstrueted and are k n o w n . These inelude arenas like w i s d o m and the Jerusalem cult theology. "' 1

4 Kor example, cornpare. Führer, Exegese, ρ. 27 (Hoffmann), ρ. 102ÉF (Huber), ρ. 199ff. 1*5 This tendency is demonstrated by Fluber, in Fohrer. Exegese, p. 106f, when he uses die designation of Y H W H as rock (sur) in Ps 2S:1; 31:3 as a motif. He then divorces the constitutive conrext of rhis conceptuai element trom Jerusalem cult theology (cf. Steck, Friedcnsvorstellungen, p. 37. footnote 87). r

r

C o m m c n t a r y o n the Approaeh and M e t h o d

135

t o r i c a l w o r k denionstrates, these smallest o f d i e m a t i c b u i l d i n g blocks v e r y frequendy represent fixed coneepts o r conceptual elements w h i c h stand in inseparable r e l a t i o n s h i p to larger conceptual contexts. They are t r a n s m i t t e d w i t h i n diis framework, and they receive characteristically f o r m u l a t e d nieaning and c o n t u u r w i t h i n this association. W o r k o n the h i s t o r y o f motifs fails at the unavoidable task of s h o w i n g that the dynamic nature o f a m o r i f w h i c h appears in different places, is historically mediated. Also, it fails at the task o f m a k i n g that m o r i f understandable. Recourse to consistent struetures o f consciousness is a designarion o f the p r o b l e m , b u t n o t a Solution. 2) The materini basis o f the h i s t o r y of motifs approaeh lies i n the fact that specific conceptual elements can appear as such in new associations and c o n ­ texts. However, diis Isolation o f individual coneepts must be raised as a p r o b ­ l e m . O n e must ask t o w h a t degree its genuine conceptual c o n t e x t should still be considered w i t h the specific coneept. F r o m that p o i n t , die m o t i f s expression is used for f u r t h e r nianifestarions, such as m e a n i n g f u l numbers o r spec i f y i n g narrative topics (e.g. seleetion o f the m a n w h o is g o o d for n o t h i n g as far as one can teli). Precisely i n this last case, i t is often difficult to distinguish between motifs o f a genre and freely r o a m i n g motils."" 5

M l . Steps o f the T r a d i t i o n H i s t o r i c a l Investigation o f a T e x t Conjìmtatwi

oftbe Appivach:

T h e t r a d i t i o n historical approaeh puts f o r w a r d that w h i c h is prcm?rted Iry a text based u p o n the text's intellectual surroundings. T h e t r a d i t i o n historical a p ­ proaeh proeeeds to die degree that die presupposed uuiterial is n o t a p r e l i t erary o r l i t e r a r y developmental stage o f die t e x t itself ( § § 4 - 6 ) , o r to the degree that l i t e r a r y reference o r genre influence (§7) does n o t exist. Rather, the t r a d i ­ t i o n historical approaeh is direeted t o w a r d elements oftbe intellectual world in w h i c h the author, and listener, o f each developmental stage o f the text move seli-evidently. These elements represent that w h i c h is l i n g u i s t i c a l l y indicated but n o t expressly f o r m u l a t e d . I t represents that w h i c h is d i o u g h t , m t c n d e d , o r necessarily associated along w i t h these elements. T h e manner i n w h i c h a n author uses these elements (whether used consistently o r i n topically deviated fashion) is fundamental to a relevant historical understanding o f the text's for­ mulation. However, the indkators o f these elements from the intellectual w o r l d ap­ pear i n a text's linguistic shape i n various degrecs and direetness. These indicators must be demonstrated by m u l t i p l e , l i t e r a r i l y independent, oceurrences i n the O l d Testament ( o r the A n c i e n t N e a r East). T h i s r e c o g n i r i o n has i m p l i c a t i o n s for the execution o f d i e specific steps. Simplified for practical reasons, the f o l l o w i n g stand i n die f o r e g r o u n d : lf>6 Cf. Koch. Tbe Grvxth ofBihliūtl'iraStmn,

ρ. 56f.

U6

§8

TRADĪTTONAL HISTORICAL APPROACH

Guiding Questions: 1. Thought Putterns Does die intended logic o i a scntence, paragraph, o r text d e m o n strate that a t h o u g h t pattern w h i c h is n o t expressiv f o r m u l a t e d Steetü'

shapes the Statement?

For example: A consequence results from every deed. Deed and effect stand i n (precise) r e l a t i o n s h i p to one another. Especially for the beginner, the necessary means o f help is found i n the secondary literature. 2. Fundamental Convictions D o the text's words demonstrate specific r e l i g i o u s , theological convictions i n association w i t h die logic o l die i m m e d i a t e c o n text? D o these fundamental convictions lie beneath the Statement inexplicably? For example: b l o o d as the setting o f life, seeing G o d is fatal, childlessness as shame. 'Ehe necessary means o f help is here theological dictionaries under the catch words and their synonyms, Aßt

A l l f u r t h e r steps m u s t be executed w i t h coneordance work and theological dictionaries for the Old Testament because they are concerned w i d i fixed l i n g u i s t i c worlds i n die f o r m u l a t i o n o f the text. T h e s t a r t i n g p o i n t is always the existing f o r m u l a t i o n i n the text itself. A l o n g w i t h the f o r m u ­ lations i n the context o f the text, die f o r m u l a t i o n p o i n t s to specific (!), parricular t r a d i t i o n backgrounds about w h i c h one should i n q u i r e . B y no means should the t r a d i t i o n historical approaeh project the entire r ä n g e o f meaning for the words i n t o the f o r m u l a t i o n at hand! 5. Images, Phrases, etc. A r e fixed images, comparisons, phrases, formulas, l i n g u i s t i c and Conventions adopted i n d i e formulation? F r o m w h i c h arena o f use do they s t e m ? W h a t do they signify? W h a t do they intend? 4. Pregnant Meaning for Individua! Words D o individual words o r w o r d associations i n the text have a p r e g ­ nant m e a n i n g w h i c h m o r e precisely narrows die lexical breadth o f m e a n i n g i n regard to the material context, Speaker, listener, o r life Situation to w h i c h the text relates? 5. Word Ensembles as Reference to Traditional Coneepts and Conceptual Contexts W h a t does an investigation o f parallel exaniples p r o v i d e for d i e w o r d ensembles i n the sentence, paragraph, and the text? I f these o n l y appear i n f o r m u l a t i o n s o f the same author o r i f they can be established as literary references o n the author's part, then fur­ ther t r a d i t i o n influence o n this f o r m u l a t i o n cannot be established direedy.

C o m m e n t a r y o n the A p p r o a c h and M e t h o d

137

I n other cases, the parallel should be investigated m o r e preeisely i n the sense o f the questions i n I V 2, because they p r o v i d e reason t o believe that one encounters elements o f traditional concepts, c o n ­ ceptuai contexts, and even eonceptions. T h e contents, scope, and logic o f these elements resonates even t h o u g h n o t expressiv stated. Even i n d i v i d u a l characteristic terms can be i n t e n d e d , and have impact, as associations o f a m o r e comprehensive intellectual ere­ ation. H e r e a series o f subsidiary questions present diemselves: a. O r i g i n o f the w o r d ensemble: E r o m whence does this w o r d ensemble derive? Tn w h i c h t r a d i ­ tional text arena o f the O l d Testament (or ancient o r i e n t a l e u l ture and religious history) does the concordance show examples w h i c h are l i t e r a r i l y independent, unehanged, and f u l l y aceumulated? Is one p o i n t e d to fixed l i n g u i s t i c fields o f A n c i e n t I s ­ rael (court, priesthood, legal entities, cult poetry, w i s d o m , D e u t e r o n o m i c / D e u t e r o n o m i s t i e t r a d i t i o n , p r o p h e t i c language)? A l r e a d y the artieles i n theological dictionaries are sometimes arranged accordingly. b. Shape o f the concept i n the t r a d i t i o n H o w does the concept noted by the w o r d ensemble appear i n the tradition? Does the parallel statement offer necessary expansions w h i c h resonate i n the t e x t under investigation? Is one directed to a larger conceptuai context w h i c h Stands behind the t e x t f o r m u l a t i o n under investigation? H o w does diis concep­ tuai context appear? T o w h a t does i t belong? W h a t does i t accomplisb? W h a t is the setting o f the eoncept n o t e d i n the text? e. C o n t e n t and i n t e n t i o n ot the concept W h a t does this concept i n t e n d t o signify i n its t r a d i t i o n a l framework? W h a t does i t presuppose by way o f experienee, thought, and the h i s t o r y o f religion? W h a t view o f the experiential w o r l d does i t release? W h a t does i t exelude? W h a t logic, t r a i n o f t h o u g h t , and insight does it intend? d. C o n c e p t h i s t o r y W h a t can one say about historical changes inside the intellec­ tual world?

Ehe means o f help i o r answering the subsidiary questions o f " a " - " d " may be gained f r o m the literature references i n footnote 154.

6. Tbe Use ofthe Traditional in the Text under Investigation W i t h diese findings o f traditional influences u p o n the text under investigation, one must finally r e t u r n to this text itself and its use o f the traditional.

§8

TRADITIONAL HISTORICAL APPROACH

a. W i t h t h o u g h t patterns, basic convictions, images, phrases, etc.: I n l i g h t o f positive findings for steps " l " - " 3 , " one should n o w ask w h a t the t r a d i t i o n background, n o w m o r e clearly under­ stood, aceomplishes for the content, perspective, and i n t e n t i o n o f the f o r m u l a t i o n at hand. W h a t should one i n c o r p o r a t e for the historical u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the statement because i t was manifestly associated and b o u n d t o that f o r m u l a t i o n by the a u t í i o r and the addressee? O n e should also expressiv i n q u i r e whether the author's o w n accents are addcd to the existing f o r ­ m u l a t i o n by adapting the t r a d i t i o n by means of linguistieally o r materially shaping d i e statement, or even by u s i n g an ingenious language and conceptualization. W h a t should diese accents i n ­ dicate? Agreements w i t h the audior's profile i n o t í i e r places and differences i n die language and the flow o f thoughts s t e m m i n g from the t r a d i t i o n can p r o v i d e clues for the f u n c t i o n o f its f o r ­ mulation. T

b . W i t h the influence o f fixed l i n g u i s t i c fields: T h i s approach is m o r e i m p o r t a n t w h e n one reeeives positive findings

for steps " 4 " and " 5 " because they p o i n t t o the i n f l u ­

ence o f fixed l i n g u i s t i c fields. I n d i i s case, the entire text o f a developmental stage should be compared w i d i the mediated, traditiona] l i n g u i s t i c field, o r even w i t h various, infiuential l i n ­ guistic fields. As a resuh, various possibilities are eonceivable and should be probed:

a. The text conforming to tradition The author's expression comcides entirefy with tradition. This conformity is shown by the identical, corresponding, or related formulations, as weil as by agreements in the extent ofthe content and the train of thought. The confoimity is present even when the author only siiently presupposes individua! conceptuai references Inat are essential for the material logic, or when the author addresses these references oniy in abbreviated fashion, A tradition historical comparison of Ps 48 with Ps 4 6 or of Prov 7 with Prov 9 would lead to this result. The author of the text at hand is thus seen simultaneously as a representative of the tradition, such as the Jerusalemite cult theology or theological wisdom. Confimiation is also provided when the statement's seiected genre comes from the same arena according to §7. In this case, the tradition represents the intellectual framework during a specific historical phase. it also represents the background of the text at hand. For the author and hearer, the tradition establishes its plausibility. One should then pnmarily determine which detail and accentthe author particuiariy emphasizes, by the express formulation, from that which is possible for the tradition.

C o m m e n t a r y on the Approaeh and M e t h o d

139

ß. The text continuing tradition Tne author's expnession operates within the framework of tradition by drawing upon that tradition. Perhaps the tradition historical investigation indicates that the author even belongs to the same, or closely related tradition arena (wisdom /temple). However, the author may continue that tradition independently (for example, the Job dialogues or Qohelet contmues the wisdom tradition). O r the author may limit the tradition reflexively by another tradition arena (for example, post-exilic prayers limited by wisdom influence in the Psalms). Here one must distinguish that which is guided by tradition from that which transcends the tra­ dition in concrete texts. γ, The text changing tradition The author uses tradition when formulating, but no longer simply emanates from this tradition arena. Rather. the author changes traditional coneepts or conceptual contexts by deviating from accents or formula­ tions, or by changing the train of thought even to the point of reversing that tradition. This case appears especially in the statements of pro­ phetic transmission which take up legal, cultic, and wisdom tradition, but transform this tradition into a new pnophetically topical statement. Here one must determine, as precisely as possible, why, on the one hand, tra­ ditional matenal is taken up in the Service of new material statements. One must determine why traditional material is seleeted, thereby stimulating certain associations which, addrtionally, must be made audible to us as accompanying intellectual overtones, On the other hand, one must determine where the accents are rearranged, w h e r e they deviate, and where they aro transfigured in comparison to the tradition. This determination must be made for the ind>vidual statement as weli as for the entire text. For their part, even the transfonnations may draw from tra­ dition, like prophetic tradition. For example: The prophetic adaptation of the coneept of the heavenly court assembly of Yf-IWH, Why does the coneept appear in I Kgs 22:19-22 and Isa 6 as an event, but scarcely appears in Isa 40:1-1 I , and does not appear in Isa 42:1—1?Why are the acting pārticipants called špirit in I Kgs 22, seraphim in Isa 6. and voices in Isa 40?

The goal of this step w h e n investigating an specific text is n o t to t r a č e t r a d i t i o n historical ancestors as an end i n itself. Rather, one seeks to u n derstand the text i n its peculiarity. H e r e one seeks t o understand the t e x t i n the t r a d i t i o n historical approaeh i n l i g h t o f the t r a d i t i o n i n e o r porated i n t o the t e x t and u t i l i z e d by i t . T h i s o r i e n t a t i o n o f the ap­ proaeh u p o n the specific text is n o t designed to pay homage t o ideals o f o r i g i n a l i t y , b u t i n order t o makc clear the special features and p e c u l i ­ arity o f this text! T h e t r a d i t i o n historical approaeh gradually makes possible a glance i n t o the intellectual processes w h i c h lie at the r o o t o f this text's f o r m u -

140

§8

TRADITIONAL HISTORICAL APPROACH

l a t i o n i f the texts p r o v i d e the possibility o f p r o m i n e n t data for i n s i g h t i n t o the profile and i n t e n t i o n o f the text! A l i ot this proves that the t r a d i t i o n historical approach provides the m o s t i m p o r t a n t p r e l i m i n a r y w o r k for d e t e r m i n i n g the contents and profile o f the S t a t e m e n t s o f the assigned text, as i t w i l l be u n d e r t a k e n i n the i n t e r p r e t a ­ tion

(§10).

C. R E S U L T S I . C o m p r e h e n d m g the Text's Profile A l i n g u i s t i c utterance can n o t be sufficiently u n d e r s t o o d b y itself. I t m u s t be u n d e r s t o o d in conjunetion w i t h the historical Situation i n w h i c h i t is m a d e .

167

I t must be understood in the framework o f its socio-cultural conditions and re­ alities.

k,B

Last b u t n o t least, the l i n g u i s t i c utterance must be observed f r o m the

b a c k g r o u n d o f tbe theological streant and ofthe

intellectual realm i n w h i c h i t

Stands and operates. T h i s o r d e r i n g according to specific concepts, theological coneeptions, and a fixed t h o u g h t w o r l d is unavoidable i f the profile o f a t e x t is t o become clear. T h i s o r d e r i n g is unavoidable i f one is t o c o m p r e h e n d h o w to conceive a l i n g u i s t i c utterance, o r from w h i c h fixed perspective one should perceive the contents. I t is unavoidable i f one is to c o m p r e h e n d d i e lines a l o n g w h i c h the linguistic utterance argues, and i n w h i c h frame o f t h o u g h t i t was u n ­ d e r s t o o d b y its hearers and readers. T h i s o r d e r i n g is also valid (and h o w ! ) i n diose places where t r a d i t i o n a l elements have been changed and where i t can be d e t e r m i n e d where a linguistic utterance transcends its t r a d i t i o n a l r o o t s i n t o a speciaiized statement. T h e o u t e r m o s t tip o f this deviation t h e n appears i f a t e x t critically takes u p a t r a d i t i o n a l concept and reverses i t .

1 6 9

T h e understand­

i n g o f this t y p e o f text is unalterably b o u n d t o the fact that its polemieal p o i n t , and the critical d e l i m i t a t i o n w h i c h i t aceomplishes, are n o t e d i n the course o f the t r a d i t i o n historical investigation. I I . Insight into Connections T r a d i t i o n historical w o r k i n the comprehensive sense attenipts t o i l l u m i nate d i e theological streams and the intellectual realms o f die b i b b c a l

time.

T h u s , i t aims t o w a r d a history of theology for Ancient Israel and early Judaism.

Ά? See below, §9. 168 Sce above, §7 Β V (ρ. 110ff) and %Ί C ΠΤ (p. 116). iw Example: Deviation of the concept of die battle of the nations in Isa 29:1-7 (in 29:l-5ba Y H W I 1 artacks against Jerusalem while leading the nations).

Literature

141

W h e r e this research already has reached productive results i n some areas, i n ­ formative connections have been f o u n d between texts and t e x t groups w h i c h had previously appcared unrelated. O r , these results have p r o v i d e d s u p p o r t i n g arguments for the presupposition o f these connections w h i c h had been presupposed for other reasons. O n the one hand, this r e c o g n i t i o n o f larger connections is advantageous to understanding the specific text. O n the o t h e r hand, i t is the s t a r t i n g p o i n t for a c q u i r i n g the c o n n e c t i o n between the O l d Testament and the N e w Testament, thereby p r e p a r i n g a bibhcal theology i n a historically relevant manner.

D. L I T E R A T U R E I. INTRODUCTION, FOUNDATION, A N D OVERVIEW G. Fohrcr. Exegese, § 8 (F. Huber). O . H . Steck. Israel und das gewaltsame Geschick der Propheten. W M A N T 23. Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1967. p. 18f (additional literature), and 107, footnote 4. . Theological Streams of Tradition, in: Tradition and Theology i n the Old Tes­ tament. D A . Knight, ed. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977. p. 183-214, especially 183-191.) II. EXPANSION A N D CRITICAL ALTERNATIVES G. Fohrcr. Tradition und Interpretation im Alten Testament. Z A W 73 (1961): 1-30 (also in: Fohrer, Studien zur alttestamendichen Theologie und Geschichte 11949-1966). B Z A W 115. Berlin, 1969. p. 54-83. H . Gese. Essavs on Biblical Theology. Minneapolis, 1981. O. Keel. 'The Symbolism of the Biblical World: Ancient Near Eastern Iconography and die Book of Psalms. New York, 1985. . Wirktnäehtige Siegeszeichen int Alten lestament. O B O 5. Freiburg (Swjt/.erland)—Göttingen, 1974. D.A. Knight. Rediscovering the Traditions o f Israel. SBL Dissertation Series 9. M i s sonla, 1973. K . Koch. The G r o w t h of Biblical Tradition, p. 70f; Fonngeschichte. p. .326-342 (not in English translation). H.P. Nasuti. Tradition History and die Psalms o f Asaph. SBL Dissertation Series 88. Atlanta, 1988. G. Pfeifer. Denkfonnenanlyse als exegetische Methode. Z A W 88 (1976): 56-71. VV Richter. Exegese, p. 75f (footnote 11), 136f,153 -155,178,182f (concerning »Motiv« and »Stoff«). Tradition and Theology in the Old Testament. D.A. Knight, ed. Philadelphia 1977. G. Wanke, Die Zionstheologie der Korachiten in ihrem traditionsgeschichtlichen Zusammenhang. B Z A W 97. Berlin 1966. See especially p. 39f, 64ff, 109ff. For literature on linguistic science and exegesis, see § 7 D I I .

142

§8

TRADITIONAL HISTORICAL APPROACH

ΙΠ. E X E M P L A R Y E X E C U T I O N M . E . Biddle. T h e Figure of Lady Jerusalem: Identification, Deificarion, and Personifieation of Cities in die Ancient Near Rast." In: The Biblical Canon in Comparative Perspective. K . L . Younger, Jr., W.W. Hallo, B F . Batto, eds. Lewiston, N Y , 1991. p. 173-194. K. Koch. Gibt es ein Vergeltungsdogma i m Alten Testament. Z T h K 52 (1955): 1-42. Also in: U m das Prinzip der Vergeltung in Religion und Recht des Alten Testa­ ments, K. Koch, ed. p. 130-180. Darmstadt, 1972. (the question of a particular world view [cause am! effeet eonneeetion]). I I . - . M . Lutz. Jahwe, Jerusalem und die Völker. VVMANΤ 27. Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1968. p. 47-51,155-177. (Tradition historical investigation of a specific text [Isa 17:12-14]). G. v. Rad. Wisdom in Israel. Nashville. 1972. W H . Schmidt. Königtum Gottes in Ugarit und Israel. B 2 A W 80. Berlin, Μ 966. (Rebgio-historical .investigation) _ . The Faith of the O l d Testament: Α History. Philadelphia, 1983. O H . Steck. Israel und das gewaltsame Geschick der Propheten. (Tradition historical investigation of a coneept and its association with other coneepts [Deuteronomistic view of history]). . Das Problem theologischer Strömungen in nachexilischer Zeit. E v T h 28 (1968): 445-458, especially 445-448. _. Friedensvorstellungen im alten Jerusalem. Psalmen-Jesaja-Deuterojesaja. ThSt(B) 111. Zürich, 1972. (Tradition historical investigation of a conception I Jerusalemitc Cult theology]). . Der Schöpfungsbericht der Priestersehrift. F R L A N T 115. G ö t t i n g e n , 1981. (Question of the knowlcdge and cducational condition) H . W. W o l l t Hoseas geistige Heimat. T h L Z 81 (1956): 83-94. Also in: Wolff, Gesam­ melte Studien zum Alten Testament. T b B 22. Munich, -T973. p. 232-250. . Arnos' geistige Heimat. W M A N T 18. Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1964. 2

Determining the Historical Setting

Α. T H E T A S K O l d 'Testament texts c o n f r o n t us today as a c o l l e c t i o n o f the faith trans­ mission o f A n c i e n t Israel. T h i s c o l l e c t i o n belongs to the u n i t y o f h o l y scripture w h i c h becomes current again i n each generation. I n t h e i r o r i g i n , however, O l d Testament texts were ali r o o t e d in a partimlar historical Situation. T h e y are p r o m n l g a t e d i n a specific t i m e , i n a specific geographica! realm. T h e y have authors o f various social stations and various intcllectual-theological shaping. T h e y speak to specific addressees, each w i t h their o w n particular experiential h o r i z o n and w o r l d view. T h e y presuppose particular p o l i t i c a l and social re­ alities, incisive social changes, and formative historical events. U n d e r s t a n d i n g these texts is impossible w i t h o u t a historical view o f the c o n d i t i o n s and c o m ­ ponents w h i c h these texts inelude. T h e procedure o f the historical setting therefore has the task o f c o m p r e h e n d i n g ™ the given text's roots i n a specific historical setting, for every stage o f its development.' ' 7

B. C O M M E N T A R Y O N T H E A P P R O A C H A N D M E T H O D I . D a t i n g a Text D a r i n g a given text, o r the layer i n w h i c h i t appears, is fundamental f o r the procedural step o f the historical setting. W h i c h observations allow one to determine the text's time o f origin? 1 7 0

More than with any other procedural step, exegetical work must draw upon available re­ search results (above all in the areas of "Old Testament Introduction" and the "History of Israel") and the corresponding literature (see above. §2 G, J - L ) . 7

I ' This statement results from the fact that the historical setting is very closely associated with the literary critical, transmission historical, and redaction historical approaches. See above, foornotes- 32, 6 >, and 7 ). l

l

144

§9

DETERMIN1NG T U E HISTORICAL

Several reference p o i n t s deserve m e n t i o n h e r e :

1. T h e p r e s u p p o s i t í o n , f r o m the past,

SETTLNG

17:

o r m e n t í o n , o f c o n t e m p o r a r y evenLs o r events

175

2. Social, c o n s t i t u t i o n a l , o r c u l t u r a l reaJities w h i c h boundaries.

mark historical

174

7

3. D a r i n g a specific t e x t ' ' o r the e n t i r e t e x t c o m p l e x t o w h i c h i t belongs.

170

( O f course, this m u s t be c r i t i c a l l y examined.)

4. T h e p r e s u p p o s i t i o n o r t r e a t m e n t o f other, datable texts f r o m Old

Testament.

the

177

17

5. T h e Classification o f the h i s t o r y o f a g e n r e , " a coneept, o r a t h e o ­ l7

logical s t r e a m . '

J

6. T h e relative r e l a t i o n s h i p t o the o t h e r t r a n s m i s s i o n o r r e d a c t i o n a l 18

layers f r o m the same t e x t c o m p l e x . "

TT T h e C o n t e m p o r a r y H i s t o r y and Social E n v i r o n m e n t o f a T e x t

O n c e the given t e x t has been m o r e o r less precisely dated, t h e n one m u s t m o r e precisely d e t e r m i n e d i e c o n t e m p o r a r y h i s t o r i c a l and the social realities i n the e n v i r o n m e n t o f its o r i g i n .

I"- Compare also the references from Fohrer, Exegese, p. 147fi. >"·* Exaniples: Lainentations looks back on the destruetion o f Jerusalem in the 6t h Century B.u.E. (cf. l:3f,7; 2:5ff; 4:20-22; 5:18, etc.), and Stands relativcly elose to those events. Mjc 7:8-20 presnpposes, among other things, that the wall of Jerusalem lies in ruins (termimis ad quem: the reconstruedon of the M-all by Nchcmiah). In addition, compare footnote 25 above on the book of Isaiah. Evaluating the corresponding reference points requires one to consider the phenomenon of vaticininm ex eventu dīfferently. Exaniples: Λ text refers to die contemporary kingdoiii in die coiuitry (cf. Isa 8:211). Α text presupposes die doiuestication of the camcl. iron fitted chartots, place natiics and their changes, designations ol peoples and counlries, etc. Exaniples: Isa 14:28-32; Ezek 20. )"6 Exaniples: the superscriptions of many prophetic books (e.g. Isa 1:1; Arnos 1:1). O f course, these can only be evaluated for anthentic words o f the prophet. 7

l " Examples: T h e books of Chronicles use Gen-Kings as a sourec. Isa 2:2-4 presupposes Deutcro-Isaiah. Confusing tradition historical dcpendcncc with literary or transmission historical de[)endence can only lead to talse conclusions at this point. , 7 K

Example: A saga style which is shorter (e.g. G e n 32:23-33) or more extensive (e.g. Gen 24). I lowever, ohserve die liiiiiuuon discussed above in $7 Β I I I 3 (p. 108). I"" Example; The posilion of Deut 30:1-10 inside die history ol die Deuteronomistic model of history (for this, see ΟΤΙ. Steck, Israel und dm gewaltsame Geschick der Propheten, 1967, p. 140t. 185f). ISO Example; T h e relative relationship of die various literary layers in Isa 10:5—27a to onc another (10:5-15,16-19,20-23,24-26,27a). For discussion, see H . Barth, Die Jemja-Worte in der Josiateit, 1977, ρ. 17ff.

C o m m e n t a r y on the A p p r o a c h and M e t h o d

145

T h i s d e t e r m i n a t i o n occurs first i n cross section: F r o m w h i c h political Situation i n the A n c i e n t N e a r Eastern realm does one proceed (e.g. the N e w Assyrian K i n g d o m as h e g e m o n y ) ? W h a t special relationships exist i n Israel (e.g. Judah is still independent w h i l e the N o r t h e r n K i n g d o m has been dissolved i n t o Assyrian provinees)? W h a t were the m o m e n t o u s c o n t e m p o r a r y events? B y w h i c h social Orders, tensions, o r upheavals was the socio-historical Situation o f Israel characterized at that t i m e ? " 1

T h i s type o f cross-sectional investigation very q u i c k l y requires protracted sectioning t h r o u g h political h i s t o r y and, as far as possible, t h r o u g h the social history o f A n c i e n t Israel and the A n c i e n t O r i e n t . T h e particular realities o f a specific historical setting can only be imderstandable f r o m die larger perspec­ tive o f the previous and subsequent development. Human expenences from this time should also be explored from a synthetic over­ view of the realities of the intellectual world of the text which were amassed in §8, and from the text's external world in §9. These experiences may result from this synthesis, from the correspondence of the text's historical world (events, social conditionings, tra­ dition historical guidan.ce, making oneself aware of this worid. and mastenng this world), and from the text itself In conjunction with this synthesis, one should also ask which Prob­ lems existed then which were unavoidably manifested by the contemporary experience. I I I . I d e n t i f y i n g the External Realities M e n t i o n e d i n the T e x t W i t h i n the f r a m e w o r k o f this procedural step, die clarification of geo­ graphica! and historical r/uestions, as well as other realities, ensues i n the service o f die historical view o f the realities o f o r i g i n and o f a texts assertions. These realities were self-evident t o author and addressee i n their time, b u t must be re-identified today. By realities, as the m e a n i n g o f the w o r d indicates, one means conerete, visually experienced elements and conditions: for example, a m o u n t a i n , a people, w a n derings o f a people, b u i l d i n g s , elothes, animal and plant life, etc. C l a r i f y i n g these realities, however, cannot disregard their connection with specific inner pro­ cess or religious manifestations oflife. A l s o , one must delve i n t o other areas to the degree t h a t they are contained i n the t e r m "realities" i n its genuine m e a n i n g . T h e r e a l i t y " c u l t stone" is perhaps associated w i t h the practice o f ineubation. 'Si Concerning the legiumate demanti for an inlensificauon of social history inve-stigations, one must not overlook the degree to which we can generally reconstruet the social history of An­ cient Israel and the Ancient Near East from the transmitted texts (and archaeological findings). The relatively small number, to this point, of socio-historical works does not simply indicate a blindness to the problem. See above §2 K . L for literature on the social history of Israel and the Ancient Near East. G . Theißen, "Die sozialgeschichriicbe Auswertung religiöser Überlieferung, Í Û H V T O N F 17 (1975): 284-299, provides an important contribution to the mediodological problem of socio-historical evaiuationof religious transmission.

146

§9

D E T E R M I N 1NG

T H E HISTORICAL SETTING

T h e r e a l i t y " t h r o n e " is associated w i t h certain r e l i g i o u s coneepts o f power. E v e n here, one must again w o r k w i t h cross-sections and p r o t r a c t e d sections.

182

A special problem presents itself w h e n the presenicuion of historical processes makes the author's own recent past or, especially; times from the more distant past, the. subject of an assertion in the text, rather than when an author addresses undisputable realities which are kn own to all, These processes must also be identified in this procedural Step. Determming what actuaily happened. compared with those presentations, is an unavoidable presupposition, which enables one to recognize which attitudina) perspective the text provides (e.g. selective accentuation in the processes of the succession of David in the Succession History) oreven the deviating Interpretation of events which the text provides (e.g. danger to Abraham in Gerar as the danger to a prophet, Gen 20). O n occasion, o n e may even recognize Interpretation which is based thoroughly on real historical experience from the interim period. In the framework of exegesis, one must naturally note the faeiiitating funetion of this historical identifìcation. The goal of exe­ gesis is to State how the author has interpreted these events. Determining what actuaily happened has an .ndependent funetion in the framework of the discipline "history of Israel." EV. D e t e r m i n i n g A u t h o r and Addressee Determining the author of a text aims less at identifying that person by name, which as a aile is seldom possible. Rather, it aims more toward srtuating the author in a specific religio-inceilectual and social setting, Old Testament literature is largely anonymous literature, and in addition. in those places where names are mentioned, one offen deals with pseudepigraphic manifestations (for example in numerous psalmic superscriptions or in Proverbs). Even in those places where we do encounter the name of an author or an authoria! group. the persons remain essentiaily :n the dark (e.g. in the case of Arnos, or even more with Micah, the Korahites, etc.). They retreat almost completely behind their statements. W e are thus lefl with scattered. individual references in the t e x t " ' ' And we are left with form oiticaf and tradition historical deduetions, not only from the specific text but a;so from the literary layer as a whole to which it belongs. What can one recognize about the social position and funetion of the author based on tne life setting of the individual units. o r of the work as a whole, and, as necessary, based o n the style ? To which theological direction and stream does the author belong' * 184

185

6

li*- Once again, compare specifically die reference in foouiote 170. 1S3 Example: Isaiah. Cf. 7:3; 8:2f.l6: 28:7b-22. '34 Compare for example die corresponding inquiry into Lev 1-7 and Deut 4:1-8 in Kaiser,

ExegeticttlMethod, ρ. 27-29. 185 Compare the references in Kaiser, Exegetical Method, ρ. 16-18. Uto Examples: the Deuteronomistir origin of a secondary literary layer in Arnos (especially 2:4f) and in Jeremiah(e.g. 11:1-14; 19:2h-9; 44:2-6).

C o m m e n t a r y on the Approach and M e t h o d

147

W h e n determining the addressee, exegesis is also left with deductions from the text, except in a few exceptions in prophetic literature (e.g. 2 Kgs I ; Arnos 7; 10-17; Isa 7; jer 28). Again. one must especially evaluate the results o f t h e life setting. 187

Recognizing the addressee provides essential clues for the particular problem, perspec­ tive, and purpose of a statement. If conerete reference points for identifying the ad­ dressee are lacking. then one can at least attempt to reconstruet imaginatively the experientiai and expectational horizon of an addressee for the historical setting ofthe text,

VI C o n c e r n i n g Materialistic H i s t o r i c a l I n t e r p r e t a t i o n of O l d Testament Texts T h e e m p l o y m e n t o f biblical text material has b r o u g h t the p r o b l e m o f materialistic historical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n t o die current t o p i c a l discussion (for example, t h r o u g h tbe particular manner i n w h i c h the text is processed and i n ­ terpreted as c u r r e n t l y seen i n tbe works o f E r n s t B l o c h and Stefan H e y m ) . J u d g m e n t about this i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a l s t a r t i n g p o i n t depends essentially u p o n its d e f i n i t i o n . I f , by materialistic historical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n one means that the religious transmissions o f A n c i e n t Israel must be explained strictly in tbe sociohistorical context o f its o r i g i n , and i f one means tbat the theological and social p o s i t i o n o f an author influenees the tendency o f the c o n t e n t o f the author's Statements, then h i s t o r i c a l critical exegesis o f tbe O l d 'lestament can t h o r o u g h l y adopt this p o s i t i o n . Indeed, historical c r i t i c i s m has always performed diis task w i t h various degrees o f clarity and decisiveness. *''' Elowever, one must deeline materialistic historical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i f i t wants t o perceive O l d Tes­ tament texts from t h e i r socio-historical setting as the fundamentally " d e f i n i n g moment(s) o f final a u t h o r i t y " * f o r pereeiving the f o r m a t i o n o f thoughts and i f i t wants to determine the manner i n w h i c h the interests and setting o f h u m a n speech are b o u n d to the r u l i n g categories of explanation. " l 8 S

1

1

0

1

1

187 Example: the participant in the sacrificial meal as one of the addressees in an individual song of thanlesgiving (see above in footnote 123 and the literature mentioned diere). 188 Cf. W. Dietrich, Wort und Wahrheit, Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1976, especially p. 27ff where, on p. 35f, the references to the works of Bloch and Heyin appear. i s Cornpare die questions concerning die life setting (above p. 1 lOff), the real historical mediation of texts and traditions (problem of the tradent, see above 1 >if), and the historical set­ ting. Further, comparc approaches analyzing tendencics such as A. Weiser, "Die Legitimation des Königs David," VT 16 (1966): 32S-.354, in light of the History of David's Ascendancy. Discussion of die agreement and difference between the David transmission and Heym's The King David Report (New York, 1973) is sadly lacking in Dietrieh's remarks about Heym's nove) (Wort und Wahrheit, p. 29). 190 This fonnuladon from Friedrich Engels (qtiotcd by Dietrich, Wort und Wahrheit, p. 29). In this context, comparc the attempts which are exegeticailv and hermeneutieally probieinatic because ofthe primary theological intentions of reverse parronizarion. With the help of a y

l y l

148

§9

DETERMINING

EHE HISTORICAL S E T T I N G

V I . O v e r v i e w o f the A p p r o a c h to the H i s t o r i c a l Setting W h e n d e t e r m i n i n g a t e x t s historical setting, one m u s t clarify the f o l ­ l o w i n g ehief problems: 1. Dating the text i n all its developmental stages leading up t o the final form 2. T h e c o n t e m p o r a r y historical environment o f these datings i n crosssectional and protracted f o r m 3. T h e realities m e n t i o n e d in die individual developmental stages o f the text 4. D e l i m i t i n g the author and addressee (in c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h § § 6 , 7 , 8 ) o f the developmental stage o f the text Various fields f r o m the w o r l d o f the text's historical o r i g i n come i n t o view according t o the finding o f the text f o r m u l a t i o n : 1. T h e historical e n v i r o n m e n t o f the texts o r i g i n i n respect to na­ tional, political (foreign and domestic), and m i l i t a r y processes 2. T o the degree that one is able, ascertaining the historical shape o f the historical inflvtences (intellectual, religious, theological, pietistic) o f the text (correlation w i t h § § 7 , 8 ) 3. C u l t u r a l backgrounds manifested in the text (every day w o r l d , morals, needs, e l o t h i n g , n o u r i s h i n e n t , l i v i n g quarters, l i v e l i h o o d , daily r o u t i n e , ete.) 4. T h e socio-historical e n v i r o n m e n t o f text f o r m u l a t i o n s , a u t h o r and addressee (settlement history, social groups, classes, economic rela­ tionships, household, trade) 5. Geographica!, climatic, botanical, zoological manifestations i n the text 6. Relevant archaeologieal and epigraphic i n f o r m a t i o n for understand­ i n g the t e x t (e.g. l l o u s e types, t e m p l e lay-out, gates, c u l t Utensils, settlement history, deductions c o n c e r n i n g socio-historical elements) See above, §2 I - M , for helps i n c l a r i f y i n g details o f tbe text i n the sense o f the historical setting.

method uf materialis-ue exegesis they attempt to subjugate biblical texts to socio-revolufionary purposes. The freely undeniable social dimension of the biblical text is thereby caused damage if biblical water is simply conducted over ideological mills. Cornpare the bibliographic references above in §1 C V. M . Clévenoi, So keimen -wir die Bibel nicht, Munich, -'1980. For metbod and ex­ amples, cornpare the considerations in W Schottroff and W. Stegemann, eds., God ofthe Londy, Part One: Old Testament. New York, 1984. Also Schottroff and Stegemann, Traditionen der Be­ freiung, vol 1. .· Methodische Zugänge, Mimich, 1980. Cornpare also R. Albertz, A History of Israelite Religion, l.otiisville. 1994; N . K . GotTwald. The Hebrew Bible, Philadelphia, 1985; idem, The Hebrew Bible in Its Social World and in Ours, Atlanta, 1994; VV.TCnieggemann,Λ Social Reading ofthe Old Tes­ tament, Minneapolis, 1994.

Literature

149

C. R E S U L T S T h e historical setting places a text i n t o the effcctivc arena o f historical powers, social povvers and the forniative experiences i n w h i c h the text was fashioned, and therefore can o n l y be appropriately i n t e r p r e t e d historically. Ehe ltistorical perception o f the text's author, addressee, and developmental realm is the key to understanding the particular c o n t o u r o f its statement, b u t also its l i m i t s . W h i l e critical exegesis connects the text back t o its original his­ t o r i c a l setting, i t thereby protects against t o o q u i c k l y extending the pres­ ent i n t o completely differenr historical situations. Tt shows the necessity o f a hermeneutically grounded m e d i a t i o n i n the present. T

D. L I T E R A T U R E G. Führer. Exegese, § 9C. Ο. Kaiser. Exegetieal Method, ρ. 35—36. For additional literature, see § 2 I - M .

Part Three

Purpose

Interpretation as Determination of the Text's Historical Meaning

A. T H E T A S K T h e goal o f all exegetical p r o c e d u r e s , the historical exposition o f the text, is accomplished a n d presented i n a particular phase, that o f I n t e r p r e t a t i o n , f o l l o w i n g the individua! methodological procedures o f the investigation. T h e task o f I n t e r p r e t a t i o n is to determine, i n a scientjfically documentable f o r m , w h i c h historical intention and meaning of the statement should be n o t e d i n the text's concrete f o r m within the historical realm of otigin a n d i n the v a r i ­ ous stadia o f its O l d Testament development. I n t e r p r e t a t i o n as the d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f the text's historical m e a n i n g seeks to acquire a n d to present the extent t o w h i c h the text's shape carries the m e a n i n g o f the statement's eontour i n the text's genuine historical e n v i r o n m e n t . T h e f o l l o w i n g are all perceived as factors o f a d y n a m i c a r t i c u l a t i o n o f m e a n i n g i n the historical S i t u a t i o n t o w h i c h they b e l o n g : historical a n d social realities, i n t e l l e c t u a l predispositions, processed experience, effective impulses, the author's conceptual purpose, a n d the character o f the addressee. T h e y a l l o w o n e to see the a r t i c u l a t i o n o f mean­ i n g i n a concrete text and a historical life process. T h e I n t e r p r e t a t i o n is directed t o w a r d the t e x t i n the h i s t o r i c a l course o f its p r o d u c t i v e f o r m a t i o n . F o r this reason, the I n t e r p r e t a t i o n is p r i n c i p a l l y undertaken separately for each of the text's ascertained stages ofgrowth. As necessary, o n e should attach a n Interpretation of the text's Old Testament development as a movement of m e a n i n g , together w i t h rationale, to the deter-

154

m i n a t i o n o f historical m e a n i n g for each o f the individual text stages. T h i s I n ­ t e r p r e t a t i o n is attached i n order t o envision exegetically the text's p r o d u c t i v e transmission inside the O l d Testament. Reflections can lead one t o conelude h o w the text's perceived historical meaning should be presented in light oj οur present time. T h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n leads one t o a t t e m p t an appropriate E n g l i s h transl a t i o n o f the text based o n the exegesis. A series of limitatons is presupposed when deTermining this task: 1. "Interpretation" is used here in place of the procedura! step which is offen called "indivicluaì exegesis" ' - and/or"contextua; exegesis." In order to avoid false associations, w e will refrain from these common des gnatlons. Above a;l, one should be wamed emphaticaliy against the misunderstanding that this procedural step is solely interesied in retrievingthe explanatlon of undecided detaiis in the text. Explaining details in the text is already unavoidable in lange measure, if not compietely; in the framework of the preceding methodoiogical procedures. Geographica! and historical explanations, as well as the explanafon of other realities must result m tne framework of the histori­ cal setting (§9).' ' Analysis of terms, '" as well as other tradition historical and history of religions determinations based on individual statements, are achieved within the framework of tradition history (§8),' 1 7

;

1

1

ς

5

2. The Interpretation seeks to determine historically the particular c o n t o u r of mean­ ing for the text. the material intention, which the text as text had in its time. The goal is thus not simply to determine the subjective intentions o\ the statements author, no matter how essential these are for the Interpretation. ' " The Interpretation should first be direeted toward the authonal intentions which effectively shaped the text in light o f specific addressees within a historical Situation. The Interpretation should trače the concrete shape o f the text back to these intentions and thus perceive the text shape as a purposeful utterance of hfe. From that point. however the Interpreta­ tion must observe that the t e x t mediates and actuaily attains a statement's content in a specific Situation. This content proeeeds beyond the originally intended historical horizon of the author (m contrast to that Isaiah's opinion, his arnouncemems of iudgment against Judah first come to fruition in 587 B . C . L . ) . Also, the c o n t e n t signifies more, or something other, than the author had intended (e.g. the evaluation of the ancient Elijah transmission first as an explanatlon of events in the subsequent period; 1 1

"2 Compare the dirertions of Fohrer (Exegese, p. 151 fT Hoffmann) and Kaiser (Exegetical Metbod, p. 3Off) respectfully who apply a particular procedural acciou for this aspect. i«; See above, p, 1431". ' See above, p. 126. See above, ρ. 1251Ϊ. l'"> Hoffmann, in Fohrer, Exegese, 152,155ff, exclusively addresses "comprehensive exegesis" concerning the autliorial intention or, in the case of a text's development, the audiorial intentions. Still, one should note the critique of this subjeefive tenn of intention in the theoretical discussion. Cf. Gadamcr, Thitb and Method, 243ff; Pannenberg, Theolog)' and the Philosoph}' of Science, especially 2081T. 1

w

T h e Task

155

or the secondary association ofthe "servant songs" to Israel). "Meaning" is thus a category of purpose for Interpretation which transcends authorial intention. Meaning also takes into account that a text can mean more than the author intended with given statements. even for the hearers in the original setting, but especially in the subsequent time (e.g. Jonah 3f:The meaning ofthe announcement of judgmcnt against Nineveh is different at the end than the original intention ofthe statement of Y H W H and Jonah). In this manner; experientia! constellations plav an essential role, even though they are different than those which the author included. Alongside and beyond the determination of a statement's contents. Interpretation seeks those experiential constellations which the author intended. It also attempts to understand a text's historical meaning beyond the subjective purpose of the author and beyond the subjective reception of the author's listener If it does so. then it inquires (histoncally!) into the appropnateness and the iiluminating power which a statement possesses objectively m light ofthe contemponary realities and the statement's experiential reality, This inquiry is especially appropriate for the reference and for the protection of the statements about God regarding the pertinent experiential reality. Such determinations constitute the theological ćore of historical interpretation, and pertain to importance, evaluation. and critique." Micah took a critical position over against the jerusalemites' assertions about God (3:1 If), which were considered orthodox in Jerusaiemite cult tradition, W i t h reference to the depth ofthe given experiential reality ofthe time, Micah's critical position appears just as effectlvely grounded as the manner in which the productive Isaian transmission transcends the lsaiah words in light ofthe experi­ ential reality of the Josianic period.'" By the same token, however, one can recognize the one-sidedness of Qohelet's statements about God by these same interpretive perspectives. w

3

200

y

l 7 Ü n e can only point to essential, sciendfically theoretical considerations for the differentiation between "subjective intention" and ''meaning.'' T h e text opens these considerations for (later) understanding. Cf. H.R. Jauß, Literaturgeschichte als Provokation, Suhrkamp edition 418,

-1970: VV. Iser, Die Appelktruktttr der Texte. Unbestimmtheit ab Wirkungsbedingimg literarischer Prosa, Konstanzer Universitätsreden 28, 1971. Comparc in English: H.R. Jauß, Towards an Aesihetic of Reception, Minneapolis, 1982; VV. Iser, Tbe Act of Reading: A 'Tbeory ofAestbetie Response, New York, 1980; VV. Pannenberg, Tbeolngy and tbe Philosophy of Science, London, 1976, especially, p. 195ff,206ff. " In addition to the broadly oudined scientific theory ot Pannenberg, cornpare also Diet­ rich, Wort und Wahrheit, p. 21ft,whose critical evaluation of Old Testament texts by referring to the "center of the Old Testament" depends, however, upon whether onc considers such an inter­ nal center of the Old Testament as given and dcterminablc. We doubt this. Wanke, in Fohrer, Exegese, p. 161 ff, seeks a path oriented toward linguistic science for a methodically deteiminable interpretation of die text's statements about God. 8

'

w

Cornpare die investigation of Bardi, mentioned above, p. 93.

To uudertake die possibility ol Interpretation, importance, evaluation, and critique bv conffoiiting the text's statement with die ex]>eriential reality of the tarne does not at all mean that the text's statement was itselt merely the articulation of widcly accessible experience. It does not mean that the text s statement simply camc into existence on tbe basis ofthe processing of diese ex­ pericnces. Here one must rather maintain contingent factors. For example, these factors arc presented in Old Testament prophecy as the declaration of the Word of Y H W H (cf. Steck, KuD 15 [1969]: 281, footnote 1). Dcutcro-lsaiah's break through of pronounceinents ot salvation ran

156

§10

I N T E R P R E T A T I O N AS D E T E R M I N A T I O N

3. In. so doing. one conceives exegetical Interpretation as observing the articulation of the theological depth of meaning for the experiential realrty m the historical realm. If so, then onetakes up the text's claim in order lo make meaning accessible. The more that one Claims that the text does not wanl to be histcncally limited and transitory, but is instead extended to future times anci actuaily mcluoes our present time, then the less that the exegetical-historical discipline, as such, is capable of articuiatmg the demanding

character ofthe

text for todoy, relevantly and concrete!)', and the less it is ca­

pable of legitimately expressing the relevance of the texts for the present Here, responsible, demonstrable theological discourse is essentiaily directed t o the work of the other theologica* disciplines.^ By using one's imagmation t o take up the text as a component ofthe modern w o r l d , ' " however the exegete can and should confront the historically processed theological Interpretation ofthe text as a historiographical process for one's own life and our contemporary world. When considering this Inter­ pretation, references are charactenzed, differences ascerta ned, and possible Impulses are specified for the contemporary experience of seif, worid. and God. ;

4. Interpretation seeks to perceive the material intention ofthe text as the intention of the author: From that intention Interpretation seeks to deduce meaning from the experiential realrty of the text's forrnative time. Determining the. goa! of Interpretation should not mislead one to reduce its goal to the formulation of very general theo­ logical sentences (oreven to the formulations of scope) which apparently consohdate the contents and direction of a text. The meaning ofthe text is given in a specific his­ torical Situation in the concrete strueture of the text's Statement It thereby has concrete historical and linguistic shape from which it cannot be divorced exegetically. The Interpretation should thus sketch the train of thought and the shape ofthe entire text's statements. It should also sketch all ofthe texts c o m p o n e n t s as a concrete linguistic-intellectual process which illuminates meaning.

B. R E L A T I O N S H I P T O T H E M E T H O D O L O G I C A L

APPROACHES

70

As already m e n t i o n e d , ' those metbodologicalSteps presented i n § § 3 - 9 are partial questions for historical understanding. T h e y are directed t o w a r d pardirectly counter to contemporary experience. Prophetic judgment Speeches do not simply diagnose the impending crisis of the time. Isaiah was not just a better polirician. From these examples, it is eprite clear, even with the power and appropriateness of statements, that one cannot contest that they remain partialiy in the experiential world of dieir rime.

-Ol Compare Lehmann, Der hermeneutisebe Horizont; Pannenberg, Theology and the Pkilosophy of Science, p. 371 ff-, and §1A above. Tins does not exclude that the exegete must be exposed to the text's demanding character in die contemporary world even if the exegete cannot coinprehensivcly process the text within the framework of historical-exegerical investigations, Recently, P. Smhlmacher (Schriftamlcgmig; "Zum Thema: Biblische Theologie des Neuen Testaments," in K. Ilaacker, etc., Biblische Theologie heute, B T h S t 1, 1977, p. 25-60, there p. 31 f.) and F. Hahn ("Problems of Historical Criticism"; Die neutestamendiche Wissenschaft," in W. Lohff/F. Hahn, eds., Wissentschaftliche Theologie im Uberblick, 1974, 20-38, there pages 28ff; and "Exegese, T h e ­ ologie und Kirche," ZTbK 74 (1977): 25 37, correctly mention this point. Compare also Dietrich,

IVort und Wahrheit, p. 11,21 ff; Barth/Schramm, Selbsterfahntng, esp. p. 47f.,67ff,10!ff. -'02 See above, §1 Β II 1 (p. 6f j. I i » See above. §1 C I (p. 14).

Relationship to die M e d i o d o l o g i c a l Approaches

157

t i c u l a r aspeets o f the t e x t and are n o t h i n g m o r e t h a n preparat ion for the inter­ 1

pretation. ^

The

procedures are i n m a n y respects i n t e r d e p e n d e n t and

often

c o n t i n u o u s . T e x t c r i r i c i s m established the o r i g i n a l H e b r e w text. L i t e r a r y c r i t i ­ c i s m , transmission h i s t o r y , and redaction c r i t i c i s m i l l u m i n a t e d the develop­ m e n t o f the t e x t a n d / o r they o u t l i n e d the text's f o r m a t i v e arenas w i t h respeet t o i n f l u e n t i a l c o n t e x t s . A l s o , they made visible die process o f the text's trans­ m i s s i o n to the p o i n t o f its c u r r e n t v e r s i o n . Finally, f o r m c r i t i c i s m , t r a d i t i o n h i s t o r y , and the h i s t o r i c a l s e t t i n g have exposed the c o m p o n e n t s o f the t e x t i n the text's o w n w o r l d i n various aspeets, w h e t h e r a r t i c u l a t e d o r unexpressed. T h e s e c o m p o n e n t s inelude h i s t o r i c a l , social, and l i n g u i s t i c elements, the his­ t o r y o f ideas, and the h i s t o r y o f theology. T h e y also established those places w h e r e die text transcends die p r e - e x i s t i n g m a t e r i a l . I f all o f d i i s has been aec o m p l i s h e d , t h e n the Interpretation n o w addresses the t e x t in its entirety i n each o f its p r o d u c t i v e f o r m a t i v e arenas w h i c h are manifested i n the text's mediated development. T h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n n o w determines the text's m e a n i n g as text. I t determines h o w m e a n i n g is expressed i n each p a r t i c u l a r h i s t o r i c a l Situation w h e n a d o p t i n g and t r a n s e e n d i n g p r e - e x i s t i n g e l e m e n t s .

205

For a demonstra-

t i o n , cornpare m y exposition o f G e n 2-3 ( b e l o w , p. 202).

-M Establishing that the procedures of § § 3 - 9 function as preparation for the interpretation (§10) has validity on the level of tbeorctically defined cmnprehcnsicm of exegetical work. Anorhcr level is the cmicrele flo~7 beitin) is a pre-Israelite setting. The religious concepnions in the individual

182

§11

T H E E X E G E T I C A L P R O C E S S U S 1 N G G E N 28:10-22

narrative are not original components ofthe patriarchal religion. They are ancient oriental. Aecording to the place name, the divinity is El, which raises a question, Does a Canaanite narrative lie Dehind the Jacob narrative in which the cult site of Bethel was estabhshed by Canaanite worshippers even before the Jacob group? T h i s is enough of the a t t e m p t o f a historical perspective based u p o n aspects o f individual I m a g i n a t i o n ! I t should be restated for encouragement that these aspeets, and others, are completed aecording to the measure o f O l d Tes­ t a m e n t foreknovvledgc, and by the patienec o l persistent observations and i l l u s t r a t i o n s . T h e y are c o m p l e t e d by w o r k i n g o n the t e x t w i t h the help o f a reference w o r k and a coneordance. They make i t possible for the exegete to enter purposefully i n t o the scientific, exegetical, m e t h o d o l o g i c a l proce­ dures. Instead o f C o n s u l t i n g secondary l i t e r a t u r e w i t h o u t one's o w n o p i n i o n , the exegete n o w approaches it w i t h one's o w n o p i n i o n s , impressions, and observations. T h e exegete also critically examines the exegete's o w n , as well as other, interpretations i n o r d e r to understand the text historically. I n so d o i n g , however, the exegete c o n t i n u a l l y gives way, i n the course o f the w o r k , to imaginative phases o f historical o u t l o o k based o n n e w l y e m e r g i n g exegetical problems and insights.

C. M E T H O D O L O G I C A L L Y D I R E C T E D P R O C E D L J R E S Between the previously operative Observation pliase and the phase ofthe method­ ologically directed wesligation, the following prelimnary oaicns are suggested: 1. After one has achieved one's own observations on the grven section of the text, it is necessary to attam an. initial overview and an initial expianation of the wider terrain, which will subsequently be treated methodologically. This informative orientation results most readily by gaining insight from introduetory sections of commentaries or reference works. The guidmg question of this orientation is: In which literary, historical, and theological context does the given text stand? The question of the literary context seeks Information about the context in which the text Stands, about the content and development ofthe book in which the text is found, and, as necessary, about the layers of development of this boofc. The question about the historical context seeks onentation about the text's time of Development. Finaliy, the question of the theological context strives for knowledge about the theological conditioning and character of the author or the literary context In our particular case it is recommended that one seek insight from the introduction to the Genesis commentary of H. Gunkel [HKI I) or G. v. Rad (071) or in the paragraphs on the pentateuch in an introduction to the Old Testament (or in AßD). 2. Assembbng secondary 'literaturo also belongs to the preparation. For this purpose, we referto the bibliographical helps mentioned in §2 A. For Gen 28:10-22, in addition to commentaries on Genesis, one should especially consuit more recent investigations of the text such as Fohren Exegese, 180-220; A. de Pury, Promesse d'Mne et legende cultueile dans »e cycle de Jacob: Genese

28 et /es traditions patriarchdes,

MI. 1975; E. Otto, "Jakob in

M e t h o d o l o g i c a l l y D i r e c t e d Procedures

183

Bethel," ZAW 88 (1976): 165-190, In the broader realm of new movements In pentateuchal literary analysis, one should consult works like H.H. Schmid, Der sogenannte iohwist

1976, and R. RendtoiiT, The Problem of the Process of Transmission in the Pentateuch

'(see §4011). Receritly, Rendtorff, "JaKob in Bethel." ZAW 94 (1982): 5 I I 523: and very thoroughly, E. Blum, Die Komposition derVätergeschichie,VVMANT 57, Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1984, 7-35, have treated this text from the perspective o these new movements. The most recent contributions are: J. Van Seters, Prohgue to History:TheYahwisi as His­ torien in Genesis, Louisviüe, I 992, 288-307: and S. McEvenue, "A Return to Sources in Gen 28:10-22?" ZAW ; 06 (1994): 375-389, 3, The fact that one now gathers secondary literature, by no means implies that one begins the various sections of the methodologically directed work with a review of that literature. The theses of this literature would too strongly predispose one's own judgment and hmder the development of one's own view. Rather, i l is emphatically recommended that one proeeed as follows: First, with the help of the methodological In­ structions, the exegete attempts to produce the necessary clarifications. In a broader step, one then consuits literature on the respective methodological question, Finally, in a third step, one forms a reasoned judgment in light ofthe literature. f

I . Text C r i t i c i s m According to the procedures which are given. above in § 3 . " ' the process is evident and not difficult to perform in the case of our text. After confirming the condition of the transmitted text in ßHK, which only offers variants in non-Hebrew versions, examina­ tion and decisions are easy. In light ofthe criteria mentioned, there is no cause to deviate from the MT Anyone using the BHS edition of Genesis, can certainly not create any greater picture of tne text transmission, and has nothing ιο decide text critically. The editor has decided for the exegete and not made known a Single variant! Instead, anyone who has a lot of time can decode the marginal notes ofthe masora which BHS offers in abundance, The exegete may want to discover the exegetical results for himself/herseif! I I . T h e Q u e s t i o n of* the Text's D e v e l o p m e n t T h e exegete is already d r i v e n to the question of the text's development i n the imaginative phase by one's o w n observations and attempts at clarifica3

tion p r i o r to e n t e r i n g the exegetical w o r k . " T h e l i t e r a r y critical, transmission h i s t o r i c a l , and redaction h i s t o r i c a l investigation b e l o n g to the question o f d i e text's d e v e l o p m e n t . " ' N o w i t is time, w i t h the aid o f m e t h o d o l o g i c a l I n ­ s t r u c t i o n i n this area, t o aequire a scientifìcally g r o u n d e d j u d g m e n t , w h i c h is demonstrable and achievable.

221 See above, page 41 ff. 222 See above, §11 Β Π (ρ. 175ff). 221 Comparc above. § 1 C II (p. 15) and §4 Λ I (ρ. 47ff).

184

§11

T U E E X E G E T I C A L PROCESS U S I N G G E N 28:10-22

1. L i t e r a r y C r i t i c i s m in connection with ine above mentioned commentaries on approach and method, * one should begin with the question ofîhe literary integrity, and one should proceed through the text with the given series ol criteria. It appears that Gen 28:1 Off offers an übundance cf indicators of literary d-sunity: 27

a. b. c. d. e. f.

g.

h.

Doublets (e.g. 28:16/17: recognition of the holiness of the place; 28; 12/13: two appearances; 28:15/20Í: piomise/condftion of vow). Double or multiple transmission η Genesis (e.g. the naming of Bethel in 28:19; 35:7; and 35:15), Secondary parenthetical statements (e.g. 28:2 I b; equating Y H W H and Elohim; See "g" below). Tensions in vocabulary (e.g. the end of 28:I 4: posibon; 28:2 Î b: position and context ofthe statement). Differences in manner of speech and style (28:15: protection on principal; 28:20: protection on the way now, Gen 28:22b, 2ms address). Differences of historical background (possibly: anointed pillar in 28:18 over against the religious qualilication of the site differentiated in 28:13,17, but one must exam­ ine the contextual possibility religio-historically, based on bible dictionaries, encyclopedias, and concordances. etc.;YHWH speaks in 28:13, which is contrasted with God's appearance in 28; 12,17, etc.). Elements specific to iayers or sourees (such as J's use o f Y H W H in 28:13,16; Elohim in 28:12,17,20,22 In the patriarchal time for Ρ [which is excluded here styüstically] or E; the dream in 28:12 for E; Haran in 28:10 according to the context of 27:4 I ff for J; 28:14 for J according to 12:3, etc.). Tensions of content (e.g. Bethel is the house of God according to 28: Î 7f; but ac­ cording to 28:22 the pillar will become the house of God after the return).

These indicators can be evalaated in the sense of literary disunity. They can also be presurnably substantiated at this point, first by the names of God. according to the usual pentateuchai hypothesis as portions of J anc E. This attempt was made already in the phase of historical outiook- Insight gleaned (Tom secondary literature shows that this kind of division of the text by J and Ε is hlghly debated today; According to the //m;íoíions attached to §4 above,' it is actually doubtfu! whether aeeepting the conflation of t w o source texts in the present text provides a completely satisfâctory substantiation (cornpare especially limitations"c" and " f " ) . Above all, the his­ torical outlook phase already demonstrated the fragmentary eharacter of the presumed J-version and the difficulty of coordinating the individual verses literary critically. If one is iTioved atall into the field of classical pentateuchai analysis (see also the advance ofRendtorff in light of Gen 28, In Tbe Problem vi Transmission, 57IT.68ff, 108ff, 140ff, and ZAW 94 [ 1982]: 5 I I 523; and Blum), then one must choose between a JE connection in Gen 28 or aeeeptance of a iiterariiy disunified base text which has been expanded by 28:13aß-15 ,?s

26

See above, p. 5 3ff. ^ See above, ρ. 180ff. Ì26 See above, p. 55ff.

M e t h o d o l o g i c a l l y D i r e c t e d Procedures

185

(Rendtorff, Blum) or by further addrtlons (Fohrer, Exegese, 182-185). This decision depends upon: I) which image one makes on the basls of methodological preconceptions about the literary development ofthe Pentateuch, 2) how, using traditionai pentateuchal source theory, one decides about the state, flow, and profile of J and/or E, wrth respect to the text of Gen 28: or 3) upon the transmission historical investigation vvhicn one must first undertake aecording to the limftations of c) and f) in §4 Β II 2 (p. 55ff.). Because ofthe confusion which dominates current research regaraing point"!," one must abandon a really lustifìed literary categorization in the framework of an indi­ vidual study of Gen 28:1 Off. Since tne recent investigations of Rendtorff and Blum establish a literary model ofthe Pentateuch without the traditional source writings, we will execute the Illustration in that which follows under the working hypothesis of clas­ sic Pentateuchal anaiysis, without clainvng a decision. A d d i t i o n for the A m e r i c a n / E n g l i s h E d i t i o n It should be emphasized once again that § I I does not intend to present a new thesis about the origin of Gen 28:10-22. Rather § I I intends to illustrate an exegetical technique with fluid possibikties. A new thesis about. this text would have to consider tocay's more well known difficuties before one could find the classic Pentateuchal sources,Yahwist and Elohist, in this t e x t The reason is clear since the explanatory model executed ,rt §1 I shows that J has been reeeived only fragmentarily, while Ε dominates, which is an exception t o the rule (see below, ρ. 186). Α new investigation of the text might come to a simpler result without presuming the classic sources of the Pentateuch. I am indebted t o my assistant, K, Schmid. for the comments which he provided: ( I ) The beginning of the text's development consists of an independent individua: narrative: 28:1 If, 16 (the first. three words). 17 19a. (2) This individual narrative was then adopted into the Jacob Cycie by 28:20-21 a,22a (28:21 b,22b are more recent expansions to the Jacob Cycle). (3) Later, in connection to a larger literary work (presentation ofthe ancest al period or the primal history + the ancestral penod, or lai"ger still?), a theological accentuation in the sense of Gen I 2:1-3; I 3:14-17 was undertaken by Gen 28:1 3 - 15,16 (the remaining words). r

2

2. A n t i c i p a t i n g the Transmission Historical A p p r o a e h - ' a. The Material The literary critical investigation has not yet decided whether Gen 28:13 * I 6 (henceforth called the J version) is pari of a Yahwistic version along with 28:1 1-12, the beginning of 16, 17 22 (henceforth prelimmarily called version A), For this reason, the transmission historical question should be addressed as necessary to both possibly literarily independent versions. One must also consider the prophetic reference in Hos I 2:5,7, as insight from secondary literature or coneordance work on Bethel or Jacob indicates. If Hos 12:5,7 ;s also literarüy independent of the Genesis account. then one finds three written references to the same event which are literarüy independent of one another They must go back to a common older transmission. 227 Secibovc, § 4 ( p . 55f).

§11

186

T I I E E X E G E T I C A L P R O C E S S U S I N G G E N 28:10-22

The next element is a comparison. All three references inelude the appearance of God t o Jacob in Bethel white on a journey that necessitates a return. It is noteworthy, however, that God does not appear ;n version A. and says nothing, According t o tne proceedings in 28:12,17f. Jacob niakes a vow, and only there does it speak of protection on tne journey. In J, by contrast, the protection of Jacob whiie traveling is the subject of God's promissory speech. Is that an older thread? Everything depends upon Hos I 2:5.7. if one glances at the t e x t commentaries, and secondary literature regarding the Jacob transmis­ sion in Hosea?® shows a text critically problematic passage. In Hos 12:5, if one decides with many for the Solution, 'immö, then Hosea knows a version of the transmission in which God speaks with Jacob in Bethel, as with J. Indeed, the content would agree with J in the assurance that Jacob will surely return with the help of his God (I 2:7)1

/Λ Observations a?ui Initial

Decisions-

9

The question of h o w one should evakiate this agreement of J and Hos over against A depends on whether Hos 17:5,7 stems from Hosea (Northern Kingdom), and whether it is independent o i the J formulation. o r relatedly, independent from the current form of Gen 28:1 Off. An excursus into Hosea and the development ofthe book of Hosea is necessary for clarilication. if one decides for Hoseanic origin. then J and Hosea oller ein o/der thread of transmission with the promise of a return during the appearance of God. This thread is missmg in A. or relatedly. it appears in the vow. What did this transmission thread b o k like prior to the written versions? Again, individual comparison is necessary. All versions, induding the vow in A, have " r e t u r n " (šûb), but they differentiate the goal. J hds" n this land" (28:15, cf 28:13). A has T o the house of my fathe