Images of Exile in the Prophetic Literature: Copenhagen Conference Proceedings 7-10 May 2017 (Forschungen Zum Alten Testament 2.Reihe) 9783161557491, 9783161566998, 3161557492

Citation preview

Forschungen zum Alten Testament 2. Reihe Edited by Konrad Schmid (Zürich) · Mark S. Smith (Princeton) Hermann Spieckermann (Göttingen) · Andrew Teeter (Harvard)

103

Images of Exile in the Prophetic Literature Copenhagen Conference Proceedings 7–10 May 2017

Edited by Jesper Høgenhaven, Frederik Poulsen, and Cian Power

Mohr Siebeck

Jesper Høgenhaven, born 1961; 1988 Dr. theol. (Copenhagen); since 2007 Professor of Old Testament at the University of Copenhagen. Frederik Poulsen, born 1984; 2014 PhD; currently Assistant Professor of Old Testament at the University of Copenhagen. Cian Power, born 1987; 2015 PhD (Harvard); 2016–18 Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Hebrew Bible Exegesis at Uppsala University; independent scholar.

ISBN 978-3-16-155749-1 / eISBN 978-3-16-156699-8 DOI 10.1628/978-3-16-156699-8 ISSN 1611–4914 / eISSN 2568–8367 (Forschungen zum Alten Testament, 2. Reihe) The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; detailed bibliographic data are available at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2019 Mohr Siebeck Tübingen, Germany. www.mohrsiebeck.com This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by copyright law) without the publisher’s written permission. This applies particularly to reproductions, translations and storage and processing in electronic systems. The book was typeset by satz&sonders in Dülmen, printed on non-aging paper by Laupp & Göbel in Gomaringen, and bound by Buchbinderei Nädele in Nehren. Printed in Germany.

Table of Contents

Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

Jesper Høgenhaven, Frederik Poulsen, and Cian Power Introduction. Images of Exile in the Prophetic Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3

PART I

ISAIAH

Francis Landy Metaphors for Death and Exile in Isaiah

....................

9

..................

27

Hyun Chul Paul Kim Metaphor, Memory, and Reality of the “Exile” in DeuteroIsaiah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

45

Ulrich Berges The Individualization of Exile in Trito-Isaiah. Some Reflections on Isaiah 55 and 58 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

63

Frederik Poulsen The Trope of Scattering in Isaiah. A Reading of Isaiah 11:11–16 and 27:7–13

PART II

JEREMIAH AND EZEKIEL

Paul M. Joyce A Rebirth of Images? Theme and Motif in Jeremiah and Ezekiel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

81

Else K. Holt Leave or Remain? A Theological Discussion in Jeremiah 29 and Beyond . . . . . . . . . .

97

Martien A. Halvorson-Taylor Prophetic Images of Women as Metaphors for Exile. Jeremiah’s Book of Consolation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

VI

Table of Contents

Sonja Ammann Voting with One’s Feet. Emigration as a Matter of Choice in the Jeremiah Narratives . . . . . 121 Jesper Høgenhaven Departure and Return of the Divine Glory in Ezekiel? . . . . . . . . . . 137 Søren Holst “You Shall Never Be Clean Again Until I Have Satisfied My Fury Upon You” (Ezek 23:13). Exile, Impurity, and Purification in Ezekiel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 Anja Klein Uncovering the Nymphomaniac. The Verb ‫ גלה‬and Exile as Sexual Violence in Ezekiel 16 and 23 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 PART III VARIOUS THEMES Dalit Rom-Shiloni Nature Imagery within Images of Exile. General Survey and Metaphoric Functions

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189

Göran Eidevall Trees and Traumas. On the Use of Phytomorphic Metaphors in Prophetic Descriptions of Deportation and Exile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217 Cian Power Images of Northern Exile. The Deportations from the Kingdom of Israel in the Prophets

. . . 233

Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer Jonah, the Eternal Fugitive. Exploring the Intertextuality of Jonah’s Flight in the Bible and Its Later Reception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255 List of Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269 Index

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271

Preface The fifteen articles in this volume were presented at the conference Images of Exile in the Prophetic Literature, which was held from 7–10 May 2017 at the Faculty of Theology, University of Copenhagen. The conference was made possible by a generous grant from the Independent Research Fund Denmark and its Sapere Aude programme. We want to thank the Fund for its financial support and the speakers and participants at the conference for stimulating discussions and a warm and enthusiastic atmosphere. A special thanks to Dr. Cian Power for his indispensable efforts in editing and revising the language of the papers and to Dr. Paul Joyce for proofreading one of the contributions. Thanks also to Mohr Siebeck and the editors of the FAT series for including this volume. Jesper Høgenhaven and Frederik Poulsen Copenhagen, May 2018

Introduction Images of Exile in the Prophetic Literature Jesper Høgenhaven, Frederik Poulsen, and Cian Power Exile is a central concern in the Hebrew Bible. According to biblical accounts, the exile in Babylon was a decisive turning point in the history of Israel. There are several other stories and discourses of exile in addition to this particular one: Adam and Eve are forced to leave Eden, Abraham and his family travel as strangers, and the miraculous story of exodus emerges from the captivity in Egypt. Exile in the Hebrew Bible, it seems, does not only echo or reflect traumatic historical events, but is also a literary theme that is taken up and reworked in a variety of ways by biblical authors. 1 In the prophetic books, there is a dense use of poetry and metaphors and reflection on exile is central to almost all of them. Yet the images they use are diverse. Some speak of exile with images of captivity and slavery. Others interpret exile as infertility and abandonment as when a man leaves his wife. Exile can be a state of spiritual death from which the people must be raised. Interestingly, the images that the prophets employ colour the concept itself, thereby expanding the range of meanings of a life in exile. At an international conference in Copenhagen in May 2017, eighteen scholars gathered to investigate and discuss images of exile in the prophetic literature. Some chose to deal with a specific passage or biblical book, while others approached the issue by comparing different books or by looking more closely at a particular image or theme. A recurrent question was what role language and metaphors play in the prophets’ attempts to express, structure, and cope with experiences of exile. This volume collects fifteen of the eighteen papers presented at that conference. We have grouped the articles in three major sections. The contributions in the first section focus on exile in Isaiah, while those in the 1

See e. g. A. K. d. H. Gudme and I. Hjelm, eds., Myth of Exile: History and Metaphor in the Hebrew Bible (CIS; London and New York: Routledge, 2015).

4

Jesper Høgenhaven, Frederik Poulsen, and Cian Power

second section treat this issue in Jeremiah and Ezekiel as well as possible links between the two books. The third section collects contributions on various themes, including nature and agricultural imagery for exile, deportations from the Northern Kingdom, and the prophet Jonah as a perpetual refugee. In Section I, Francis Landy’s essay, which was also the opening lecture of the conference, reflects on the ways in which the theme of exile is present in the meta-narrative, message, and structure of the book of Isaiah as a whole. Landy draws attention to the association of death with exile and argues that exile throughout the book becomes an existential condition: even at home, one does not feel at home. Frederik Poulsen analyses the motif of scattering and dispersion in Isaiah. After a brief overview of this literary theme in the Hebrew Bible, Poulsen offers a close reading and comparison of Isaiah 11:11–16 and 27:7–13. Hyun Chul Paul Kim detects metaphors of exile in Deutero-Isaiah, including the images of darkness-blindness-prison, drought-hunger, and daughters-sons of Zion. In addition to this analysis, Kim presents some astute reflections on the relation between metaphor, memory, and reality in the poetry of DeuteroIsaiah. The relation between historical realities and figurative interpretations is also taken up by Ulrich Berges, who discusses the theme of exile in Trito-Isaiah. Looking at Isaiah 55 and 58 in particular, he argues that exile becomes individualized and associated with ethical concerns; in short, exile is transformed from an external movement into an ethical reordering, a way out of one’s own egoism. The first article in Section II examines literary relations between the books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel. In addition to the theology of judgement, Paul M. Joyce offers a careful analysis of three shared motifs: dry bones as a metaphor for exile and death; sour grapes and the question of guilt; and theological geography and the figurative dimension of journey imagery. Else K. Holt deals with Jeremiah’s letter to the exiles in Jeremiah 29 and its rather positive description of the conditions of daily life for the deportees in Babylon. Taking similar language in Deuteronomy, Isaiah, and Psalms into consideration, she discusses the function, purpose, and possible historical context of expressing a prophetic message by means of correspondence by letter. Martien A. Halvorson-Taylor examines the poems in the Book of Consolation (Jeremiah 30–31). She demonstrates that the images of men in labour, of a wounded woman, and of the mourning of Rachel, all of which turn exile into an enduring existential condition, deliberately draw from and re-contextualize earlier Jeremianic traditions. Sonja Ammann studies the Jeremiah narrative in Jeremiah 37–43. Examining three

Introduction

5

short episodes (Jer 37:11–16; 40:1–6; 43:6), Ammann discusses whether the prophet’s action – his attempt to leave the city – serves as a political message to his fellow citizens, and she offers a critical perspective on the assumptions often made by scholars regarding these narratives. Jesper Høgenhaven examines the notion of the mobility of YHWH’s glory, central to Ezekiel. Analysing key chapters in the book (Ezek 1; 8–11; 43), he demonstrates the subtle play at work on the motifs of divine absence and presence and stresses that, rather than indicating God’s dislocation into exile, divine mobility points to the inescapability of judgement upon the sinful people. Søren Holst discusses the thorough ambiguity of exile in the book of Ezekiel. He shows that while, on the one hand, exile is a place of punishment for the people’s crimes, on the other, it is a place of purification by means of which the purified people can return to the blessings of their homeland. Anja Klein offers an overview of the key verb ‫ גלה‬and its use in Ezekiel before turning to a detailed reading of Ezekiel 16 and 23. She draws attention to the close association in these chapters of exile with sexual violence and, more broadly, with social issues such as honour and shame and gender roles. In Section III, Dalit Rom-Shiloni introduces five biological-ecological fields to detect, group, and interpret distinctive images of exile: fauna, flora, water sources, landscape characteristics, and climate systems. She furthermore demonstrates the potential of this enterprise by examining a series of texts from Isaiah. Göran Eidevall focuses on prophetic texts that liken the removal of people to moving a plant. The rationale behind this metaphor, he argues, is the immobility of plants (if they are removed they die) and plant imagery is thus capable of expressing feelings of uncertain futures in unknown territories. Cian Power looks at the Neo-Assyrian deportations from the “Northern” Kingdom of Israel in the late eighth century BCE. Examining references to this event in Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Micah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, he provides a critical comparison of these books with regard to the language employed and to the supposed meaning of exile. Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer concludes the volume with a reading of the book of Jonah. Drawing attention to vocabulary shared by the story of Jonah and that of Adam, Eve, and Cain in Genesis, she argues that Jonah embodies the pain of alienation; he is cast as a perpetual refugee. Finally, she shows how this motif is also present in two twentieth-century novels by Jewish authors that draw on the story of Jonah.

Part I Isaiah

Metaphors for Death and Exile in Isaiah Francis Landy

At the centre of Isaiah, between 39:8 and 40:1, is the exile. Everything in the book points to it, either by anticipation or retrospection, and yet it is a null point, an interruption, in which nothing is spoken. 1 Two hundred years intervene between Isaiah’s prediction of exile to Hezekiah in 39:6–7, at the end of the long narrative of the deliverance of Jerusalem in chapters 36–38, and the message of comfort in 40:1. The disjuncture means that the book is fundamentally discordant, despite the immense effort at unification. The juxtaposition of Proto- and Deutero-Isaiah is not an accident, as still occasionally proposed, but it nonetheless contrasts two entirely different poetic and imaginative worlds, whose congruence is uncertain and incomplete. The book purports to tell a story, from creation to redemption; it is the classic metanarrative, like the Odyssey, in which the hero, Israel or God, leaves home, has adventures, and comes home; and as in the classic metanarrative, home is never quite what one remembers. In the case of Isaiah, the metanarrative is the more exigent because it corresponds to the story of the Hebrew Bible, and because it claims universal significance and truth; it is the story of the world. The metanarrative is in fact that there is a metanarrative, that history has a 1 U. Berges (Jesaja: Der Prophet und das Buch [Biblische Gestalten 22; Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2010], 92) argues that the gap is caused by a wish to emphasize the deliverance from Sennacherib and the hope of return in 40:1–2. S. K. Kostamo (“Mind the Gap: Reading Isa 39:8–40:1 within Early Second Temple Judah,” in History, Memory, Hebrew Scriptures: A Festschrift for Ehud Ben Zvi [ed. D. V. Edelman and I. D. Wilson; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2015], 215–228) proposes that it serves to bracket the exilic period and demarcate the distant monarchic past from the restoration period. E. Ben Zvi (“Isaiah a Memorable Prophet: Why Was Isaiah so Memorable in the Late Persian /Early Hellenistic Periods? Some Observations,” in “Remembering Biblical Figures in the Late Persian and Early Hellenistic Periods: Social Memory and Imagination” [ed. D. V. Edelman and E. Ben Zvi; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013], 365–383, 377) similarly thinks that the absence of explicit references to the exile marginalizes it. On the contrary, my position is that the silence concerning the exile makes it an all-important “elephant in the room”, to which virtually everything in the book points. See F. Landy, “Exile in the Book of Isaiah,” in The Concept of Exile in Ancient Israel and its Historical Contexts (ed. E. Ben Zvi and C. Levin; BZAW 404; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2010), 241–256.

10

Francis Landy

plot and that everything is for the best – as long, that is, as you are not one of the sinners at the end of the book. The question of the coherence of the book is then that of the coherence of history. The alternative is that history is not teleological, that exile will continue for ever. The book leaves us with hope, and that perhaps is the sole reason why it is written: “YHWH has anointed me to proclaim to the humble” (61:1). But the hope is always against the background of despair, or, as David Carr says, of trauma. 2 The sceptical voice is evoked, always to be dismissed. But it keeps coming back. Death and exile correspond throughout the book, as the twin fates of the victims of the catastrophe. Death may be a metaphor for exile, or vice versa. Exile is a living death, augmented by associations of Babylon with the underworld in chapter 14; death is the ultimate antagonist of life and of YHWH, the final exile, separating us from God and the living; hence the anxiety surrounding death, the insistence that it is in fact return, to the ancestors, to the earth; hence the fear of being outcast, dying in a strange land, and the hope of resurrection. Death is beyond human discourse; the null point at the centre, portending death and exile, is also a caesura from which all the words of the book emanate. They are a resistance to it, since death and exile threaten all language and all meaning. Once the Temple is destroyed, the entire symbolic and sacred structure of Judah /Israel becomes a memory, and the people itself loses its political and imaginary identity, becomes adrift among a sea of nations, and risks or welcomes absorption or annihilation. If there is a new Temple, as in Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah, what will it be, and what will be its relation to the First Temple? To what extent is repetition possible? And to the extent it is possible, what is it that we will repeat? We begin in chapter 1 with the Temple as the place where God is not at home, and we end in chapter 66, with the Temple as a home for everyone – the eunuch and the stranger – where God is unable to find a resting place, and where the glorious future is uneasily juxtaposed to a disconcerting and sacrilegious present.

2 D. M. Carr, Holy Resilience: The Bible’s Traumatic Origins (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2014). Carr (74–76) argues that the exile was “a gap in the midst of biblical history”, which could not be addressed directly, but which produced a fundamental reevaluation of what it meant to be a Judean, and hence a proliferation of scriptures. His thesis is that trauma affects memory and behavior in indirect ways (7). On the relationship of history and trauma, as well as the dangers in an over-emphasis on aporia and unreadability, see D. LaCapra, Writing History, Writing Trauma (2nd ed. with new preface; Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2014).

Metaphors for Death and Exile in Isaiah

11

Metaphor has been the subject of an enormous amount of philosophical and literary discussion from antiquity on, not least in biblical studies. 3 It may be a transposition from one subject to another, from death to exile and vice versa; a declaration of likeness between unlike things; an elementary constituent of mind, of ordering and mapping of the world, as in cognitive theory; it may be complex or simple. Poetry uses metaphor to exploit the possibilities of the imagination, to sharpen perception, to give us a sense of seeing something for the first time. Metaphor is unpredictable, highly context dependent, and takes us in unexpected directions; it offers us unlimited interpretive opportunities. Roman Jakobson saw metaphor as foundational to what he called the poetic function, perceiving equivalences across time; 4 it thus has a syncretic, synchronic aspect; through it the unfolding corpus of Isaiah becomes whole, as we read one passage in light of another, remote one. Of course, this is only one half of the story: metaphor can be differential, disjunctive and what I call deconstructive; it can split the atom. By this I mean that as much as we construct a poetic (and everyday) world through metaphor, we simultaneously open it to alternative possibilities, to ambiguity, and to further questions. In Isaiah, all metaphors speak for the unspeakable; the primary metaphor is the transfer from silence and ineffability into speech. It is a drama repeated every time the prophet opens his mouth. Derrida writes (or speaks) several times about his fascination with the vouloir dire, “wishing or meaning to say”, with the moment, without content, between the

3 For a comprehensive account of ancient and modern philosophical theories of metaphor, see D. Hills, “Metaphor,” in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (ed. E. N. Zalta; Fall 2017 Edition: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2017/entries/metaphor/). Martien A. Halvorson-Taylor (Enduring Exile: The Metaphorization of Exile in the Hebrew Bible [VTSup 41; Leiden: Brill, 2011], 16–21) provides a succinct summary of approaches to metaphor in the Hebrew Bible. See also P. van Hecke, ed., Metaphor in the Hebrew Bible (BETL 187; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2005). An important early contribution was C. V. Camp and C. R. Fontaine, eds., Women, War, and Metaphor: Language and Society in the Study of the Hebrew Bible (Semeia 61; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993), especially Camp’s introductory essay, “Metaphor in Feminist Biblical Interpretation: Theoretical Perspectives,” 3–36. A cognitive approach is introduced by H. Løland, Silent or Salient Gender? The Interpretation of Gendered God-Language in the Hebrew Bible, exemplified by Isaiah 42, 46 and 49 (FAT II / 32; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008), 1–57. 4 R. Jakobson, “Poetics and Linguistics: A Concluding Statement” in Style and Language (ed. T. Sebeok; Cambridge: MIT, 1960), 350–378, 358. For Jakobson metaphor and metonymy are the two vectors of poetry and prose respectively, the former finding equivalences across the sequence. For a thorough-going Jakobsonian analysis of biblical poetry, see A. Berlin, The Dynamics of Biblical Parallelism (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985).

12

Francis Landy

urge to utter, or the reluctance to do so, and the speech itself. 5 If death and exile are characterized by silence, non-being, and cultural disintegration, language may resuscitate the dead, at least by restoring a cultural tradition, and give names to the nameless. The poetry of the book is also metaphorical in that it translates the language of God into human speech. In the commissioning scene of chapter 6, Isaiah complains that he is of impure lips among a people of impure lips; after he is purified by the seraph, his language is implicitly different from all others, an incommensurability confirmed by the instruction to mandate and instil incomprehension. The strangeness of prophetic language is a motif throughout the book, and has been the subject of essays by the French critic Maurice Blanchot and by Herbert Marks. 6 Moreover, while revelation, the opening of the eyes, is promised, it never actually happens, at least within the book. So every word – including those referring to blindness and deafness – potentially conceals a mystery, is a challenge to interpretation. It may mean other than that which it says. God, in particular, is ‫אל מסתתר‬, a God who conceals himself (45:15), one who hides his face from the house of Jacob, ‫( המסתיר פניו מבית יעקב‬8:17) and this is the condition for writing the book, or at least one version of the book (8:16–17), if that is what it means to “seal Torah in my disciples”. 7 The aspect I wish to highlight is the possibility of strangeness and inexhaustibility in metaphor, an estrangement of language from its familiar meanings and contexts, especially in poetic metaphor. Maurice Blanchot writes of prophecy as the “naked 5 Derrida’s fascination goes back to his Of Grammatology (trans. G. C. Spivak; Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976) and is rendered explicit in an interview in his Positions (trans. A. Bass; Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1981), 14. Furthermore, he circles round the question in the essay “Literature in Secret,” in The Gift of Death and Literature in Secret (trans. D. Wills; 2nd ed.; Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2008), 119–158. 6 M. Blanchot, “Prophetic Speech,” in The Book to Come (trans. S. Cornell; Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2003), 79–86; H. Marks, “On Prophetic Stammering” in The Book and the Text: The Bible and Literary Theory (ed. R. Schwartz; Oxford and Cambridge: Blackwell, 1990), 60–80. 7 Many scholars take this literally, as referring to a written document. See, for example, J. Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 1–39 (AB 19; New York: Doubleday, 2000), 232, 243–244; W. A. M. Beuken, Jesaja 1–12 (trans. U. Berges; HThKAT; Freiburg: Herder, 2003), 231–232. Others read it metaphorically, referring to the teachings stored up in the disciples’ memory e. g. H. Wildberger, Isaiah 1–12 (trans. T. Trapp; Continental Commentary; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991), 366. See also R. E. Clements, “Written Prophecy: The Case of the Isaiah Memoir,” in Jerusalem and the Nations: Studies in the Book of Isaiah (HBM 16; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2011), 53–65. A previous version of Clements’ article appeared in Writings and Speech in Israelite and Ancient Near Eastern Prophecy (ed. E. Ben Zvi and M. H. Floyd; SBL Symposium Series; Atlanta: SBL, 2000), 89–101.

Metaphors for Death and Exile in Isaiah

13

encounter with the Outside”, 8 by which he means something beyond all human experience, and its necessary translation into human language. The prophet and his children, in the passage quoted above, are “signs and portents” from YHWH of Hosts, but we do not know what they are signs and portents of, except to signify his hidden presence. 9 The book is a ‫חזון‬, a “vision”, a word used for prophetic, clairvoyant experience, and hence for a clarity that sees beyond appearances, into the far future for instance. The language of the book is a transposition and obscuring of that vision, which, as I have written elsewhere, turns into hearing and speech. 10 It is a rendering of the invisible deity, the source of all words and images, into language, which conceals his presence, his “face”. An example of this is the transgressive vision of chapter 6, where what we see is precisely what we do not see. If there is a mystery beyond words – and this is a dimension of metaphor often overlooked in biblical studies – the book is self-evidently not metaphorical in large part; or rather, metaphoricity implies literality, something to which metaphor refers, if only indirectly. Death and exile are real events, horizons of human and cultural experience. Many passages are not metaphorical, or only use conventional metaphors; often it is hard to decide whether a description, like the paradise of the animals in 11:6–8, is meant to be literal or metaphorical. There is recourse to subsets of metaphor like simile or comparison or other figures of speech, such as metonymy, and sometimes they intertwine. The ‫ציץ נבל‬, “the fading diadem /flower”, of 28:1 is an example. As a flower, it is a metaphor for transience as well as beauty; as a diadem, it is a metonymy for sovereignty, especially in parallel with ‫עטרת‬, “crown”. Trauma is surrounded by thickets of language, by endless displacements, and sometimes by the breakdown of language, for example in weeping. There is the huge poetic effort to accommodate, explain, and create something beautiful out of tragedy, and the interminable risk of failure. Once I tried a psychoanalytic approach to some of this material (the Oracles against the Nations) with reference to the French psychoanalytic critics Julia Kristeva and Hélène Cixous. I argued that the conventional term ‫משא‬, “burden”, used for the Oracles against the Nations, suggested 8

Blanchot, “Prophetic Speech,” 80. The indeterminacy of the signs is reinforced by the ambiguity of the children’s symbolic names. That of She’ar Yashuv will be discussed below. 10 F. Landy, “Vision and Voice in Isaiah,” JSOT 88 (2000): 19–36. Reprinted in F. Landy, Beauty and the Enigma and Other Essays in the Hebrew Bible (JSOTSup 312: Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), 371–391. 9

14

Francis Landy

a depressive weight on the prophet, and an effort to express inconsolable grief that manifested itself, for example, in obsessive wordplays. I am ever more cautious about this approach; nonetheless, I am attentive to what is unknown in writing. 11 Poets write in response to something, which may be a Muse or a divine voice, and the prophetic text, as Blanchot says, is a dialogue between the prophet and a terrifying or mysterious alterity. What is the role of the unconscious in writing, at the intersection of the individual and the collective? And how should one attend to it? For that reason a certain degree of tentativeness accompanies all my work, a sense of not quite knowing where I am going. 12 One has to be attentive to precisely what one cannot know, the minute intonations of the writer, the imaginative world – in Lacan’s terms, the imaginaire – that he or she allows us to enter. Writing, reading, and criticism are sensual, tactile activities; one feels the words on the tongue. The beauty, or, contrarily, the ugliness, of language is infused with the fantasies of the writer, with intimate pleasures and fears. In Isaiah’s terms, criticism, at least interesting criticism, requires a certain “hearing beyond the hearing of the ears” (11:3). I have been influenced by the work of the psychoanalyst D. W. Winnicott, who argued for the growth of a “play space”, initially between mother and child, as the location of all cultural experience, in which the child can experiment with the possibilities of being. 13 I am interested in the experience of writing, and its relation to the experience of a world that has become alien, as is surely the case with every prophet. Cixous writes of writing as being an encounter with death and the dream world. 14 It deals with the elementary drives of life and death, with the working through of trauma, and with primary relations, notably those of parent and child, husband and wife, with all their attendant ambivalences 11 I have talked about this in an interview with Ian D. Wilson: “Paradoxes, Enigmas, and Professorship” in University of Alberta Religious Studies Spring Newsletter 2014 (see https:// hcommons.org/deposits/item/hc:12927/). Some of the following discussion is adapted from the interview. 12 F. Landy, “Reading, Writing, and Exile,” in Ben Zvi and Levin, The Concept of Exile, 257–273, 259–260. See J. Hillis Miller, “What Do Stories about Pictures Want?” Critical Inquiry 34 (2008): 59–97, on the blindness of writing, and R. P. Carroll, “Blindsight and the Vision Thing,” in Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah: Studies of an Interpretive Tradition. Volume 1 (ed. C. C. Broyles and C. A. Evans; VTSup 70/1; Leiden: Brill, 1997), 79–93, who argues that only a blind, or, even stronger, a blinded, critic can properly read visionary poetry like Isaiah. 13 F. Landy, “On Metaphor, Play, and Nonsense,” in Camp and Fontaine, Women, War, and Metaphor, 219–237. Republished in Landy, Beauty and the Enigma, 252–271. 14 H. Cixous, Three Steps on the Ladder of Writing (trans. S. Cornell and S. Sellers; New York: Columbia University Press, 1993).

Metaphors for Death and Exile in Isaiah

15

and transpositions. Israel, for instance, is son, daughter and wife; God is father, mother, and husband, evoking primal fantasies of love and death. Through it we have access to the “dream world” of ancient Israel and Yehud, its alternative realities. Metaphors for death and exile refer back to the gap between the monarchic and restoration periods, and thus to an abyss, a black hole, which threatens to consume, as I have mentioned, the entire metanarrative. The abiding fantasy is of being dead while alive, and alive while dead. Metaphors are both displacements of the trauma – attempts to render the unspeakable in language – and ways of pointing to fundamental connections, realities and relations. Death and exile thus are both used metaphorically, often in relation to each other, to signify the world the poet /prophet imagines, and reciprocally everything in the book points, through relations of analogy, contrast, and association, back to those events. Both, moreover, are encompassing, universal conditions; the destruction of Jerusalem and the deportation are examples of the fate of all nations, of the sense of estrangement, of bereavement, loss, and nostalgic desire. Jerusalem is every city, as Robert Carroll commented, the city of chaos as well as the city of God. 15 It represents the entire human aspiration, and the critique, from within, of the attempt to secure a perfect world. Outside the book as well as at its centre there is death and its associated images: the pit, the desert, etc. God writes his book, the book of YHWH (34:16), and outside it there is nothing (everything is in it, it says), or else there are readers, space travellers if you will, come from far away to make sense of this past which also, somehow, includes themselves. So exile is the condition of interpretation. I will focus on images of exile, given the theme of this volume, that intersect with those of death. Isaiah is remarkable, as I have intimated, for its lack of direct representation of exile, in contrast to Amos and Hosea, in both of which death and deportation are the twin and alternating fates awaiting Israel; and to Jeremiah and Ezekiel, which actually live through it. 16 Exile does appear in disguise, however, or transferred to others, rec-

15

R. P. Carroll, “City of Chaos, City of Stone, City of Flesh: Urbanscapes in Prophetic Discourses,” in Every City Shall Be Forsaken: Urbanism and Prophecy in Ancient Israel and the Near East (ed. L. Grabbe and R. D. Heck; JSOTSup 330; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), 45–61. 16 J. Nogalski, “Isaiah and the Twelve: Scrolls with Parallel Functions in the Corpus Propheticum” (unpublished paper), notes that the Book of the Twelve has a similar gap at the centre.

16

Francis Landy

ollected or anticipated as coming to an end, 17 and yet persisting as an unassuageable wound. The dead will never come back; the past, and the Davidic dynasty, will never be restored. The first reference to exile is as complex as any, and neatly twins the motifs of death and exile: ‫גלה עמי מבלי דעת‬, “my people is exiled without knowledge”, from the series of woe oracles in chapter 5. Exile here may be literal, but it is followed immediately by the descent into Sheol: “Therefore Sheol has stretched its throat and gaped its mouth without limit ...” (5:14). 18 So exile is descent into Sheol, but it is also ignorance; “my people is exiled without knowledge” may mean that they do not know that they are exiled, or that they are unaware of YHWH’s work, as it says in 5:12: “the deed of YHWH they have not looked on, the work of his hands they have not seen.” Then exile is from the recognition of God’s acts, and all the associated commonplaces that make them into “my people”; exile is from knowledge of their proper allegiance, a motif that goes back to the beginning of the book (1:2–3). The context is a denunciation of drunkards: “Woe to those who rise early to pursue drink, staying up late; wine lights up for them” (5:11); exile would then be a metaphor for their taking leave of their senses. All these connections inform each other: drunkenness = ignorance = exile = death, and so on, and they are amplified by the many links between them, as when the revellers continue their party in Sheol, unaware that they have died, or as the men of hunger (‫)מתי רעב‬ ְ are also dead of hunger (‫)מתי רעב‬, ֵ the living dead. Of course, drunkenness is also a metaphor for the various evils castigated in the woe oracles, all of which reflect each other – injustice, land appropriation, the inversion of wisdom. The whole passage is characterized by systematic reversals. The drunkards are parched with thirst (5:13); Sheol imbibes the drinkers. Here exile may refer to deportation, but also to an internal condition. Sheol opens up a void in the midst of society which swallows up and annuls everything: the nobility, described as ‫ כבודו‬in 5:13, the system of justice, conventional wisdom (5:21–22), and the intoxication of power (5:22). Similar ambiguities pervade the commissioning scene in chapter 6, which I see as a metapoetic key to the book. The glory of YHWH, proclaimed by the seraphim in 6:3 as immanent in the world, is manifest in 17

For example in the injunction to “Go out from there” in 52:11. One may note the range of reference of ‫נפש‬, here somewhat conventionally translated “throat”. It may also mean “appetite,” evoking the proverbial insatiability of death (Prov 30:15–16), or “life-force”, suggesting an oxymoron, that death is animate. 18

Metaphors for Death and Exile in Isaiah

17

desolation and deportation (6:11–12), in its perceived absence, and thus in the metanarrative. The ambiguity turns on the different meanings of ‫שוב‬, which may mean “repent” or “return”, in 6:10 and 6:13. In 6:10, the command to prevent understanding precludes the people’s return to God and “healing.” In 6:13 it may refer to the return from the exile predicted in 6:12, 19 as well as to restoration to YHWH. In 7:3, Isaiah is accompanied in his confrontation with Ahaz by his son, She’ar Yashuv. She’ar Yashuv may be one of the “signs and portents” constituted by Isaiah’s sons, but if so he is a silent onlooker in the unfolding scene. Isaiah entreats Ahaz to request a sign from YHWH, presumably that the Aramean-Ephraimite coalition will be defeated, but the sign is already there. The sign that Ahaz is given willy-nilly, the birth of Immanuel, portends the failure of the Davidic dynasty and a new era. YHWH accompanies us, for good or ill, through every catastrophe, such as the advent of the Assyrians in 7:17. The future in the land it holds out, impoverished or felicitous, is in tension with the trajectory of exile and return symbolised by She’ar Yashuv. What is She’ar Yashuv doing there? He is a witness perhaps, who can transmit knowledge of the scene to the future, and thus ensure the survival of prophecy, but he is also the embodiment of an alternative destiny, which may be hopeful – a remnant shall return – or derisory – only a remnant shall return. She’ar Yashuv is a loose end in the narrative, but stands for the greater one, for the overall perspective and future of the book. Metaphorically, the story is the child of prophecy, 20 and the prophet and his sons become metaphors, parables, for the divine program. We find this repeatedly in prophetic narratives, in which prophets exemplify the difficulties of divine communication. She’ar Yashuv, as the future, may stand in some kind of relation with that presented by Immanuel, Maher-Shallal-Hash-Baz, the Davidic heir of 9:5–6 and 11:1–10, the other children in the book; it may be the same or different. He may be a reader or interpreter, in whom the book is sealed or may be read or unread, according to the parable of 29:11–12. The question, moreover, is Isaiah’s challenge to Ahaz: '‫שאל לך אות מעם ה‬ ‫אלהיך העמק שאלה‬, “Request a sign for yourself ... be it deep as Sheol” 19

In fact, 6:12 is more ambiguous, since “Great is the abandonment in the midst of the land” might simply refer to depopulation, the decimation predicted in 6:13. 20 In 8:1–4, Isaiah has intercourse with a “prophetess,” who gives birth to the child MaherShallal-Hash-Baz. That both its parents are prophets gives it an inherent prophetic status. See F. Landy, “Prophetic Intercourse,” in Sense and Sensibility: Essays on Reading the Bible in Memory of Robert Carroll (ed. A. G. Hunter and P. R. Davies; JSOTSup 348; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002), 261–279.

18

Francis Landy

(7:11). The pun suggests a correlation between questioning and Sheol; as if Ahaz’s refusal to ask questions is because of his fear of death, or Sheol is the source of the deepest human questions, of a sense of foundationlessness. Ahaz momentarily betrays the sceptical voice, precisely through his pious dissimulation. 21 She’ar Yashuv comes back, as a revenant, in 10:21–22, verses usually seen as supplementary. There, however, it becomes a prediction of a return to God, ‫שאר ישוב שאר יעקב אל אל גבור‬, “A remnant will return, the remnant of Jacob, to God the mighty” (v. 21) in a passage in which the motifs of destruction, depopulation, and exile combine with ethical transformation. ‫אל גבור‬, however, also recalls one of the titles of the Davidic heir in 9:5. 22 Royal and divine attributes interfuse; the return may be to an idealised Davidide, with all that that may mean, as well as to YHWH. In chapter 20, the prophet is once again “a sign and portent”, this time of the exile of Egypt and Ethiopia (20:4). Here the motif of the exile is deflected onto other nations, figures of remoteness, ancient splendour, and power, whose deportation anticipates and distracts from that of Judah. The prophet symbolically participates in their humiliation, by walking naked for three years. Nakedness is a sign of marginality; the prophet, as throughout the Oracles about the Nations, identifies with the victim. 23 Exile is acted out in his body, through his dramatically stripping himself of his dignity, subjecting himself to the pornographic gaze to which the Egyptians and Ethiopians are exposed, especially given that the text draws attention to the buttocks. He becomes a prophet to the nations, representing, for a moment, the universality of the prophetic commission, and an abstraction from Israel. If clothing represents culture, social status, and aesthetic refinement, nudity reduces the prophet (and the nations) to

21

As H. Liss (Die Unerhörte Prophetie: Kommunikative Strukturen prophetische Rede im Buch Yesha’yahu [Arbeiten zur Bibel und ihrer Geschichte 14; Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2003], 89) says, Ahaz is acting in accordance with the constraints of his historical and religious context, in which doubting the will of God is sacrilegious. This characterizes him as belonging to the uncomprehending people of the commission of 6:9–10. Hence the irony of the passage. Parallels with Gideon’s testing of YHWH are frequently made. 22 For the interconnections in this passage, see Beuken, Jesaja 1–12, 280. One might note that Marvin A. Sweeney (Isaiah 1–39 with an Introduction to Prophetic Literature [FOTL 16; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996], 208) thinks it is a midrashic development of earlier texts by Isaiah, following the fall of Samaria. 23 On ‘queerness’ in this passage, see R. Graybill, Are We Not Men? Unstable Masculinity in the Hebrew Prophets (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 4–11.

Metaphors for Death and Exile in Isaiah

19

bare humanity. Exile becomes a metaphor for cognitive estrangement, 24 and also for Israel’s (and the prophetic) mission to the world. This leads directly to the dialectic between the first and second parts of Isaiah, and the problem of what the return and exile mean. Exile figures too in the last of the prophetic stories in Isaiah. Hezekiah shows the Babylonian emissaries who visit him on his recovery from his sickness all his treasures; consequently, Isaiah predicts, these treasures will be carried off to Babylon and Hezekiah’s sons (or at least some of them) will be eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon. This is the most direct reference to exile in Proto-Isaiah, and immediately precedes the prologue to Deutero-Isaiah. It portends the end of the Davidic dynasty at the moment of its apparent apogee, with the miraculous deliverance from the Assyrians. Hezekiah’s lapse is inexplicable and fatal, like Josiah’s a century later; even his reaction, like Josiah’s, suggests acceptance of transience: après moi, le déluge. The Davidic dynasty, the focus of so much attention in Proto-Isaiah, and so many utopian fantasies, will die out, sterilely, in the Babylonian court. Except that there is a future: “let not the eunuch say, ‘I am a dry tree’” (56:3). 25 This at least suggests a different kind of progeny, perhaps indeed a different tree from that in 11:1–10. Exile appears also in the previous chapter, in Hezekiah’s prayer: ‫דורי‬ ‫נסע ונגלה מני כאהל רעי‬, “My generation is plucked up; it is exiled / removed from me like a shepherd’s tent” (38:12). Hezekiah’s prayer, like everything in the presentation of Hezekiah in these chapters, constructs him, as it were, as a post-monarchic king, a Davidide of the Psalms rather than history. His only action, apart from his moment of folly, is prayer. In the poem, he laments his mortality; even the fifteen years’ grace God grants him is only a temporary reprieve. I read ‫ דורי‬as “my generation” rather than “my dwelling,” 26 in parallel with ‫יושבי חדל‬, “inhabitants

24 Isaiah does not speak throughout this passage, and there is no indication that he understands the meaning of his strange action. He drops out of language, just as he is stripped of all the accoutrements of culture. Cf. Liss, Die Unerhörte Prophetie, 196. 25 The relationship between 39:7 and 56:3 is often noted. Jacob Stromberg (Isaiah after Exile: The Author of Third Isaiah as Reader and Redactor of the Book [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011], 218) thinks that the reference to eunuchs was projected back into Isa 39 by the editors of Trito-Isaiah. 26 The only other instance in which ‫ דור‬may have this meaning is Isa 53:8a, though I think it is dubious (cf. Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 1–39, 481). W. A. M. Beuken (Isaiah 28–39 [trans. B. Doyle; Historical Commentary on the Old Testament; Leuven: Peeters, 2000], 397), suggests that it refers to “a circular form of settlement,” associated for instance with ‫כדור‬, “ball”, but there is little supporting evidence. The main grounds for rejecting the common meaning of “generation” is contextual; “my dwelling” makes a good parallel with the “shepherd’s tent”.

20

Francis Landy

of the ceasing world” in the previous verse; 27 ‫ נגלה‬combines different meanings of the root ‫ – גלה‬exile, remove, reveal – on which more later; ‫ נסע‬may evoke travel as well as the plucking up of tent pegs, as in 33:20. The shepherd’s tent is clearly a metaphor for transitoriness, compounded perhaps by sacred associations. The poem expresses the isolation and fear of a man on the edge of death, without any royal trappings (one might contrast David’s last words in 2 Sam 23). That his generation has been plucked up (or has travelled) suggests his solitude; he is already separated from his cohort. The metaphorical equivalence of death and exile is reversed; for the dying self, life is disclosed or removed, it is an exile from death. Moreover, his generation, his circle, is also passing, each on his or her own path. It is a kind of epitaph for the old world, that of Proto-Isaiah, and a harbinger of the new world, proclaimed in chapter 40. Elsewhere I have written about what I call spectrality in DeuteroIsaiah, especially in its prologue. 28 By this I mean that it echoes motifs and preoccupations of Proto-Isaiah, in this case the call vision in chapter 6, but from the other side of the disaster. We have no temple, no seraphim, the glory of YHWH is to be revealed in the future, but is not manifest in the present, there is merely a wilderness in which the way is to be opened. The herald announces YHWH’s imminent coming, but he never arrives, at least in the book. The poet /prophet despairs about the possibility of meaningful speech, in contrast to the eagerness of the prophet in 6:8. The exile, ‫גלות‬, is referred to explicitly as such in 45:13, for the only time in the book. ‫הוא יבנה עירי וגלותי ישלח‬, “he will build my city and send forth my exile.” Cyrus is the new Davidide; 29 but Jerusalem However, if one sees it in continuity with ‫יושבי הדל‬, that objection is removed. For a similar argument, see A. L. H. M. van Wieringen, “Notes on Isaiah 38–39,” BN 102 (2000): 28–32, 29. Michael L. Barré (The Lord Has Saved Me: A Study of the Psalm of Hezekiah (Isaiah 38: 9–20) [CBQMS 39; Washington: Catholic Biblical Association, 2005], 81) thinks it means “lifetime.” 27 The term ‫חדל‬, “cessation”, is sometimes emended to ‫חלד‬, “world”; there is little reason for this, as Beuken notes (Isaiah 28–39, 380). There are at least two instances of word play between ‫ חדל‬and ‫חלד‬: Pss 39:5–6 and 49:2, 9. ‫ חלד‬always has a connotation of transitoriness. See further M. Dahood, “‫‘ ָהלֵד‬Cessation’ in Isaiah 38:11,” Bib 52 (1971): 215–216. 28 F. Landy, “Spectrality in the Prologue to Deutero-Isaiah,” in The Desert Will Bloom: Poetic Visions in Isaiah (ed. J. Everson and H. C. P. Kim; Atlanta: SBL, 2009), 131–159. An earlier version was published as “The Ghostly Prelude to Deutero-Isaiah,” BibInt 14 (2006): 332–363. 29 L. S. Fried (“Cyrus the Messiah? The Historical Background to Isaiah 45:1,” HTR 95 [2002]: 373–393) argues for the full transference of Davidic theology onto Cyrus. For the tension with the Deuteronomic law of the king (Deut 17:14–20), see I. D. Wilson, “Yhwh’s

Metaphors for Death and Exile in Isaiah

21

will be part of the Persian Empire. Cyrus does not know YHWH; God is concealed (45:15); his work is invisible. 30 The entire rhetorical force of Deutero-Isaiah is directed against this pervasive reality. Return from exile coexists with the persistence of exile; God acts so that he should be known by the entire world from east to west and particularly by Cyrus, but he remains unknown and perhaps unknowable. The exile is the place from which one comes, especially given the merging of the paths of Abraham and Cyrus, corresponding to their awakening, their journey to consciousness. Exile is the origin; we do not know where we are at home. So there are a number of persistent metaphors: exile is home, the beginning, the matrix, and so on. Conversely, Deutero-Isaiah is characterized by its panoply of interwoven metaphors for the return from exile: the new Exodus, the new Creation, birth from the divine mother, victory over chaos, awakening. The metaphors themselves suggest a poetic endeavour, a passage to the word that lasts for ever, the only thing that lasts for ever, when the imperial powers have faded. 31 One might see here the beginnings of Judaism as a diasporic religion, what Jonathan Z. Smith called “utopian” religion, a dialectic between here, there and anywhere. 32 Jerusalem and the exile, being at home and not-at-home, interchange. The metaphor is then the equivalence of Jerusalem and the world, the new Davidide’s mission to build the city and the establishment of the Persian Empire. There is a recurrent transfer of imagery and ideology. We find this, for instance, in the redefinition of the prophet’s and Israel’s task Anointed: Cyrus, Deuteronomy’s Law of the King, and Yehudite Identity,” in Political Memory in and after the Persian Empire (ed. J. M. Silverman and C. Waerzeggers; Atlanta: SBL, 2015), 325–362. 30 Ian D. Wilson (“Yhwh’s Consciousness: Isaiah 40–48 and Ancient Judean Historical Thought,” VT 66 [2016]: 346–361, 348) argues that the repeated ‫ אל ידעתני‬in Isa 45:4 and 5 refers to the past, on the grounds of the contrast with the yiqtol forms that precede it. However, I think that the structure of the sentences, in which the phrase ‫ אל ידעתני‬is climactic, suggests that it is the (non) result of the processes previously described. Despite all that YHWH has done for him, Cyrus still does not know him. It accords with the dialectic of not knowing /knowing and blindness /vision which pervades these chapters. 31 John Goldingay (“Isaiah 40–55 in the 1990s: Among Other Things Deconstructing, Mystifying, Intertextual, Socio-Critical, Hearer-Involving,” BibInt 5 [1997], 225–246, 229) notes that the utterly intangible and ephemeral word only lasts through writing. 32 J. Z. Smith “The Wobbling Pivot,” in Map is Not Territory: Studies in the History of Religions (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1978), 88–103; and “Map is Not Territory”, in Map is Not Territory, 288–309. Smith subsequently revised his views in “Here, There, and Anywhere,” in Relating Religions: Essays in the Study of Religion (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2005), 323–339. An excellent application of Smith’s theory to the motif of exile in Deutero-Isaiah is J. Linville, “Playing with Maps of Exile: Displacement, Utopia, and Disjunction,” in The Concept of Exile in Ancient Israel and its Historical Contexts (ed. E. Ben Zvi and C. Levin; BZAW 404; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2010), 275–293.

22

Francis Landy

as being a light to the nations in 42:6 and 49:6, the superimposition of the return on the map of the Empire in 11:11 and 66:19, the pervasive ambiguity as to what constitutes Israel: does it include the sinners? Does it include the nations? Is it defined ethnically or by allegiance to YHWH? Is it a regime of truth or a political institution? Is the Temple real or metaphorical, as in 28:16–17? The last text I want to discuss is 49:14–21, especially the last verse. ‫ואמרת בלבבך מי ילד לי את אלה ואני שכולה וגלמודה גלה וסורה ואלה מי‬ ‫גדל הן אני נשארתי לבדי אלה איפה הם‬, “And you said in your heart, ‘Who bore these for me? And I was bereaved and forlorn, exiled and wandering, and these, who raised them? I was left solitary and these, where are they?’” Zion was in exile; the exile is both that of her children, so that a hypostatized Zion accompanies the exiles on their wanderings, like the later Shekhinah, and suggests too that she is exiled from her children and her home, an implication amplified by the image of divorce in 50:1–2. She is the bereaved mother, a familiar figure of lament; the exile is conflated with death. We are back to the metaphorical equivalence of exile and death with which we started. The exiled children are metaphorically dead, or they are the survivors of the dead, who are mourned, for instance, in 51:17–21. As survivors, they are spectral, ghosts of an irrecoverable past; the fantasy is the mother who imagines that her children have come back to her. According to the familiar psychoanalytic theory of mourning, one leaves part of oneself with the dead; this is especially so with traumatic catastrophes, like the Shoah. The irony, however, is that it is the dead children themselves who are ventriloquizing their mother grieving for them, through the prophet. Mother Zion, moreover, is really dead, only surviving through the laments of her dead children. 33 The dead children lament for the dead mother, who laments for them. Except that the mother is also alive, whether metaphorically, as the exiled children, or through Cyrus’ rebuilding program and thus as the Persian imperium, or in God’s dreams. The children imagine being reunited with the lost mother. However, the fantasy of the mother’s death is combined with one that is even more terrifying: that of the mother who forgets her children. This is how the passage begins in v. 15: “Will a woman forget her infant? ... Yes, even these will forget ...”. There of course it is presented rhetorically as an impossibility, but here it becomes actual: “Who gave birth to these? ... Who raised them? ...Where are they?” The 33

Moreover, as John Goldingay (The Message of Isaiah 40–55: A Literary-Theological Commentary [London: T & T Clark, 2005], 387) points out, she herself is a child in v. 15.

Metaphors for Death and Exile in Isaiah

23

mother who does not recognize her children or even remember giving birth renders home alien in an absolute sense, in that the children are orphans from birth. Exile is forgetfulness. The passage is framed by joy, in part because it is God speaking, claiming parental responsibility, and telling Zion that they are the children of her bereavement (‫)בני שכליך‬, and partly because Zion’s apparent disclaimer is clearly preliminary to their acknowledgement. She says, as it were, “I can’t believe it! It’s not true!” But it is true. Nevertheless, in the next verses the nations take over the maternal function, as they do in the parallel passage in the final chapter of the book (66:12–13). So who then is the real mother? It may be God, the super-mother, who remembers when everyone else has forgotten. But God too is the subject of anxiety and grief. Zion thinks God has forgotten her; God holds the memory of Zion’s walls “before me for ever” (v. 15): the walls that signify its desolation. For God too, Zion is an empty space. Moreover, God is ambivalent, creating darkness and evil (45:7), ultimately responsible for the desolation for which he grieves. So we have three mothers, all of whom signify a different kind of exile. God brings death as well as life, destroys the matrix where his children are born; exile is from the womb as well as death. Zion is the spectral mother, who cannot remember her maternity. The nations are surrogate mothers, figuring Israel as foster-children. I have looked at metaphors for exile and death, and how exile and death function as twinned metaphors, to distract from the central trauma, the gap at the centre of the world of Isaiah, and I have explored how they permeate the imaginary landscapes and linguistic domains of the book. For example, in chapter 5 exile and death characterize the entire corrupt and normative world of Judah; the command to prevent communication in chapter 6 delays comprehension until the final parousia. In particular, the metaphors systemically transpose the poetics and politics of the first part of the book onto the second, so that Cyrus becomes the new Davidide, Zion is in exile, Judaism is diasporic as well as locative, the glorious return and the grand metanarrative is superimposed on the persistence of exile, estrangement and the inclusion of the nations. Home is never where we started from. The root for exile, ‫גלה‬, is the same as that for revelation, though

24

Francis Landy

usually appearing with different grammatical constructs. 34 What is the difference between the two? Sometimes none, as in the exile and exposure of Babylon in 47:2–3. What may be revealed may be the end of the exile, as in 40:5: '‫ונגלה כבוד ה‬, “The glory of YHWH will be revealed.” The proximity of the two may suggest imminence; revelation is ever-present, a possibility we find repeated throughout Isaiah, for example through Janus parallelism. ‫ ונגלה‬looks back over the experience of exile, and over the journey that God is about to undertake from Babylon to Jerusalem, which is announced in 40:3, and it looks forward to the time when “all flesh” will recognize that “the mouth of YHWH has spoken” (40:5). But it may also be interdependence; revelation, the plenitude of glory, only comes about through exile, through this immensely long and difficult journey. The book culminates in the return to Zion, which is also to the mother and to infantile dependence (66:12). The end of the book is homecoming, as if speech is exile. Of course, the ending is indeterminate: “all flesh” properly worships, but it also looks on with horror at the ever rotting corpses of the sinners (66:24). The new heavens and new earth, the new creation announced in 65:17 and 66:22, are impressed with memories of the old, since the sinners are representatives of the reprobates throughout the book. 35 The formulaic “And it shall be from new moon (‫ )חדש‬to new moon, and Sabbath to Sabbath” in 66:23, playing on the word for “new” (‫ )חדש‬as well as the festival of creation, suggests ever repeated cycles, that the end is not the end. All the nations come to worship YHWH in Zion, just as they travel to learn his ways in 2:2–4, and, at least according to one interpretation, he chooses priests and Levites from among them (66:19). 36 Israel and the nations are indistinguishable; Zion

34 D. K. H. Gray (“A New Analysis of a Key Hebrew Term: The Semantics of Galah (‘to go into exile’)” TynBul 58 [2007]: 43–59) thinks that there is no linguistic connection between the two meanings of galah, and that any that are inferred betray theological interests. However, he does not acknowledge that it is characteristic of poetry in general to find metaphorical links between unrelated homonyms. 35 For instance, the “rebels” (‫ )פשעים‬in 66:24 recollect the sons who “rebel” (‫ )פשעו‬in 1:2. 36 Claus Westermann (Isaiah 40–66: A Commentary [trans. D. G. M. Stalker; Old Testament Library; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1969], 426), Shalom Paul, (Isaiah 40–66 [Eerdmans Critical Commentary; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012], 629), and Ulrich Berges (Jesaja, 168), represent this position. Marvin Sweeney (Isaiah 40–66 [FOTL 19; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2016], 384), on the contrary, thinks that they are chosen from the exiled Levites. See also J. S. Croattó, Imaginar el Futuro estructura retórica y querigma del Tercer Isaías (Buenos Aires: Lumen, 2007), 28 and passim.

Metaphors for Death and Exile in Isaiah

25

is the universal home, comparable, for instance in 11:6–8, to Eden. 37 From being a dystopia where death swallows up everything, in 5:14, Zion becomes the place where death is swallowed up forever (25:7), a hope repeated in different forms through the book, for example in extraordinary longevity (65:20). The word persists from generation after generation, long after the book is closed (59:21); one will continue to mourn for Zion, even when one is there (62:6–7); exile never ends, even when it ends.

37 Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer (“Death or Conversion? The Gentiles in the Concluding Chapters of Isaiah and the Book of the Twelve,” JTS 68 [2017], 1–22) suggests that the inclusive vision is later than the particularist one, and has been artfully inserted into the penultimate position in the respective corpora. These passages could equally be seen synchronically, as part of a dialectic.

The Trope of Scattering in Isaiah A Reading of Isaiah 11:11–16 and 27:7–13 Frederik Poulsen The Book of Isaiah contains several fascinating images of exile. 1 In addition to slavery, captivity, spiritual blindness, and abandonment, we encounter the idea of worldwide scattering: the people of Israel have been scattered throughout the entire earth. In the opening chapter of the second major part of the book, the powerful proclamation of YHWH as his people’s shepherd presupposes this idea. Like a shepherd, YHWH will gather his dispersed flock and lead them home (40:11). Isa 43:1–7 likewise depicts YHWH’s ingathering of his people from far away, and Isa 49:8–12 contains a detailed description of YHWH’s renewed guidance of his liberated people in their return from the four corners of the earth. In addition to these examples, two passages in the first part of the book contain images of geographical displacement and worldwide dispersion: Isa 11:11–16 and 27:7–13. Both passages employ the trope of scattering in their vision of YHWH’s future deliverance and ingathering of his dispersed. They look beyond the time of divine judgment to a return of the people from exile and the restoration of the one unified people of God. With regard to the overall composition of Isaiah, it is noteworthy that these visions occur at the end of larger literary blocks. The eschatological expectations of Isa 11:11–16 (along with Isa 12) conclude Isa 1–12, whereas the hope for future gathering in Jerusalem in Isa 27:12–13 concludes Isa 24–27. 2 In the narrative flow of the book, 1 This article draws on Chapter 5 in F. Poulsen, The Black Hole in Isaiah: A Study of Exile as a Literary Theme (FAT 125; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2019). 2 Several interpreters assume that these passages at the end of major sections are part of an editorial effort to establish literary coherence within the emerging Book of Isaiah; see R. E. Clements, Isaiah 1–39 (NCBC; London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1980), 223; J. T. Hibbard, Intertextuality in Isaiah 24–27: The Reuse and Evocation of Earlier Texts and Traditions (FAT II /16; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006), 194–195. Odil Hannes Steck, for instance, has argued that Isa 11:11–16 and 27:12–13, along with 35:1–10 and 62:10–12, reflect the same editorial strand from the late Persian or Hellenistic period; see O. H. Steck, Bereitete Heimkehr. Jesaja 35 als redaktionelle Brücke zwischen dem Ersten und dem Zweiten

28

Frederik Poulsen

these passages constitute small glimpses of hope that point to the reality of divine restoration proclaimed so intensely in its latter part. This article opens with an overview of the literary trope of scattering in the Old Testament and an examination of three key terms before turning to a close reading of Isa 11:11–16 and 27:7–13.

1. The Trope of Scattering in the Old Testament Scattering is a key theme in the tower of Babel story (Gen 11:1–9). To reinforce their unity and to avoid dispersion, the inhabitants of Babel intend to build a giant tower. Ironically, God’s punishment consists in exactly what they feared: “YHWH scattered [‫ָפץ‬ ֶ ‫ ]ַויּ‬them abroad from there over the face of all the earth” (11:8). The dispersion of all peoples is one main point of the narrative as underlined by its final words, repeating and emphasizing the statement from the preceding verse: “from there YHWH scattered them [‫יצם‬ ָ ‫]ה ִפ‬ ֱ abroad over the face of all the earth” (11:9). “From there” (‫שּׁם‬ ָ ‫)מ‬ ִ suggests the idea of a centre from which the inhabitants move out into all cardinal directions. It is a movement from the centre to the periphery, that is, from unity to universal dispersion. Scattering is a common image of exile, especially in Deuteronomy and the prophets. 3 Analogous to the tower of Babel story, the biblical authors regard the unity and sovereignty of Israel as having been destroyed by the scattering of the people to foreign countries. Three Hebrew terms (‫פוץ‬, ‫זרה‬, and ‫ )נדח‬usually occur in texts dealing with the topic of scattering and dispersion. 4 The translators of the Septuagint matched forms of all Jesaja (SB 121; Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1985), 60–68, 101–103; Studien zu Tritojesaja (BZAW 203; Berlin and New York: De Gruyter, 1991), 20–27, 143–166. Analogously to Steck, J. Lust, “Exile and Diaspora: Gathering from Dispersion in Ezekiel,” in Lectures et Relectures de la Bible (ed. J. M. Auwers and A. Wénin; BETL 144; Leuven: Leuven University Press and Uitgeverij Peeters, 1999), 99–122, 113–121 claims that passages in Ezekiel alluding to the gathering of the worldwide Diaspora (e. g. Ezek 11:14–21; 20:31–48; 34:11–17; 36:23b–38; 37:15–28) were composed and inserted by an editor in the late Persian or Hellenistic period. 3 See e. g. J. Gile, “Deuteronomy and Ezekiel’s Theology of Exile,” in For Our Good Always: Studies on the Message and Influence of Deuteronomy in Honor of Daniel I. Block (ed. J. S. DeRouchie, J. Gile and K. J. Turner; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2013), 287–306; K. J. Turner, “Deuteronomy’s Theology of Exile,” in For Our Good Always: Studies on the Message and Influence of Deuteronomy in Honor of Daniel I. Block (ed. J. S. DeRouchie, J. Gile and K. J. Turner; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2013), 189–220. 4 In addition to these words, the verb ‫“( פזר‬to scatter”), which does not occur in Isaiah, also denotes the scattering of things (e. g. bones) and peoples; cf. the reference in Esther 3:8

The Trope of Scattering in Isaiah

29

three Hebrew roots with the verb διασπείρω (“to scatter”) or the noun διασπορά (“dispersion”), which lies behind the modern word “Diaspora.” 5 The first term ‫ פוץ‬is a key word in Gen 11:1–9. It occurs 66 times in the Old Testament, frequently denoting removal to foreign places. The basic meaning is “to overflow” or “to spread.” Gen 10:18 informs readers that the tribes of the Canaanites dispersed or spread abroad. In a few cases, the term denotes the scattering of fine or light material, for instance, the scattering of dill in the agricultural parable in Isa 28:25. The term further denotes the spreading of peoples (e. g. 1 Sam 11:11) and in particular of enemies. 6 Further associations with war are found in the Minor Prophets: Nah 2:2 refers to the attacker as “a shatterer” (‫)מ ִפיץ‬, ֵ and Hab 3:14 relates that foreign princes came like a whirlwind to scatter the people. Interestingly, as a result of the Babylonian assault against Jerusalem, the Judaean army “was scattered” from its king (2 Kgs 25:5; cf. Jer 52:8). Several instances of the term occur in the context of deportation and exile. In the Pentateuch, Gen 11:1–9 uses it to depict worldwide scattering and Gen 49:7 to anticipate the Levites’ future exile within the land. Deuteronomy employs the term three times in Moses’ speech to his people on the threshold to the Promised Land (4:27; 28:64; 30:3). In 4:27, Moses warns them: “YHWH will scatter [‫ְה ִפיץ‬ ֵ ‫ ]ו‬you among the peoples; only a few of you will be left among the nations where YHWH will lead you.” Furthermore, in the climax of the treaty-like passage of Deut 28, scattering among the nations is one of a series of severe punishments that will strike the people. In 28:64, Moses states: “YHWH will scatter you [‫יצָך‬ ְ ‫ֶה ִפ‬ ֱ ‫]ו‬ among all peoples, from one end of the earth to the other.” Notable here is the explicit thought of a worldwide scattering, extending to the remotest areas of the earth. The prophets use the term several times. Isaiah refers to “the dispersed of Judah” (‫ְהוּדה‬ ָ ‫ְפצוֹת י‬ ֻ ‫ ;נ‬11:12) and imagines a scattering of the inhabitants of the earth (24:1). In Zephaniah, YHWH refers to his worshippers as “the daughter of my dispersed ones” (‫ת־פּוּצי‬ ַ ‫;בּ‬ ַ 3:10). More prominently, Jeremiah and Ezekiel frequently use the term to denote the people’s exile in foreign lands. 7 Examples include YHWH’s declaration in Jer 9:15: “I

to “a certain people scattered [‫]מ ֻפזָּר‬ ְ and dispersed among the peoples” and in Joel 4:2 to the punishment of all the nations because “they scattered” (‫)פּזְּרוּ‬ ִ YHWH’s people. 5 See the review of διασπορά in Lust, “Exile and Diaspora,” 103–111. 6 See Num 10:35; 2 Sam 22:15; Ps 18:15; 68:2; 144:6; Isa 41:16. 7 Jer 9:15; 10:21; 13:24; 18:17; 23:1–2; 30:11; 40:15; Ezek 12:15; 20:23, 34, 41; 22:15; 28:25; 34:5–6, 12, 21; 36:19.

30

Frederik Poulsen

will scatter them among nations that neither they nor their ancestors have known”; and in Ezek 11:16: “I scattered them among the nations.” The term is sometimes associated with the scattering of animals: the people are compared to a flock of sheep that has been scattered. In 1 Kgs 22:17, Micaiah envisages the defeat of the nation: “I saw all Israel scattered [‫ְפ ִצים‬ ֹ ‫ ]נ‬on the mountains, like sheep that have no shepherd.” The lack of a shepherd to guide and protect the flock reappears in Zech 13:7: “Strike the shepherd, that the sheep may be scattered [‫פוּצי ָן‬ ֶ ‫]וּת‬.” ְ Employing this kind of imagery, Jeremiah compares the people’s kings to bad shepherds who have destroyed and scattered the sheep of YHWH’s pasture and driven them away (Jer 23:1–2; cf. 10:21). Ezekiel intensively develops this image in his major chapter on true and false shepherds, Ezek 34. YHWH states: “So they were scattered [ ‫פוּציָנה‬ ֶ ‫ַתּ‬ ְ ‫]ו‬, because there was no shepherd; and they became food for all the wild animals and were scattered [‫פוּציָנה‬ ֶ ‫ַתּ‬ ְ ‫]ו‬. My sheep wandered over all the mountains and on every high hill; my sheep were scattered [‫ ]ָנפֹצוּ‬over all the face of the earth, with no one to search or seek for them” (34:5–6; cf. vv. 12 and 21). Again, it is significant to note that the scattering covers the entire earth rather than a single region. The second and near-synonymous term ‫“( זרה‬to scatter”) occurs 39 times. 8 It is used for scattering or spreading material, for instance, sulphur (Job 18:15), bones (Ezek 6:5), or dung (Mal 2:3), and more abstractly knowledge (Prov 15:7). In a handful of cases it denotes the act of winnowing, that is, the separation of the chaff from the grain by the wind (e. g. Ruth 3:2; Isa 30:24; Jer 4:11). The removal of enemies in Isa 41:16 picks up this imagery: “you shall winnow them and the wind shall carry them away” (cf. Jer 49:32, 36; 52:2). Several instances of ‫ זרה‬explicitly occur in the context of exile. In Lev 26:33 punishment for idolatry consists of the people being scattered among the nations (cf. Ps 106:27). Similarly, 1 Kgs 14:15 predicts YHWH’s punishment of his people: “he will root up Israel out of this good land that he gave to their ancestors, and scatter them [‫ֵרם‬ ָ‫ ] ְוז‬beyond the Euphrates.” 8 The term parallels ‫ פוץ‬in hiphil seven times in Ezekiel: 12:15; 20:23; 22:15; 36:19 referring to the exile of YHWH’s people, and 29:12; 30:23, 26 referring to the exile of the Egyptians. G. Widengren, “Yahweh’s Gathering of the Dispersed,” in In the Shelter of Elyon: Essays on Ancient Palestinian Life and Literature in Honor of G. W. Ahlström (ed. W. B. Barrick and J. R. Spencer; JSOTSup 31; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1984), 227–245, 229, 233 considers these instances as rendering a fixed formula: “I will scatter thee /them among the nations, and disperse thee /them in the countries.” See also the discussion in Gile, “Ezekiel’s Theology of Exile,” 289–291.

The Trope of Scattering in Isaiah

31

The motif of winnowing appears in YHWH’s deportation of his people in Jer 15:7: “I have winnowed them [‫ְרם‬ ֵ‫ָאז‬ ֶ ‫ ]ו‬with a winnowing fork.” In Ezekiel, the term occurs frequently in the sense of exile. 9 An example is the portrayal of the defeat of Judah and its king in Ezek 12. YHWH states: “I will scatter [‫ָרה‬ ֶ‫]אז‬ ֱ to every wind all who are around him, his helpers and all his troops [...] they shall know that I am YHWH when I disperse them [‫יצי‬ ִ ‫]בּ ֲה ִפ‬ ַ among the nations and scatter them [‫יתי‬ ִ ‫ֵר‬ ִ ‫ ] ְוז‬through the countries” (12:14–15). Finally, Zechariah speaks of various military powers as four horns that have scattered Judah, Israel, and Jerusalem (2:1–4). As was the case with the former verb, a few instances use ‫ זרה‬for the scattering of sheep. Again, the language is figurative to show the destiny of the people. Ps 44:12 reads: “You have made us like sheep for slaughter, and have scattered us [‫יתנוּ‬ ָ ‫ֵר‬ ִ ‫ ]ז‬among the nations.” Moreover, in Jer 31:10 YHWH’s renewed activity as shepherd of his people is set up against past scattering: “He who scattered [‫ָרה‬ ֵ‫]מז‬ ְ Israel will gather him, and will keep him as a shepherd a flock.” The shepherding of animals is an important aspect of the third term ‫נדח‬. It occurs 58 times and its basic meaning is “to push (away),” “to banish,” and “to scatter.” The sense of leading or driving someone, often in the wrong direction, occurs in a handful of texts. 10 As an example of religious seduction, 2 Kgs 17:21 relates that “Jeroboam drove Israel from YHWH,” resulting in the Assyrian capture of Samaria. The wisdom motif of being led astray from the right way is explicit in the condemnation in Deut 13:6 of those who “drove” the people from the way in which YHWH commanded them to walk. The association of the verb with animals is present in Deut 22:1. According to this verse, one is obliged to take a “sheep straying away” (‫ִדּ ִחים‬ ָ‫ )נ‬back to its owner. Furthermore, Isa 13:14 states that the Babylonians will flee “like a hunted gazelle [‫]כּ ְצ ִבי ֻמָדּח‬, ִ or like sheep with no one to gather them.” This sense of the word is used metaphorically to denote YHWH’s banishment of his people. Jeremiah especially picks up this language to express the idea of scattering. 11 Almost as a repeated formula, YHWH speaks about all the places, nations or lands where he will drive or has driven his people (e. g. Jer 29:14). The image of the people as a dispersed flock recurs in Jer 50:17: “Israel is a hunted sheep that lions 9

Ezek 5:10, 12; 6:8; 12:14–15; 20:23; 22:15; 36:19. Deut 4:19; 13:6, 11, 14; 30:17; 2 Kgs 17:21; 2 Chr 21:11; Ps 62:5; Prov 7:21. 11 Jer 8:3; 16:15; 23:2, 3, 8; 24:9; 27:10, 15; 29:14, 18; 32:37; 40:12; 43:5; 46:28. Cf. Ezek 4:13; Dan 9:7. 10

32

Frederik Poulsen

have driven away.” 12 The miserable destiny of those banished is expressed in Isa 8:22 where the people will be “thrust” (‫ֻדּח‬ ָ‫)מנ‬ ְ into thick darkness. Moreover, Isaiah refers to the exiles as “the outcasts of Israel” (‫ִשָׂר ֵאל‬ ְ ‫;נ ְִד ֵחי י‬ 11:16; 56:8; see below). A similar expression is used about Moab in 16:3–4 where “the outcasts” (‫ִדּ ִחים‬ ָ‫ )נ‬parallel “fugitive” (‫)נֵדד‬. ֹ 13 To sum up, all three verbs when denoting the removal of peoples carry negative connotations. In many cases, scattering is the result of divine punishment. Dispersion goes along with forced migration and is interpreted as expulsion or banishment. The agricultural and pastoral associations of the verbs are significant as they say something about the object being removed. Forced away into exile, the people of YHWH are as light, powerless, and insignificant as the seed or dill which the farmer scatters across his fields. They can easily be spread. The people are seen as “as unrecognizable and utterly helpless as ashes in the wind.” 14 Furthermore, the recurrent image of the people as a lost and dispersed flock, far away from its home pasture, confirms the idea of weakness and vulnerability. Finally, it is worth noticing that in several cases the people are scattered throughout the nations and foreign lands rather than to one particular country (e. g. Babylon). It is a worldwide dispersion, even to the ends of earth. In most cases, scattering to the remotest areas of the world is either a threat or a fait accompli. Significantly, as we shall also see in Isaiah, the description of the scattered people is often accompanied or overruled by a promise of gathering. 15 The divine shepherd who scatters his flock is also the one who gathers it again and brings it back. Whereas scattering involves a movement from the centre to the periphery, ingathering reverses this movement: the people will come from all corners of the world to be reunited in one place. A final illustration before we turn to Isaiah is Deut 30:1–4. These verses imagine that the people are among all the nations. Here, they will reflect on what caused their present situation and return to YHWH in repentance and faith. Then God will restore their fortunes and gather them from all the peoples among whom he once scattered them. Verse 4 12

Cf. Isa 40:11; Jer 23:2, 3; Ezek 34:4, 16; Micah 4:6; Zeph 3:19. Other passages employ ‫ נדח‬to denote the banishment or removal of enemies; see Ps 5:11 (the wicked); Jer 49:5 (Ammon); 49:36 (Elam); Joel 2:20 (the enemy from the north). 14 A.-M. Wetter, “Balancing the Scales: The Construction of the Exile as Countertradition in the Bible,” in From Babylon to Eternity: The Exile Remembered and Constructed in Text and Tradition (B. Becking et al.; London: Equinox, 2009), 34–56, 38. 15 Cf. e. g. Jer 23:3; 29:14; 31:10; Ezek 11:16–17; see also Widengren, “Gathering,” 227–234. 13

The Trope of Scattering in Isaiah

33

emphasizes the divine intention to collect them wherever they are: “Even if you are exiled [‫חָך‬ ֲ ‫ִדּ‬ ַ‫ ]נ‬to the ends of the heavens [‫שּׁ ָמיִם‬ ָ ‫]בּ ְק ֵצה ַה‬, ִ from there YHWH your God will gather you, and from there he will bring you back.” Even in the most distant places of the earth – at the farthest edge of the heavens – YHWH will appear to gather his flock.

2. Isaiah 11:11–16 The themes of scattering and gathering pervade Isa 11:11–16. YHWH’s renewed engagement in the history of his people includes an ingathering of those who have been scattered all over the world. An essential element in the reunion of the dispersed people is the reconciliation of the Northern and Southern Kingdoms which for a long time have existed as scattered groups. To make the return possible YHWH will remove all obstacles and establish a highway for all those who remain in the Diaspora. The passage constitutes the concluding part of Isa 11. This chapter, which depicts the messianic king and his eschatological realm, concludes the larger block on the encounters with the Assyrian Empire (5:25–11:16) before the final hymn of thanksgiving in Isa 12. In contrast to the portrait of the Assyrian king in 10:5–34, Isa 11 as a whole offers an alternative idea of righteous rule. Whereas vv. 1–9 focus on the royal figure and the astonishing vision of peace on YHWH’s holy mountain, vv. 11–16 focus on the return and gathering after exile; v. 10 ties the two oracles together as a redactional bridge. 16 Isa 11:11–16 appears as a unity. References to YHWH’s hand and the empires of Egypt and Assyria along with the phrase “the remnant of his people who remain (from Assyria)” (‫ִשּׁ ֵאר ֵמ ַאשּׁוּר‬ ָ ‫שׁר י‬ ֶ ‫)שׁ ָאר ַעמּוֹ ֲא‬ ְ frame the unit. Three sub-units form a chiastic structure: vv. 11–12 and vv. 15–16 envisage the return from the Diaspora, whereas vv. 13–14 illustrate the reunification of the two kingdoms and their joint retaking of lost territory. In v. 11, YHWH’s renewed, powerful intervention is poetically expressed as his extending his hand. Curiously, his extended hand is said to appear “yet a second time” (‫)שׁנִית‬. ֵ Hans Wildberger argues that this second time refers to a subsequent wave of returnees, following the first

16

See the discussion in J. Stromberg, Isaiah after Exile: The Author of Third Isaiah as Reader and Redactor of the Book (OTM; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 183–191.

34

Frederik Poulsen

wave in the beginning of the Persian period. 17 Hardly anything in the text warrants this interpretation. Other interpreters propose that “a second time” offers an allusion to the exodus from Egypt, casting the action of v. 11 as a second exodus (cf. vv. 15–16). 18 The literary context in Isaiah, however, offers a third and better option. 19 In the preceding chapters, YHWH’s outstretched hand is a strong metaphor for his anger and destructive purpose (5:25; 9:11, 16, 20; 10:4). The second raising of his hand here implies a shift in perspective: “at the first, God raised his hand in judgement of his people, but now he will raise it to initiate their salvation.” 20 YHWH once extended his hand to destroy and scatter. Now he will extend it to redeem and gather. YHWH’s renewed engagement concerns “the remnant that is left of his people” (‫ִשּׁ ֵאר‬ ָ ‫שׁר י‬ ֶ ‫ת־שׁ ָאר ַעמֹּו ֲא‬ ְ ‫)א‬ ֶ in a long list of places. In contrast to other texts in Isaiah, our passage does not locate this remnant on the holy mountain of Zion (e. g. 4:2–6), but in the worldwide Diaspora. It seems to presume a situation where the city and land have been completely destroyed by the judging hand of God and where the inhabitants that once dwelt in one place have been completely scattered. Nevertheless, the overall viewpoint of the passage is the holy mountain in Jerusalem (cf. 11:9). YHWH’s salvific activity goes out from here as from the centre of a compass to the people scattered all over the world. Clearly there is a movement from the periphery back to this centre. The function of mentioning no less than eight ancient geographical locations is to create an image of completeness like “the four corners of the earth” in the following verse. The eight names spell out the points of the compass and represent the borders of the known world. 21 The great empire Assyria, along with Elam and Shinar (or Babylon), lies to the east. The 17 H. Wildberger, Jesaja. 1. Teilband, Jesaja 1–12 (BK X /1; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1972), 467–468. 18 E.g. E. J. Young, The Book of Isaiah. Volume I, Chapters 1–18 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), 394; J. N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1–39 (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986), 287. 19 Cf. C. R. Seitz, Isaiah 1–39 (IBC; Louisville: John Knox Press, 1993), 108; W. A. M. Beuken, Jesaja 1–12 (trans. U. Berges; HThKAT; Freiburg: Herder, 2003), 318. 20 H. G. M. Williamson, The Book Called Isaiah: Deutero-Isaiah’s Role in Composition and Redaction (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994), 132. 21 Many interpreters regard only Assyria and perhaps Egypt to be original (cf. v. 16). Clements (Isaiah 1–39, 126), for instance, claims that an editor later added the subsequent references to accommodate other places where Jews were dwelling; in fact, “such a gloss marks one of the latest additions to the entire book.” Even if this is true, the idea of the widest possible Diaspora is already present in the phrase “from the four corners of the earth” in v. 12, which few, if any, scholars, as far as I can tell, deem to be secondary.

The Trope of Scattering in Isaiah

35

other great empire Egypt, along with Pathros and Ethiopia, lies to the south. The Syrian city Hamath lies to the north. “The coastlands of the sea” (‫)איֵּי ַהיָּם‬ ִ refers to a place in the Mediterranean Sea to the west, either a coastal area or an island. Although it is plausible that Jews lived at many of these places, listing them serves another function: “the purpose is figurative, attempting to say that God is able to restore his people from everywhere.” 22 The motif of concentration is further elaborated in v. 12. The four lines form a concentric structure with references to “nations” and “the earth” in the outer frame and the gathering of Israel and Judah in the inner parallel. YHWH is the subject of the three verbs. Initially, he will raise “a signal for the nations” (‫)נֵס לַגּוֹיִם‬, perhaps to alert them that the time has come to let go of the dispersed people and bring them home (cf. Isa 49:22). 23 As noted, the reference to “the four corners of the earth” (‫ַא ְר ַבּע ַכּנְפוֹת‬ ‫)ה ָאֶרץ‬ ָ suggests completeness. The number “four” frequently symbolizes wholeness, in particular in reference to ultimate destruction, for instance, in Ezek 7:2: “The end has come upon the four corners of the land.” The people have been scattered to every wind, but now YHWH will gather them. 24 The idea of entirety is also present in the designation of the people at the centre of v. 12. They are called “the banished of Israel” (‫ִשָׂר ֵאל‬ ְ ‫ )נ ְִד ֵחי י‬25 and “the dispersed of Judah” (‫ְהוּדה‬ ָ ‫ְפצוֹת י‬ ֻ ‫)נ‬. Notable is the feminine form of “dispersed” which along with the masculine form of “banished” express entirety – men and women. Israel and Judah either stand for the two kingdoms soon to be united (cf. v. 13) or are synonymous to articulate the one people now being gathered. In a sophisticated manner, vv. 13–14 develop the themes of scattering and gathering. A people that once were scattered into two groups willbecome one again. The Northern Kingdom of Ephraim and the Southern Kingdom of Judah will be reconciled and regain their strength and terri-

22

Oswalt, Isaiah 1–39, 287. An alternative but dubious approach regards the “nations” as the geographical realm of the Diaspora where the scattered Israelites dwell; see J. S. Croatto, “The ‘Nations’ in the Salvific Oracles of Isaiah,” VT 55 (2005): 143–161, 158–159; cf. my comments in F. Poulsen, God, His Servant, and the Nations in Isaiah 42:1–9: Biblical Theological Reflections after Brevard S. Childs and Hans Hübner (FAT II /73; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), 198–205. 24 See Jesper Høgenhaven’s contribution to this volume. 25 In addition to this verse, the phrase ‫ִשָׂר ֵאל‬ ְ ‫ נ ְִד ֵחי י‬occurs only in Ps 147:2 where the gathering of the outcasts parallels the rebuilding of Jerusalem, and in Isa 56:8 which likely adopts and reformulates 11:12; see Stromberg, Isaiah after Exile, 82–86. 23

36

Frederik Poulsen

torial dominion as in the days of the great King David. 26 There will be no more division and tension between the two houses. Perhaps this political reconciliation presupposes the ingathering of the dispersed people as presented in vv. 11–12. Other prophetic texts lend support to the idea that it is the very act of returning to Zion that generates reunification. 27 In Jeremiah the people of Israel and the people of Judah become one as they return from the land of north (i. e. the exile) and seek YHWH on Zion (3:18; 50:4–5). Likewise, in Ezek 37:15–28 YHWH gathers his scattered people and makes them into “one nation” (‫)גוֹי ֶא ָחד‬. The fundamental movement from periphery to centre – from worldwide scattering to reunification on the holy mountain – is reversed in v. 14. The restored unity will manifest itself in an outward-moving expansion of the territory of the new empire. The people will hunt down their neighbours like a bird of prey and together they will plunder them. Lost control over the surrounding regions will be regained, that is, regions which according to memory had formerly been conquered by King David: Philistia (2 Sam 8:1), Edom (2 Sam 8:13–14), Moab (2 Sam 8:2), and Ammon (2 Sam 10:1–5). 28 Verse 14 thus views the extent of the new empire in light of the old Davidic kingdom. Moreover, mentioning exactly four geographical names emphasizes the idea of completeness: Israel is gathered from distant countries, from the four corners of the earth (cf. v. 12), to rule its four neighbours. Verses 15–16 depict the removal of obstacles so that the scattered people can return. The scene is that of a battle and the language is vivid and graphic. The main hindrance to the people’s return is water. There seems to be an allusion to the waters of chaos which YHWH fought against in ancient days (Isa 51:10; Ps 74:13–14). It is a power that once again needs to be broken. The verbs employed designate powerful and war-like actions. YHWH will “utterly destroy” the tongue of Egypt, literally “put it under ban” (‫ חרם‬in hiphil). Another intriguing option, however, is to derive the verb from a homonymic root meaning “to split or divide,” that is, YHWH will split the tongue of Egypt. This sense would offer a good parallel to the action in the second half of the verse.

26

See Cian Power’s contribution to this volume. See F. Poulsen, Representing Zion: Judgement and Salvation in the Old Testament (CIS; London and New York: Routledge, 2015), 169–172. 28 Wildberger, Jesaja 1–12, 472–473. Beuken (Jesaja 1–12, 320) refers to the passage as “eine Reise in die Geschichte Israels.” 27

The Trope of Scattering in Isaiah

37

YHWH will wave his hand over “the River” (probably the Euphrates). This act is accompanied by – or perhaps imitates – the wind blowing back and forth and making things move from side to side (e. g. trees in Isa 7:2). The wind has the force to divide and scatter and serves as a divine agent of punishment. The final result of YHWH’s destructive acts is spelled out in the final line: he will split the River into seven channels or wadis. The verb means “to strike or smite” (‫ נכה‬in hiphil), suggesting that YHWH beats the River with the wind as his instrument (cf. Isa 10:26; Zech 10:11). As a consequence, the River will be divided into seven minor streams. The number “seven” symbolically refers to completeness (cf. “four” in vv. 12 and 14 above) and points to the thoroughness of YHWH’s powerful intervention. Not without irony, the verse reverses the motif of scattering: the dispersed Israel will become one great people by returning home, but only by the division of one great river into many. Moreover, just as the sea is split into two to establish a way through it, two houses are fused into one by crossing it. The motif of the way is indicated by the final phrase of v. 15. YHWH will make a way for or guide (‫ דרך‬in hiphil) his people on their journey. Verse 16 develops this theme by introducing the central term “highway” (‫)מ ִס ָלּה‬. ְ The sole occurrence of this word in Jeremiah (31:21) explicitly links it to exile: road markers and signposts will mark the highway by which the people went into exile, for later they will return by the very same way. In Isa 49:11 and 62:10 the highway occurs in close connection with the return of the scattered people.

3. Isaiah 27:7–13 Isaiah 27:7–13 reflects on the experience of exile and proclaims a strong hope for a future ingathering of those who have been driven away. YHWH scattered his people with a destructive wind but, eventually, he will gather them one by one and the restored people will worship him on the holy mountain in Jerusalem. The passage concludes the section of Isa 24–27, commonly referred to as the “Apocalypse of Isaiah.” Characteristic of these chapters is the cosmic and largely dehistoricized perspective, focusing on the forthcoming devastating judgment of the earth and its inhabitants, and moving towards a future of salvation and redemption. References to worldwide destruction and cosmic scattering in 24:1–3 and the ingathering and

38

Frederik Poulsen

restoration of Israel in 27:12–13 frame the section. According to its opening verses, YHWH will lay waste the earth and “scatter its inhabitants” (‫יה‬ ָ ‫ֹשׁ ֶב‬ ְ ‫ְה ִפיץ י‬ ֵ ‫ ;)ו‬no one will escape it. Scholars generally recognize the composite nature of Isa 27, and proposals for diachronic separation of units differ widely (the most extreme proposal suggests no less than seven independent units: vv. 1, 2–5, 6, 7–8, 9–11, 12, 13). 29 From a synchronic point of view, Isa 27 consists of three units. Verse 1 depicts YHWH’s victory over Leviathan, “the twisting serpent,” as a prelude to restoration. Verses 2–6 contain an allegorical representation of Israel as YHWH’s vineyard, which he cares for and protects, and a short explanation of the allegory (cf. 5:1–7). Verses 7–13 consist of reflections on the experience of exile and a hope for future gathering and restoration of the scattered people. The opening unit (v. 1) and the end of the third unit (vv. 12–13) form an inclusio (notice the repetition of ‫ַבּיּוֹם‬ ‫)ההוּא‬. ַ Perhaps the great call for gathering at the end of the chapter is thought to emerge from YHWH’s killing of the chaos monster of the sea (cf. Isa 11:15–16). Regarding the structure of 27:7–13, v. 7 marks a transition between vv. 2–6 and 7–13 by offering two rhetorical questions which set the theme of the latter passage: how did YHWH treat his people? Three minor units follow the initial questions: vv. 8–9 contain a retrospective account of the exile and its effects; vv. 10–11 narrate the fate of a fortified city; 30 and vv. 12–13 convey the hope for a complete gathering and restoration of the dispersed Israel. The first and third sub-units correspond to each other: the physical removal and scattering of the people in v. 8 relates to their ingathering in v. 12 and the destruction of idols and false worship in v. 9 matches the spiritual restoration of proper worship to YHWH in v. 13. Rather abruptly the passage opens in v. 7 with two rhetorical questions: “Has he struck them down as he struck down those who struck them? Or have they been killed as their killers were killed?” The initial purpose of these questions is to evoke reflection among the people on whether their fate is as bad as that of their enemies: has YHWH treated his people as other nations? The implied answer is no. No doubt YHWH’s punishment of his people has been severe and painful but it has not been terminal. The

29 See the recent review in J. T. Willis, “Yahweh Regenerates His Vineyard: Isaiah 27,” in Formation and Intertextuality in Isaiah 24–27 (ed. J. T. Hibbard and H. C. P. Kim; SBLAIL 17; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2013), 201–207. 30 The content of vv. 10–11 is very difficult to interpret. In order to concentrate my analysis on the motifs of scattering and gathering I will not deal with these verses in my exegesis.

The Trope of Scattering in Isaiah

39

implied answer raises a new question: in what manner then did YHWH treat his people? This is what the following verses seek to address. Rather than death and total extinction the punishment consisted of expulsion. Notable in v. 8 is the concentration of verbs designating dismissal and removal. As a whole the verse points to a “forced separation” between YHWH and his people. 31 Perhaps the shift from masculine (“him”) to feminine suffixes (“her”) serves to intensify the relationship: Judah or Jerusalem is portrayed as YHWH’s wife who has been rejected and sent away. As v. 9 indicates, the covenant relationship has been disrupted because of idolatry. Therefore, YHWH contends or fights his case (‫)ריב‬ against his people by sending them away to a painful life in exile. The meaning of the initial word ‫אסּ ָאה‬ ְ ‫ ְבּ ַס‬is disputed. There are two approaches to explaining what it refers to. The first approach assumes that it has something to do with the word “seah” (‫)ס ָאה‬ ְ which signifies a measure of capacity. 32 The word either renders the idea that the people were sent away gradually (“little by little”) or that the people were sent away according to an exact measure (“with restraint” or “in moderation”). The latter of these suggestions works well in light of the preceding verse: “God has carefully measured out the judgment of the Exile so that it will not destroy the people but bring them to purification.” 33 Moreover, as the word is used for the measurement of seed, grain, or barley (e. g. 1 Kgs 18:32), the thought could be that YHWH has sent his people away as a farmer scatters seeds across his fields. The second approach assumes that the sense of the word is similar or perhaps even synonymous to the following ‫ְחהּ‬ ָ ‫שׁל‬ ַ ‫“( ְבּ‬by sending her away”). 34 The term could be an infinitive form of a verb, perhaps with a feminine suffix (reading ‫ ־הּ‬for ‫)־ה‬. The sense of this verb is alleged to be comparable to a cognate Arabic word (sa’sa’) which designates the driving

31 B. Doyle, The Apocalypse of Isaiah Metaphorically Speaking: A Study of the Use, Function and Significance of Metaphors in Isaiah 24–27 (BETL 151; Leuven: Leuven University Press and Uitgeverij Peeters, 2000), 357. 32 E.g. Clements, Isaiah 1–39, 221; M. A. Sweeney, Isaiah 1–39 (FOTL 16; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 346: “measure by measure;” Oswalt, Isaiah 1–39, 497: “by exact measure.” 33 Oswalt, Isaiah 1–39, 497–498. 34 E.g. Doyle, Apocalypse, 353: “in shooing her;” D. G. Johnson, From Chaos to Restoration: An Integrative Reading of Isaiah 24–27 (JSOTSup 61; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1988), 108: “when he drove her away” (cf. Seitz, Isaiah 1–39, 199); H. Wildberger, Jesaja. 2. Teilband, Jesaja 13–27 (BK X /2; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1978), 1013: “durch Aufscheuchen.” Cf. also the NRSV: “by expulsion, by exile.”

40

Frederik Poulsen

of pack animals with urging cries. 35 If so YHWH is likened to a shepherd who by shooing his people drives them away like donkeys. Both proposals work well. 36 Either YHWH is a farmer who disperses his people according to a certain measure or he is a shepherd who with frightening cries leads his flock away from their pasture. The latter half of v. 8 describes the removal of the people by a dry and destructive wind. The wind as a punishing agent of YHWH is a common motif. The verse contains references to “his fierce blast” (‫שׁה‬ ָ ‫)רוּחוֹ ַה ָקּ‬ and “the east wind” (‫)ק ִדים‬, ָ the latter of which could allude to Assyrian or Babylonian assaults. In any case, “the east wind” is also known as the sirocco which is a particularly hot and dry desert wind. Where this wind strikes, grain will wither (Gen 41:6; Ezek 17:10). In Isaiah, YHWH’s wind or breath contains similar associations. As we observed, he splits the great river into streams with his wind (11:15) and enemies flee like chaff before the wind (17:13; 57:13). Here, YHWH uses this powerful wind to scatter his own people because of their sins. As a result, the land is left empty of inhabitants. I believe that there is a further reference to this situation in Isa 54:11. Along with “afflicted” and “uncomforted,” Jerusalem is called “storm-tossed” or “windblown” (‫ֹעָרה‬ ֲ ‫)ס‬. The word denotes the driving back and forth by the wind of storms, as in Jonah’s experience in the middle of the sea (Jonah 1:11–13). 37 Interestingly, Zechariah explicitly links the storm with the scattering of the people and the empty land left behind. YHWH states: “I scattered them with a whirlwind [‘stormed them away;’ ‫]א ָס ֲעֵרם‬ ֵ among the nations that they had not known. Thus the land they left was desolate [‫”]שׁ ָמּה‬ ַ (Zech 7:14). No doubt YHWH’s treatment of his people is severe, yet there is a glimpse of hope. The wind will blast but not forever; it will only be temporary. Verses 12–13 look beyond judgment to the time of salvation. In contrast to the complete scattering and separation “on the day of the east wind” (‫)יוֹם ָק ִדים‬, YHWH’s actions “on that day” (‫)בּיּוֹם ַההוּא‬ ַ consists of a complete gathering and restoration of his dispersed people (cf. 11:11).

35 Cf. G. R. Driver, “Some Hebrew Verbs, Nouns, and Pronouns,” JTS 30 (1929): 371–378, 371–372 who considers the root to be onomatopoetic: “The sound, which is the Semitic equivalent of the Greek σοῦ σοῦ and the English ‘shoo-shoo’ used to scare away birds and other animals, is an instinctive exclamation which is found in many languages and its presence in the Old Testament need cause no surprise.” 36 The translation in W. A. M. Beuken, Jesaja 13–27 (trans. U. Berges and A. Spans; HThKAT; Freiburg: Herder, 2007), 394 contains both options: “mit Maßen /durch Tadeln.” 37 Cf. S. M. Paul, Isaiah 40–66 (ECC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012), 428.

The Trope of Scattering in Isaiah

41

Verse 12 envisions a great harvest. YHWH will gather his people like grains or fruits from the field. The rare verb “to thresh” or “flail” (‫)חבט‬ refers to beating grains or fruits out of trees, typically in smaller quantities of the product (cf. 28:27). This is done by hand with a stick and requires force; perhaps YHWH likewise beats to release his people from exile (cf. 11:15; 27:1). In addition, although this process /procedure takes a considerable amount of time, the losses are less than by ordinary threshing with a sledge. This says something about YHWH’s work: every grain or piece of fruit is of importance to him, and he will collect it with the greatest care and exactness (“one by one”). 38 The geographical area within which YHWH gathers the dispersed is defined by the Euphrates and the Wadi of Egypt. Yet the references to “the land of Assyria” (‫)אֶרץ ַאשּׁוּר‬ ֶ and “the land of Egypt” (‫)אֶרץ ִמ ְצָריִם‬ ֶ in the next verse indicate that the territories of the two great empires are part of the sphere from which those who have been banished will return (cf. 11:11–16). Verse 13 opens with a remarkable call to the dispersed people in Assyria and Egypt. A “great trumpet” or “shofar” (‫ָדול‬ ֹ ‫)שׁוֹפר גּ‬ ָ will sound. Blowing the shofar primarily appears in military and cultic contexts. 39 It warns of a military attack (Jer 6:1; Ezek 33:3) and the coming of divine judgment (Joel 2:1; Zech 9:14). Here, it serves as an auditory signal to gather the dispersed, similar to the function of the visual signal of a “banner” (‫ )נֵס‬in 11:12. This gathering could be seen as a liturgical act in which the horn sounds to assemble the scattered people not for war, but for worship in Jerusalem (cf. Ps 81:4; Joel 2:15). 40 The adjective “great” hardly refers to the size of the shofar, but rather to its sound (“loud”) and to the significance and uniqueness of the event it initiates. Wherever the dispersed people dwell, they will hear the call and come. Interestingly, on the Day of Atonement (‫)בּיוֹם ַה ִכּ ֻפּ ִרים‬ ְ the shofar is to sound loudly throughout the entire land (Lev 25:9). In light of this, the call in v. 13 suggests that divine atonement is complete (cf. v. 9): the people that were scattered in a million pieces will finally become one again. 41 38 Wildberger, Jesaja 13–27, 1023: “Jahwe vollzieht sein rettendes Sammeln mit letzter Sorgfalt; keine Mühe ist ihm zu groß, kein einziges Körnchen darf verlorengehen.” 39 See K. D. Jenner, “The Big Shofar (Isaiah 27:13): A Hapax Legomenon to be Understood Merely as a Metaphor or as a Crux interpretum for the Interpretation of Eschatological Expectation?” in Studies in Isaiah 24–27: The Isaiah Workshop – De Jesaja Werkplaats (ed. H. J. Bosman, H. van Grol and al.; OtSt 43; Leiden: Brill, 2000), 157–182, 157–163. 40 Beuken, Jesaja 13–27, 412. 41 Doyle, Apocalyptic, 362–363.

42

Frederik Poulsen

In line with 11:11–16 the exiles are referred to as “those who were lost” (‫ֹב ִדים‬ ְ ‫)הא‬ ָ in Assyria and “those who were driven out” (‫ִדּ ִחים‬ ָ‫)הנּ‬ ַ to Egypt. The first word could also refer to those who perished or died and, accordingly, the verse depicts the resurrection of the dead (cf. 25:8; 26:14, 19). 42 In light of the parallel word, it is more reasonable to imagine them as sheep going lost or astray in dispersion. The dispersed people will come from the periphery of the known world to its centre and worship YHWH on his holy mountain in Jerusalem; cf. the implicit movement in 11:11–16 from the corners of the world to “my holy mountain” (11:9). The return is not only physical, but also spiritual. In contrast to idolatry and false worship in v. 9 the proper worship of YHWH will be restored: they will bow to and worship the only true God. Whereas 11:11–16 focuses on the restoration of the Davidic empire and national unity, emphasis here is on the restoration of the cult. The closure of the passage picks up a central vision of Isaiah in which the holy mountain in Jerusalem becomes the centre of a worldwide gathering including both Israel and the nations (e. g. 2:2–4; 60:1–22; 66:18–24). 43 In terms of vocabulary and cultic associations, 66:18–24 offers the closest parallel to v. 13: all nations and tongues will “come” (‫)וּבאוּ‬ ָ and see YHWH’s glory; he will set a “sign” (‫ )אוֹת‬among them and they will bring “the brothers” back as a cultic offering to “my holy mountain Jerusalem” (‫ְרוּשׁ ִַלם‬ ָ ‫שׁי י‬ ִ ‫;)הר ָק ְד‬ ַ and all flesh will “come to worship” (‫חוֹת‬ ֲ ‫שׁ ַתּ‬ ְ ‫ְה‬ ִ ‫[ ל‬...] ‫ )יָבוֹא‬before YHWH. A significant difference, however, is that we do not hear anything explicitly about the destiny of the nations in 27:12–13. The focus here, as in the latter part of Isa 11, remains on the ingathering and restoration of the dispersed people of YHWH.

4. Conclusion A significant feature in the passages examined is the idea of a worldwide scattering. The exiled people have not only been displaced to one specific location (e. g. Babylon) but are thought to have been dispersed across the entire world. The metaphor employed of a compass points to the completeness of scattering – the four corners of the earth – and highlights the holy mountain in Jerusalem as the centre of attention. The ingathering involves a movement from the periphery to this, the very centre of the 42 43

Oswalt, Isaiah 1–39, 501. See Poulsen, Representing Zion, 176–179.

The Trope of Scattering in Isaiah

43

world. Furthermore, there is a consistent emphasis on the aspect of distance insofar as the people will return from the most distant and remote region of the earth. No geographical distance is too great to be overcome. Different images illustrate the removal and condition of the dispersed people. They are referred to as banished and as outcasts. They have been blasted away from their home by the wind, dispersed like seed across the field, and shooed away like a flock of animals. Yet YHWH will gather his people and bring them home like a farmer collects the fruits from the field and brings in the harvest. YHWH will gather them like a shepherd who collects his sheep and leads them to their pasture. YHWH’s personal involvement in his people’s return is comprehensive. On the one hand, he extends his forceful hand to break down barriers. He strikes the great river to make a passage through it and he beats to release his people. On the other hand, he shows the most intimate and gentle concern for his people, making sure that none of them is lost. The use of signals also reveals YHWH’s engagement. He will raise a visible banner to the nations. A great shofar in Jerusalem will sound and everyone who hears its call will come.

Metaphor, Memory, and Reality of the “Exile” in Deutero-Isaiah Hyun Chul Paul Kim Where is the exile in Deutero-Isaiah? 1 Have interpreters simply presumed and inherited the premise (known since Abraham Ibn Ezra) that DeuteroIsaiah supposedly depicts the exile as its historical background? If there is scant evidence on exile in Deutero-Isaiah, such as no specific narrative descriptions like those found in the second book of Kings, how should we understand the story, history, sociology, economy, politics, and religion associated with the exile? This study thus examines key images linked to the literary, metaphorical, and thematic concepts of the exile in DeuteroIsaiah. My thesis is that, even though Deutero-Isaiah does not appear to directly recount the everyday conditions of the exile, key words and concepts in these chapters invite a double reading as both metaphorical and literal reflections of the exile and thereby point to the enormous traumas and impacts inherently brought about by the exile. I will first review select key lexemes linked to the images of exile: (1) darkness-blindnessprison, (2) drought-hunger, and (3) daughters-sons of Zion. Employing recent metaphor theories, I will then explore what functions these images play as poetic signifiers of the exile. Further discussions exploring the interconnected issues of metaphor, memory, and (ancient and modern) reality will also be mentioned.

1 By “exile,” I essentially mean “forced migration,” in which the (defeated or vulnerable) people are physically (but also oftentimes psychologically) relocated away from their home, freedom, and /or dignity. See J. J. Ahn, Exile as Forced Migrations: A Sociological, Literary, and Theological Approach on the Displacement and Resettlement of the Southern Kingdom of Judah (BZAW 417; Berlin: De Gruyter, 2010), 40–66.

46

Hyun Chul Paul Kim

1. Images of Exile 1.1. Darkness, Blindness, and Prison First, and foremost, exile is best depicted as “darkness.” Exile is like a dark prison for those who have been forcefully thrust into the suffocating conditions of life in the unfamiliar settings of their relocation. 2 The words “darkness,” “blindness,” and “prison” occur notably throughout Deutero-Isaiah. It is my contention that readers can observe both literal and metaphorical meanings in these words. 3 In a metaphorical sense, they signify the ideas of exilic challenges, such as powerlessness and impassibility. In the literal sense, they also denote the places of physical agony in the exilic setting. The term “dark /darkness” (‫ )חשׁך‬occurs eighteen times in the book of Isaiah (seven times in chs. 1–39 and eleven times in chs. 40–66). In Isaiah 1–39, many of these occurrences have metaphorical meanings but also subtle literal meanings. For example, some texts correlate the notion of “darkness” with the “day” of YHWH (Isa 13:10; cf. Isa 13:6, 9, 13). 4 On the one hand, as though echoing and nullifying the Genesis creation account, the description literally portrays the stars, sun, and moon becoming dark: that is, the day becomes night. On the other hand, in the metaphorical nuance, the “day” of YHWH, presumably a time of bright hope and restoration, represents a time of gloom instead of salvation (cf. Joel 2:1–2; 3:4 [Eng. 2:31]; Amos 5:18–20); that is, the day is night (or, the day is like night). Darkness parallels evil and bitterness, just as light is connected to good and sweetness (5:20). 5 In contrast to light, darkness signifies that which is unjust, corrupt, and agonizing (5:26, 30; 8:20–22),

2 N. P. Lemche, “Psalm 137: Exile as Hell!” in Myths of Exile: History and Metaphor in the Hebrew Bible (ed. A. K. d. H. Gudme and I. Hjelm; CIS; London and New York: Routledge, 2015), 89–98, 89: “Exile means prison.” 3 D. M. Smith, “Light,” in HarperCollins Bible Dictionary (ed. M. A. Powell; New York: HarperOne, 2011), 559: “The NT use of ‘light’ is both literal (Matt. 17:2) and symbolic (4:16, quoting Isa. 9:2).” 4 Unless otherwise noted, all biblical translations are from the NRSV. 5 Light is a leading theme in the book of Isaiah. See R. E. Clements, “A Light to the Nations,” in Forming Prophetic Literature: Essays on Isaiah and the Twelve in Honor of John D. W. Watts (ed. J. W. Watts and P. R. House; JSOTSup 235; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996), 57–69, 65: “The imagery of light, which is so familiar a feature of life as to make it a readily available, and almost obvious metaphor of salvation, provides an important counterpart to the imagery of blindness, which occupies a central place in the Isaianic theology.”

Metaphor, Memory, and Reality of the “Exile” in Deutero-Isaiah

47

encompassing “a master image for chaos, separation, and death, and a synonym of sin and evil.” 6 Darkness is closely linked to blindness, again metaphorically (cf. 29:15) and literally (cf. 29:18–19). The Deuteronomic curse of “madness” and “blindness” (alongside “confusion of mind”) in Deut 28:28 connotes the metaphorical meanings of “wild and helpless panic” and “blind incapacity” (BDB). Likewise, “you will grope at noon” (NASB) figuratively denotes “judicial blindness” (BDB), as in parallelism with “you will not prosper in your ways” (Deut 28:29, NASB). Yet darkness (‫)אפלה‬ in Isa 8:22 (cf. 58:10; 59:9) literally denotes a “thick darkness” (‫;חשׁך־אפלה‬ cf. Exod 10:21–23) where the Egyptians could not “see,” except for the Israelites who had “light” (Exod 10:23). In fact, the people can “feel” (BDB) or “touch” (HALOT) – literally “grope” (‫ – )משׁשׁ‬the darkness (Exod 10:21). This verb (“to grope”) occurs elsewhere (Gen 27:12, 22; 31:34, 37; cf. Judg 16:26), all suggesting that “thick darkness” is associated with physical blindness, as blind people grope in the dark (Deut 28:29; Job 5:14; 12:25). Consequently, also in Deutero-Isaiah, we find continuity across the double signifiers of both literal and metaphorical meanings. Many expressions indicate both symbolic bondage (metaphorical sense) and physical confinement (literal sense). On the one hand, in the metaphorical sense, exile is likened to darkness, linked to the notions of prison and blindness: “to open the eyes that are blind, to bring out the prisoners from the dungeon, from the prison those who sit in darkness” (42:7; cf. Jer 13:16; Zech 9:11–12; Ps 146:7–8; Lam 3:2, 6, 34). 7 How can a human agent open blind eyes, when there was no LASIK surgery or transplant technology? Hence we are dealing with the metaphorical sense, namely, rescuing and giving hope to the exiled community. Thus, in Isa 42:16, darkness parallels the “rough places,” symbolizing a situation of exilic despair like the wilderness (40:3; 41:18–19; 47:15; cf. 45:2–3; 61:1) or the valley of dry bones (cf. Ezek 37:1–2).

6 W. Willis, “Darkness,” in Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible (ed. D. N. Freedman et al; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 317. 7 D. L. Smith, Religion of the Landless: The Social Context of the Babylonian Exile (Bloomington: Meyer Stone Books, 1989), 174: “The experience of exile was compared to prison, and liberation was seen as release from that prison, ‘opening the eyes of the imprisoned.’” See also S. Dille, Mixing Metaphors: God as Mother and Father in Deutero-Isaiah (JSOTSup 398; London: T&T Clark, 2004), 82: “Deutero-Isaiah employs a ‘prison’ paradigm ... along with the images of ‘blindness’, ‘darkness’, and ‘deafness’.”

48

Hyun Chul Paul Kim

Likewise, blindness alludes to the contexts of doubt and distrust, as opposed to hope and belief, exemplified by the exilic people who were blind to God, following other, Babylonian gods (Isa 42:17; cf. 6:9–10; 24:22; 42:19–22). Prison and blindness imply darkness in its figurative connotations of exilic hardship and powerlessness. 8 In the metaphors of dark, trying situations, the prophet seeks the righteous who will walk in the light of YHWH (2:5), those who resist despair in 50:10. On the other hand, however, we cannot dismiss the likelihood that these are literal descriptions. Inasmuch as the metaphorical sense of darkness, blindness, and prison symbolize the exilic hardships, the literal sense may connote the actual experiences or cultural memory of such phenomena. Sure enough, blindness oftentimes alludes to the religious and political recalcitrance of the rulers who only want to see and hear the things they want to see and hear (Isa 56:10). Nevertheless, the ancient Near Eastern cases of blinding of captured subjects, along with castration, should not be discarded, especially as these were often committed in public. 9 For example, King Zedekiah was blinded by the Babylonian king (2 Kgs 25:7; Jer 39:7), just as Samson was blinded by the Philistines (Judg 16:21). Readers also wonder whether there is a link between Hezekiah’s sons / grandsons (Isa 39:7) and the eunuchs (56:3–5). How then are we to take the task of the servant of rescuing the prisoners “who sit in” the dark holes, caves, or dungeons (42:22): “Saying to the prisoners, ‘Come out,’ to those who are in darkness, ‘Show yourselves.’ They shall feed along the ways, on all the bare heights shall be their pasture” (49:9; cf. 14:17)? The dark prison may have meant the physical dungeon, where some Judaeans were indeed incarcerated, whether temporarily or permanently (e. g., Joseph in Gen 39:20; cf. Jer 37:15–18; 2 Chr 18:25–26). 10 Darkness is thus associated with prison, a physical

8 S. Paul, Isaiah 40–66 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2011), 329–330: “Those imprisoned in dark places (another metaphor for the exile; cf. 42:7).” 9 The atrocious torture and dismemberment, including the putting out of eyes, carried out by the Neo-Assyrians are well attested; see E. Belibtreu, “Grisly Assyrian Record of Torture and Death,” BAR 17 (1991): 52–61, 75. Recently, more historians are highlighting similar brutality perpetrated by the Neo-Babylonians and even Persians, esp. from the Behistun Inscription; see K. Kleber and E. Frahm, “A Not-So-Great Escape: Crime and Punishment according to a Document from Neo-Babylonian Uruk,” JCS 58 (2006): 109–122; B. Jacobs, “Torture in the Achaemenid Period,” Encyclopædia Iranica (http://www.iranicaonline.org/ articles/torture-achaemenid-period). 10 C. Franke, Isaiah 46, 47, and 48: A New Literary-Critical Reading (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1994), 121: “[Deutero-Isaiah] specifically refers to darkness as a place where prisoners dwell.” See Kleber and Frahm, “A Not-So-Great Escape,” 116: “It has been argued that

Metaphor, Memory, and Reality of the “Exile” in Deutero-Isaiah

49

place of suffocation and suffering. Darkness associated with blindness could have had devastating impacts, both physically and psychologically.

1.2. Drought and Hunger Exile is thirst, hunger, and poverty (Isa 5:13; cf. Deut 28:48). The nature of exile takes away the very food of the captives and the colonized. 11 Admittedly, famine and lack of food are natural phenomena that are not necessarily tied to war or captivity. Nevertheless, we can say that war and captivity contribute to such phenomena. The expressions “dry up all their herbage ... dry up the pools” (Isa 42:15; cf. 51:3) recall a dramatic transformation of nature, which accompanies YHWH’s turning “darkness ... into light” (42:16). The divine exhortation to the exiles sitting in darkness to “come out” of the prison (49:9) likewise encompasses the divine reversal of hunger and thirst in 49:10. In fact, the exilic catastrophe comprises “two things”: devastating “famine” and the destructive “sword” in 51:19 (cf. Jer 14:1–6, 12–16; Lam 4:9). 12 Concerning (siege) warfare, Deut 20:19–20 reveals parts of invasion tactics that include cutting off water resources, burning down food resources, and even chopping down trees for siege weapons (cf. Isa 15:5–6). As Mark Biddle elucidates, these tactics “had far-reaching consequences for the future viability of a regional economy. Orchards and vineyards require years to mature to the point of yielding.” 13 Under imperial invasion and domination, exilic Judah had to witness economic hardship, especially for the peasant underclass, as hinted in

there were no prison sentences as such in the ancient Near East, but there are indications that long-term imprisonment existed.” 11 Consider an analogy with the abuse of food and hunger in the concentration camps: “The logic of the Nazis was that if you deprive someone of food, they will do whatever you want;” see A. T. Abernethy, Eating in Isaiah: Approaching the Role of Food and Drink in Isaiah’s Structure and Message (Leiden: Brill, 2014), 108. 12 Concerning the intertextual correlation, and reversal, of the themes of famine and sword between Lam 4:1–2, 9–11, 21–22 and Isa 51:17–23 (cf. Isa 1:20), see P. T. Willey, Remember the Former Things: The Recollection of Previous Texts in Second Isaiah (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 1997), 159–165. Consider also J. Ahn, “Story and Memory,” in The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Bible and Theology (vol. 2; ed. S. E. Balentine; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015), 341: “The repeated psychological trauma that the community experienced daily, in search of water and food to sustain themselves on the long arduous journey to begin life as corvée, is disquieting.” 13 M. E. Biddle, Deuteronomy (SHBC 4; Macon: Smyth & Helwys, 2003), 318. See also Abernethy, Eating in Isaiah, 65: “A strong case can be made that the desolation in Isa 24 is the result of warfare ... the aftermath of invasion.”

50

Hyun Chul Paul Kim

Lam 5:4, 6, 9–10 (cf. Lam 1:11, 19–20; 2:11–12, 20–21; 4:9). 14 Even after the collapse of the Babylonian colonial administration, some of the populace in Yehud continued their outcry of agony under the Persian regime (cf. Neh 9:36–37). 15 Accordingly, the prophet’s invitation to readily available meals in 55:1–2, 10 could have had a revelatory or revolutionary impact, especially with regard to the economic destitution many exiles would have endured on a daily basis. 16 The subsequent oracles betray the likely situations of the exiled /colonized Judah, where the Judaeans had to endure the harsh experience of being vulnerable farmers robbed of their grain by foreign overlords in 61:5–6; 62:8–9; 65:21–22 (cf. Lam 5:2). Furthermore, such reversals of fortune extend to the social strife between the righteous and the wicked in reconstruction period Yehud through the dichotomy of feast (for the righteous) and famine (for the wicked) in Isa 65:13, 25. Last, but not least, such correlations of famine and hunger for the exile further intertwine with the metaphor of darkness, in contrast to light. In at least one text (58:7, 10; cf. 8:22), we find such a juxtaposition through literary and thematic parallelism, showing that lack of food denotes darkness, whereas providing food alludes to light. Darkness signifies the experience of hunger and affliction, notably in exile. This parallelism between darkness and famine coincides with the parallelisms of light and righteousness versus darkness and injustice in 59:9. 17 Therefore, just as darkness is the opposite of light, so famine or thirst contrasts with food and water, illustrating the parched, oppressed situation of the exile. 18

14 Abernethy, Eating in Isaiah, 136: “Even if hunger is not a dominant reality for those in exile and at a safe distance from Jerusalem’s fall, the memory of the terrible hunger caused by the Babylonian siege would linger in the minds of exiles, leaving them unsettled as they struggle to come to terms with what YHWH has brought upon their ancestors.” 15 N. MacDonald, Not Bread Alone: The Uses of Food in the Old Testament (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 196–218; S. L. Adams, Social and Economic Life in Second Temple Judea (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2014), 128–82. 16 On the intertextual connections between Lam 5:4 and Isa 55:1, note Willey, Remember the Former Things, 237: “According to the lament [Lam 5:4], those who lost their heritage to encroaching foreigners were forced to pay money even for natural resources freely found by those owning property.” 17 Psalm 107 combines key issues associated with the exile, e. g., darkness and prison (vv. 10, 14, 16), hunger and thirst (vv. 5, 9, 35–36), gathering expelled /lost children (vv. 2–3, 39), and forced labor (v. 12). I am grateful to Ronnie Goldstein for alerting me to this psalm. 18 For an extensive study of the images of water in Isaiah, see J. T. Willis, Images of Water in Isaiah (Lanham: Lexington Books, 2017), 19–51, 88–115.

Metaphor, Memory, and Reality of the “Exile” in Deutero-Isaiah

51

1.3. Daughters and Sons The exile breaks the bonds of social and familial relationships, including those relating to the king, royals, elites, soldiers, farmers, and so on. Yet war and captivity tend to more severely affect children, who are “both valued and vulnerable.” 19 It is no surprise that key words such as son, daughter, infant, youth, or lad occur frequently in the book of Isaiah. Children are precious and powerless, especially in the ancient patriarchal world. They are immature and childish while at the same time innocent and chaste. They are useful as a source of labour (cf. Gen 29:6–9; Exod 2:16; 21:7; 1 Sam 17:14–15) and valuable spoils of war, alongside women and livestock (cf. Deut 20:14). They are the essential members of the family, clan, and nation for remembering them and providing them a legacy, while alternatively posing a potential threat to their enemy (cf. Exod 1:16, 22). Figuratively, children, and especially daughters, are the symbol and identity of a city, often with rhetorical expressions of YHWH as the divine patron and parent. Interestingly, children play important literary and thematic roles in the opening and concluding chapters in Isaiah (1:8, 21; 3:16–24; 62:11; 66:13). 20 On an overarching scale, their depiction shifts from divine chastisement of rebellious children to divine compassion for the traumatized, scattered children. Similarly, in Deutero-Isaiah, we encounter frequent references to the daughter(s), son(s), and even servant(s), to whom the prophet pronounces the divine promises of care and restoration. What portrayals and themes of the exile can we find in these descriptions? First of all, we find a contrast between the virgin daughter Babylon (ch. 47) and the captive daughter Zion (ch. 52). The polemic against Daughter Babylon in 47:1, 5 accentuates the scathing condemnation of the empire’s abusive oppression. The oracle of assurance for Daughter Zion in 52:1–2 implicitly evinces the humiliation and violation many women of Jerusalem would have endured. The common catchwords in both passages build thematic ties and links. The mocking order to “come down and sit in the dust” (‫ ;רדי ושׁבי על־עפר‬47:1) against virgin daughter Babylon corresponds to the impassioned call for the deflowered daugh19

J. Parker, “Child, Children,” in EBR (vol. 5; ed. D. C. Allison et al.; Berlin: De Gruyter, 2012), 84. 20 V. Bridgeman, “‘I Will Make Boys Their Princes’: A Womanist Reading of Children in the Book of Isaiah,” in Womanist Interpretations of the Bible: Expanding the Discourse (ed. G. L. Byron and V. Lovelace; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2016), 311–327. See also J. Lapsley, “‘Look! The Children and I Are as Signs and Portents in Israel’: Children in Isaiah,” in The Child in the Bible (ed. M. J. Bunge; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), 82–102, 96–97.

52

Hyun Chul Paul Kim

ter Zion to “shake yourself from the dust, rise up, O captive” Jerusalem (‫ ;התנערי מעפר קומי שׁבי‬52:2). 21 Whereas Daughter Babylon is to “go down,” Daughter Zion is to “rise up.” 22 The same Hebrew word (‫)שׁבי‬, albeit with different roots and meanings (“sit” in 47:1 and “captive” in 52:2), heightens the contrasting correlations. 23 The expression with the same root word, “no more” (‫ אל תוסיפי‬in 47:1, 5 and ‫ אל יוסיף‬in 52:1; cf. Lam 4:15), emphasizes the reversal of fates for these two daughters. In the Isaianic new exodus oracle, Daughter Babylon is to “go [or, ‘enter,’ with sexual overtones] into darkness” and thus into the harsh life of the exile (47:5). 24 Daughter Zion is to put on royal garments because the “uncircumcised” and the “unclean” – both words in the masculine – will not “enter” into her any longer (52:1). 25 These daughters represent figurative meanings, denoting the personified cities of Babylon and Jerusalem. However, as was common in ancient practices of war (and even in today’s wars), we cannot dismiss the literal meanings when daughters were frequent victims of violation, rape, and abduction by the invading army. 26 The call for Daughter Babylon to enter into “darkness” denotes, 21 C. Franke (Isaiah 46, 47, and 48, 106–107) takes the combination of “dust” (‫ )עפר‬and “earth /ground” (‫ )ארץ‬as denoting the underworld, Sheol (e. g., Isa 29:4; Amos 2:7; cf. Isa 14:11–12, 15; Jonah 2:6 [Eng. 2:7]; Ps 30:10 [Eng. 30:9]; Lam 2:2). 22 P. T. Willey (Remember the Former Things, 168, 171) further observes the intertextual reversal of fortunes between Lam 1:8–9; 2:10 and Isa 47:1–5. See H. C. P. Kim, “Little Highs, Little Lows: Tracing Key Themes in Isaiah,” in The Book of Isaiah: Enduring Questions Answered Anew: Essays Honoring Joseph Blenkinsopp and His Contribution to the Study of Isaiah (ed. R. J. Bautch and J. T. Hibbard; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2014), 133–158, 157. 23 We should note another double meaning of the word ‫גלה‬, which denotes both “to uncover” (e. g., Exod 20:26; Lev 18:6–19; 2 Sam 6:20; Ruth 3:4, 7) and “to go into exile” (e. g., 2 Kgs 16:9; 17:11; 24:14; 25:11). This root occurs three times in 47:2–3 (uncovering the veil, thighs, and nakedness; cf. Jer 13:22, 26), intertwining the meaning of the exile with that of sexual humiliation, and vice versa; see Franke, Isaiah 46, 47, and 48, 115; D. L. SmithChristopher, “Ezekiel in Abu Ghraib: Rereading Ezekiel 16:37–39 in the Context of Imperial Conquest,” in Ezekiel’s Hierarchical World: Wrestling with a Tiered Reality (ed. S. L. Cook and C. L. Patton; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2002), 141–157, 154. 24 On the intertextual reversal of Lam 4:15 to Isa 52:11, see Willey, Remember the Former Things, 127. 25 Concerning the expressions of sexual violation in 47:2–3 (cf. Lam 4:21–22), see M. A. Sweeney, Isaiah 40–66 (FOTL 19; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2016), 133–134: “Such exposure of women might be expected in a slave market or in the aftermath of the conquest of a city in which surviving women are stripped and sold to the highest bidder to do with what he pleases.” See also M. Frantzmann, “The City as Woman: The Case of Babylon in Isaiah 47,” ABR 43 (1995): 1–19, 12. 26 Consider the connotation of “shame, reproach” (‫ )חרפה‬in Isa 47:3 in light of the shame of rape in 2 Sam 13:13 (Franke, Isaiah 46, 47, and 48, 115–116). Note also Judg 5:30, “Are they not dividing the spoil? A maiden, two maidens for every warrior (NASB; literally, ‘a womb or two wombs for each soldier’).”

Metaphor, Memory, and Reality of the “Exile” in Deutero-Isaiah

53

metaphorically, her change of social location and political status. Yet, at the same time, many other words in this passage (such as “dust,” “enter,” “sit,” “uncircumcised,” “skirt,” and especially “daughter”) eerily allude to the physical sufferings of women and children as victims of war (cf. Lam 3:51). Secondly, a severely affected group among the casualties of war would be the (male) soldiers, the sons, few in number, and thus essential to the continuation of the lineage (cf. Isa 51:18–20). The promise of numerous sons to the grieving mother Zion (54:1, 4) implies the opposite situation to the exile in Isa 54:13 (cf. Judg 5:28–31; 1 Sam 2:5). In fact, the loss of children in war and exile is powerfully portrayed in the vision of the valley of dry (‫ )יבשׁ‬bones in Ezekiel, as though the nation’s legacy has dried up (Ezek 37:1–2, 11). The complementary imagery of gold and children together is used to depict a haunting scene of Jerusalem’s streets, where gold is darkened and children lie abandoned or even dead, in Lam 4:1–2 (cf. Nah 3:10; Isa 54:11–13; 62:5). 27 In Deutero-Isaiah, the prophet expresses a similar complaint that just as the grass withers (‫ ;יבשׁ‬literally, “dries up”), so the people are dried up (Isa 40:7). Likewise, the eunuch laments, “I am just a dry (‫ )יבשׁ‬tree” (Isa 56:3; cf. 56:5). Mother Zion’s lament and the divine promise of progeny like Abraham’s (51:2) exhibit symbolic themes of defeat and loss. The abandoned and bereaved Zion’s ill fate and upcoming restoration are metaphorical expressions of population decrease. Here again, these figurative depictions are entwined with literal implications. War causes death, as the recurring expressions of the loss of children and the laments hauntingly indicate. When Zion becomes a bereaved widow and mother, she is not merely a casualty of war. Rather, this is an indescribable, incomprehensible devastation. Each loss is monumental and each sorrow inconsolable. Whether for royals or commoners, exilic Judah’s pain and sorrow seem real – more than metaphorical – if not historical. Thirdly, children – both daughters and sons – would often become captives of the invaders. They were not only abused, violated, and lost but also abducted, taken away, and scattered into unknown places. 28 Whether 27

P. T. Willey (Remember the Former Things, 160–161; see also 239–241) points out that the phrase “at the head of every corner” (‫ )בראשׁ כל־חוצות‬is “always used of children, and always used to describe the extremity of disaster,” portraying the “worst imaginable depictions of disaster” in the slaughter of innocent children. 28 J. D. Smoak, “Assyrian Siege Warfare Imagery and the Background of a Biblical Curse,” in Writing and Reading War: Rhetoric, Gender, and Ethics in Biblical and Modern Contexts (ed. B. E. Kelle and F. R. Ames; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008), 83–91, 88: “Assyrian

54

Hyun Chul Paul Kim

there were taken for forced labor (cf. 2 Kgs 24:14–16; 25:11; Psalm 137; Dan 1:3–6), became refugees (cf. 2 Kgs 25:26; Jer 43:1–7), or were subject to confinement (cf. 2 Kgs 25:27–30), it can be presumed that children or youths may have been included among those taken away. 29 Remarkably, in Deutero-Isaiah, we find expressions of sons and daughters being scattered alongside the divine intention to bring them back – the sons and daughters of Judah /Israel who were dispersed into four corners of the world in Isa 43:6 and 60:4, 9. Just as “north” and “south” denote remote places, “nations” (let alone the superpower empires) signify the countries beyond one’s reach. It would have been nothing short of a miracle to imagine the return of the lost daughters and sons in exile, envisioned in Isa 49:22 and 66:20. 30 The divine promise to bring “your” sons and daughters is addressed to Zion, in the second-person feminine (60:4). These descriptions portray the personified city Zion’s yearning for her dispersed people. The metaphorical sense evokes powerful notions of rebuilding the destroyed and depopulated city. But, at the same time, we cannot discount the literal meaning relating to a situation where a mother, and a father, would desperately wait for their sons and daughters (cf. Gen 46:29–30). 31 The ideal, metaphorical hope of restoration and reconstruction looms large. Yet the supposed reality of emptiness in Judah’s households and cities seems literally and painfully palpable as well.

inscriptions and iconography also closely situate depictions of mass deportation with those of the destruction of cities and agricultural support systems.” 29 In light of the Al-Yah¯udu Documents, D. Rom-Shiloni expounds how the Babylonian deportation policy brought exiles to unpopulated areas: “Upon their arrival in Babylon, these non-Mesopotamian peoples were given land and required to pay taxes; they were required to serve either in the military or in corvees for the many building projects of Nbk in Babylon;” see D. Rom-Shiloni, “The Untold Stories: Al-Yah¯udu and or versus Hebrew Bible Babylonian Compositions,” WO 47 (2017): 124–134, 128. Note also Dille, Mixing Metaphors, 145: “It cannot be imagined that the events of 597 and 587 BCE were anything but disruptive to families, and many family members must have been separated. Parents and children may well have been separated from one another, be it over Judah, Babylon, and other destinations such as Egypt.” 30 Similarly, on the theme of transformation, see S. Moughtin-Mumby, Sexual and Marital Metaphors in Hosea, Jeremiah, Isaiah, and Ezekiel (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 131. 31 Consider also B. H. Lim, The ‘Way of the Lord’ in the Book of Isaiah (LHBOTS 522; New York: T&T Clark, 2010), 93: “Is the exhortation of 52:11–12 to be understood as literal or metaphorical? The answer is both.”

Metaphor, Memory, and Reality of the “Exile” in Deutero-Isaiah

55

2. Metaphor, Memory, and Reality 2.1. Metaphor and Reality Kirsten Nielsen posits that “imagery enables the same text to reveal different meanings time and again, and one of its functions is precisely to create a certain insecurity in the audience, to tease us into thinking.... and therefore require our active participation in resolving the image.” 32 Juan Cruz, in his review of the theories of metaphor of Aristotle, Paul Ricœur, and Benjamin Harshav, recapitulates that metaphors can be a single word (Aristotle), a sentence (Ricœur), or “a passage, a whole poem or even a whole book” (Harshav). 33 Amid inherent distinctions between literal and figurative meanings, metaphors replete with indeterminacy invite readers to explore the interpretive mutuality between the fictional, literary world and the historical, real world. 34 Thus metaphors, seemingly detached from tangible contexts, evoke contexts of lived experiences and situations. Figurative and symbolic words signify worlds that are literal and contextual. George Lakoff claims that “the locus of metaphor is not in language at all, but in the way we conceptualize one mental domain in terms of another,” contrary to the traditional view that “metaphor is primarily in the realm of poetic or ‘figurative’ language.” 35 In other words, it is mistaken to assume that “poetic language is independent of external context.” 36 To paraphrase, in poetry or language it is virtually impossible to separate experience from poetry, reality from symbolism, and the literal from the metaphorical. Vladimir Zori´c explicates that in poetry of exile, most poems are “associated with some form of exilic displacement and thematically dwell upon that experience.” 37 Therefore, metaphorical language, in a reciprocal way, both 32 K. Nielsen, “Imagery in the Old Testament as a Ressource for Modern Times,” in Erfahrungsräume: Theologische Beiträge zur kulturellen Erneuerung (ed. A.-K. Szagun; Münster: LIT, 1999), 125–128, 126. 33 J. Cruz, “Who is like Yahweh?”: A Study of Divine Metaphors in the Book of Micah (FRLANT 263; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016), 46. 34 B. Harshav calls this interpretive mutuality as the “double-layered nature of literary reference;” see B. Harshav, Explorations in Poetics (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2007), 22–23. See also Cruz, “Who is like Yahweh?” 43–44. 35 G. Lakoff, “The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor,” in Metaphor and Thought (ed. A. Ortony; 2nd ed.; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 202–251, 203–204. 36 V. Zori´c, “Radiating Nests: Metalingual Tropes in Poetry of Exile,” Comparative Literature 62 (2010): 201–227, 204. See Josef Stern, Metaphor in Context (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2000), 308: “[Metaphor is] a special kind of context-dependent expression, an expression whose character is sensitive to its context set of presuppositions.” 37 Zori´c, “Radiating Nests,” 201.

56

Hyun Chul Paul Kim

possesses and responds to diverse linguistic codes of existential contexts. Metaphors are essentially tied to – if not rooted in – everyday realities. 38 In Deutero-Isaiah, at the outset, the exile appears to be evasive or elusive. What is recorded and transmitted tends to be metaphors and memories. Yet what those metaphors and memories portray are both specific (particular) and broad (universal) dimensions of reality – the dimensions which ultimately coalesce and complement each other vis-à-vis any past or potential reality. 39 It is in this reciprocity between fiction and fact, between metaphor and reality, that we the interpreters can traverse the gaps and bridges between particularity and universality. On the one hand, we have concrete aspects related to the metaphors of exile. The particularity of each image is uniquely tied to a presumed context. The exile of 587 BCE (plus those of 597 and 582) is concretely and tangibly Judah’s, and not ours of the twenty-first century. Historians cannot convincingly pinpoint each specific name or incident of Judah’s exile. Nevertheless, the text’s key words and accompanying concepts delineated above signify those concrete, tangible peoples and events in the supposed contexts surrounding 587 BCE. Each dark prison-like experience is unique, each instance of starvation, whether in Babylon’s captivity camp or in a colonized farm in Judah, matters, and each child’s indescribable traumatic experience cannot be dismissed in our reconstruction of the exile. The singularity of each description of the exile, whether the servant’s or Zion’s daughters’, is what we have to take seriously, if we give any historical or theological credence to Deutero-Isaiah’s textual witnesses. On the other hand, although intangible or even abstract, many concepts within the images of exile in Deutero-Isaiah can be comparable and relevant to diverse situations, be they ancient or modern. Even a one-off event can have its own life, in the reciprocity between the text and the reader /interpreter, traversing metaphor and reality. 40 Such an interpretive reciprocity between the text’s event and the reader’s imagination can 38 Cruz, “Who is like Yahweh?” 45: “Metaphor must then be analysed not only in terms of its semantic functions in a literary work but also for how it relates to the real world.” 39 I. A. Richards’s groundbreaking distinction between “tenor” and “vehicle” has been influential, which other theorists such as P. Ricœur refined, all with the common emphasis on interactive reciprocity in multiple ways: “Metaphors create meaning by joining the vehicle’s and the tenor’s systems of associations; both tenor and vehicle are transformed in the process;” cf. M. A. Halvorson-Taylor, Enduring Exile: The Metaphorization of Exile in the Hebrew Bible (VTSup 141; Leiden: Brill, 2011), 21. 40 S. T. Kamionkowski, Gender Reversal and Cosmic Chaos: A Study on the Book of Ezekiel (JSOTSup 368; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2003), 37 and 39: “The metaphor thus creates reality.... Put in Lakoffian terms, interpreters, as they read metaphors, create reality.”

Metaphor, Memory, and Reality of the “Exile” in Deutero-Isaiah

57

engender at once an impassable gap and at the same time an interactive connection. To quote Shimon Bar-Effrat, “Metaphor is the expressive force that pushes readers to move back and forth in their imaginations.” 41 In such “back and forth” interpretive imagining, the universality of the pertinent issues enables us readers to correlate the particularity of the biblical text with the particularity of today’s world, and vice versa. 42 For example, the expression in Ps 109:24 (“my knees are weak through fasting; and my flesh faileth of fatness” KJV), which denotes the psalmist’s social, religious, and physical agony, can be imagined and reread with a comparable image of “the horrific experiences of Jews and others in the Nazi death camps,” if we correlate the comparable contexts of exile. 43 The valley of dry bones in Ezek 37:1 may represent the aftermath of the battlefields in Israel, literally, or the author’s deadly environs in the Babylonian Empire, metaphorically. Yet the text’s grim descriptions may evoke the Nazis’ gas chambers as well as the long, arduous slavery of African-Americans to modern interpreters. This further leads to the topic of memory.

2.2. Memory and Truth Recent theories of memory, especially cultural memory, have had significant impacts on biblical scholarship. There is individual memory and collective memory. 44 One may remember or forget, as Deutero-Isaiah is wont to mention (e. g., 43:25; 44:21; 46:8–9; 47:7; 49:14–15; 51:13; 54:4; 57:11). The power of memory is to visit and bring back the past into the present. If metaphor is “‘naming the unnamed’ ... ‘naming that which is difficult to name,’” 45 then memory is “essentially a reconstruction of the

41

S. Bar-Effrat, Narrative Art in the Bible (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1989), 209. R. P. Knierim, The Task of Old Testament Theology: Method and Cases (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 69: “Biblical hermeneutic involves the encounter between, on the one hand, the validity of the texts within the entire biblical theology and, on the other hand, the validity of today’s situations within the totality of our own reality.” 43 This insight is borrowed from Michael Malley, a student in my Psalms class in 2016. Exile, broadly defined, connotes “a metaphor for political disenfranchisement, social inequality, and alienation from God. To suffer any of those conditions is, in effect, to be in exile” (Halvorson-Taylor, Enduring Exile, 8). 44 On “communicative memory” and “cultural memory” as well as “individual, personal, or collective identity,” see J. Assmann, Cultural Memory and Early Civilization: Writing, Remembrance, and Political Imagination (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011), 34–44, 112–114. 45 C. D. Bergmann, Childbirth as a Metaphor for Crisis: Evidence from the Ancient Near East, the Hebrew Bible, and 1QH XI, 1–18 (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2008), 8. 42

58

Hyun Chul Paul Kim

past in light of the present.” 46 Or, put simply, if metaphor points to what could happen, memory grapples with what did happen. Yet, just like metaphor, memory too has its hermeneutical problems. Metaphor shares memory’s difference or distance with reality. Memory too can conflict with truth. If metaphor is restricted by the common understandings (e. g., simile, context, and native language), memory too has its limits due to the gap between the past and the present. As Maurice Halbwachs analyses, “[Social beliefs] are collective traditions or recollections, but they are also ideas or conventions that result from a knowledge of the present.” 47 Just as metaphor must be explained by the interpreter, memory can only be recollected in the present moment. 48 As Yosef Yerushalmi notes, “Memory is among the most fragile and capricious of our faculties.” 49 Memory thus contrasts not only with amnesia but also with distorted or falsified memory. 50 Paradoxically, it is this potential danger of forgetfulness or denial that makes memory all the more important. To those who told, copied, and edited the sacred memories, those memories not only testified to the truths of their past but also mattered for the shaping of their identity at their present and future times. 51 Rather than being scientific data (which still require interpretation), biblical stories /histories bear witnesses as, what Walter Brueggemann calls, testimonies. 52 In Deutero-Isaiah, the rhetorical responses to the exile’s complaints appeal to their memories in 40:27–28 and 49:14 (cf. 49:4). The divine promise of comfort affirms that Israel and Zion will not be forgotten, as recounted in 44:21 and 49:15.

46 M. Halbwachs, On Collective Memory (trans. L. A. Coser; Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1992), 34. 47 Halbwachs, On Collective Memory, 188. See also J. M. Lieu, Christian Identity in the Jewish and Graeco-Roman World (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 62: “The relationship between who we are and the past we tell is a reciprocal one and is rarely static.... Although it is often said that to discover the past is to understand how it created the present, no less important is the question, ‘how did the present create the past?’” 48 Assmann, Cultural Memory, 33: “The past is not a natural growth but a cultural creation.” 49 Y. H. Yerushalmi, Zakhor: Jewish History and Jewish Memory (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1982), 5. 50 Halbwachs, On Collective Memory, 51. 51 R. Hendel, Remembering Abraham: Culture, Memory, and History in the Hebrew Bible (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 97: “The biblical practice of historiography is one of interpretation and combination, rather than verification or falsification.” 52 W. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament: Testimony, Dispute, Advocacy (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1997), 119: “I suggest that the largest rubric under which we can consider Israel’s speech about God is that of testimony.” Note also Hendel, Remembering Abraham, 103.

Metaphor, Memory, and Reality of the “Exile” in Deutero-Isaiah

59

Why did remembering or forgetting matter in the exile? As Psalm 137 demonstrates, the exiles had to wrestle with one thing, more than anything else – remembering and not forgetting. David W. Stowe’s study of the Nazi concentration camps confirms this importance of memory: As survivors’ testimonies make clear, memory was the only resource European Jews had by which to imagine some small measure of cosmic justice against the Nazis and others who terrorized them. This was especially the case when the SS specifically taunted their victims with the prediction that this history would be erased – that no one would believe what had actually happened in the camps. 53

The survivors of the systemic mass abduction and rape of women as sex slaves (known as “comfort women”) for Imperial Japanese soldiers during WWII testify that what they demand is not monetary compensation but rather that the memory of the injustice wrought upon them be recognized with sincere apologies and memorialized as truth. 54 So, how central is the exile in Deutero-Isaiah? 55 Let’s take a few examples. Again, we will try to read between the lines of what memory of the exile the texts may have been signifying, vis-à-vis the memories of the exiles during World War II. In 49:26, the exiles hear the oracle of the reversal of cannibalism. This is one of the most disturbing passages in the Hebrew Bible. 56 While its metaphorical nuance is attested (cf. Isa 9:19), ironically and tragically, similar events are remembered by exiles during World War II. According to the memoir of the concentration camp survivor, Jan Salus, describing what is called “excremental assault,” the Nazis forced the victims to “wallow in their own waste in order to attempt to break down any remaining sense of dignity and self-worth before actually murdering them” (cf. Isa 36:12; Ezek 4:12–14). 57 A North Korean “comfort women” survivor, Ok-Sun Chong, recounted that a kidnapped girl who stood up against the authorities was rolled on top of a sharp-needled wooden board and beheaded, as the commander Yamamoto shouted, “since those

53 D. W. Stowe, Song of Exile: The Enduring Mystery of Psalm 137 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 158. 54 See “Open Letter in Support of Historians in Japan UPDATED,” The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus 13 (2015): 1–24 (https://apjjf.org/-Asia-Pacific-Journal-Feature/4828/article. pdf). 55 Stowe, Song of Exile, x. 56 Cf. 2 Kgs 6:24–29; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20; 4:10; cf. Nah 3:10; Ps 137:8–9; consider also Isa 51:13, 23; note that the “you” in 51:23 is in the feminine singular! 57 Stowe, Song of Exile, 158.

60

Hyun Chul Paul Kim

Korean girls are crying because they have not eaten, boil the human flesh and make them eat it.” 58 Similarly, the recollection of slavery in Isa 52:3, 5 may allude to the forced labor of the exilic Judaeans. The relocated captives would have had to endure the harrowing harassment thrust upon them. Additionally, the oracle of salvation for the dejected, deflowered Lady Zion penetratingly addresses the theme of forgetting the shame of youth in 54:4, which would have seemed impossible to many victims. Many “comfort women” survivors agonizingly recall the bygone years of their youth, completely trampled and torn apart by their abductors. 59 Recalling the full-scale disaster in the time of Noah, the upheaval of mountains and hills displays the fragility of nature in 54:10. For the Korean girls taken away to remote battlefield camps in foreign lands, their mountains and hills were sad nostalgic reminders of their home, far removed from their displacement. Despite their yearning for homecoming, only a few of them returned, while the majority were murdered or their bodies were burned, evidencing the colonizer’s effort to erase memory.

3. Conclusion One of the marquee slogans of the U. S. president, Donald Trump, was to “make America great again,” especially by building walls against neighbouring countries. Whether or not these “walls” actually will be erected across the southern border of the U. S. A., we know that Trump meant the “walls” to mean more than the metaphorical ideas of protection or segregation. More than two millennia ago, a prophet proclaimed, “Prepare the way of the LORD ... a highway for our God” (Isa 40:3). For the ancient Hebrew prophet, the “way” may have meant more than an actual road, like the King’s Highway, for the return migration from Babylon /Persia back to the Levant. The metaphor of “the way of the LORD” can connote the salvific and righteous path conducive to God’s commands. 60 Just as the 58 A testimony of Ok-Sun Chong (then 13 years old) from http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/commission/country52/53-add1.htm. 59 Most, if not all, of the “comfort women” victims – mostly from the age of fourteen to eighteen years – were taken away by violent means, such as deception, coercive selling, and kidnapping. See Y. Yoshiaki, Comfort Women: Sexual Slavery in the Japanese Military during World War II (trans. S. O’Brien; New York: Columbia University Press, 2000), 103–128. 60 Ø. Lund, Way Metaphors and Way Topics in Isaiah 40–55(FAT 2/28; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007), 102, 199, and 229.

Metaphor, Memory, and Reality of the “Exile” in Deutero-Isaiah

61

American “wall” can mean both the abstract idea of separation and the actual bricks and mortar, and barbed wire, so the exiles’ “way” can signify not only the metaphorical conduct or attitude of having faith in God but also the actual path for the journey of return migration. Metaphors of the exile in Deutero-Isaiah contain subtle poetic essences. Many of the key expressions hardly seem to corroborate the tangible archaeological or historical details of the exile. However, metaphors are innately intertwined with real contexts and lived experiences. Memory too can be as remote as the time of the past. Yet memory resolutely brings back the past into the present. Both metaphor and memory, therefore, can have multiple and contending signifiers, clues, and implications. Evidently, the texts of Deutero-Isaiah are neither historiography of exilic life nor lamentations directly arising out of the national calamity. Nonetheless, as metaphors and memories are inherently evocative for readers and listeners, what if we read them from the standpoint of those Judaeans who were devastated and dehumanized, whether in colonized Judah or in Babylonian captivity? If we do so, whenever we encounter the words of “darkness” and “prison,” might they not portray a glimpse of the life of prison-like bondage, where life without freedom is a life without light? Wherever economic usurpation with resultant hunger and poverty might suck the life out of captive people, might their situation not be too different from that of drought and famine? Whoever may have been meant by the fatherless or motherless “daughters” and “sons,” might their forceful dislocation not be equivalent to the traumas of families torn apart, villages pillaged, and a nation dismantled? If so, it would be a grave mistake to conclude that the exile mattered only minimally. Albeit via metaphor and memory, Deutero-Isaiah forces us to reconsider and reinterpret our perceptions of the reality of the exile. Just as there is no “pleasant” slavery, nor a “peaceful” war, there is no “benign” exile. That the testimony of a traumatized community is a fabrication is, indeed, a faulty perspective. That the exile is a myth is therefore a myth. 61

61

K. Jeppesen, “Exile a Period – Exile a Myth,” in Leading Captivity Captive: ‘The Exile’ as History and Ideology (ed. L. L. Grabbe; JSOTSup 278; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), 139–144, 144: “I think that there is some kind of connection between the exile in history and the exile in the mythical narrative. You can say that all texts about the exile are nothing else than reflections of the myth, but there are still events, which were part of the process where the understanding was made deeper or as said above, where the history and the myth meet.”

The Individualization of Exile in Trito-Isaiah Some Reflections on Isaiah 55 and 58 Ulrich Berges 1. Introduction In the Book of Isaiah, exile is not just one subject among others; it belongs to the core themes of this prophetic scroll. 1 But, interestingly, the theme seems to be quite hidden. 2 The presence and absence of exile are two sides of the same coin. Francis Landy has put it in the following words: “Isaiah is all about exile – but in a way, it is not about exile at all.” 3 As is well known, exile plays a significant role in the Deutero-Isaianic chapters as is also the case in Isaiah 34–35, which focus on the fatal end of Edom and the bright future of Zion. 4 While there is no doubt that TritoIsaiah, i. e. the chapters 55/56–66, are strongly influenced by the exile and the return (and the enduring diaspora), only very few studies deal with the issue of “Exile in Trito-Isaiah.” 5 In an important article Bradley C. Gregory 6 stresses that exile is the underestimated hermeneutical matrix 1 See M. A. Halvorson-Taylor, Enduring Exile: The Metaphorization of Exile in the Hebrew Bible (VTSup 141; Leiden: Brill 2011), especially Chapter 3.III. “Exile and the Mission of the Servant” (pp. 136–149) where she deals with Isa 42:5–9 and 49:7–13; as well as Isa 61:1–3 and 58:6–7. 2 G. Knoppers, “Exile, Return and Diaspora: Expatriates and Repatriates in Late Biblical Literature,” in Text, Contexts and Readings in Postexilic Literature (ed. L. Jonker; FAT II /53; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011), 29–61, 38 speaks from a much broader perspective of “the silent treatment.” 3 F. Landy, “Exile in the Book Isaiah,” in The Concept of Exile in Ancient Israel and its Historical Contexts (ed. E. Ben Zvi and C. Levin; BZAW 404; Berlin: De Gruyter, 2010), 241–256, 241. 4 Cf. E. Farfan Navarro, El desierto transformado: Una imagen deuteroisaiana de regeneración (AnBib 130; Rome: Editrice Pontificio Biblico, 1992); for the semantics, see J. Kiefer, Exil und Diaspora: Begrifflichkeit und Deutungen im antiken Judentum und in der hebräischen Bibel (ABG 19; Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2005). 5 Cf. e. g. D. L. Smith-Christopher, A Biblical Theology of Exile (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2002), who gives only a few hints that suggest the so-called Trito-Isaianic chapters. 6 B. C. Gregory, “The Postexilic Exile in Third Isaiah: Isaiah 61:1–3 in Light of Second Temple Hermeneutics,” JBL 126 (2007): 475–496.

64

Ulrich Berges

of many passages in Trito-Isaiah. The reason for this obvious neglect lies in the fact that Isaiah 55/56–66 are rightly considered to be postexilic and even late postexilic. For this reason Jacob Stromberg chose for his dissertation the title “Isaiah after Exile: The Author of Third Isaiah as Reader and Redactor of the Book.” 7 The exile continues to be an important issue in the last part of the Book of Isaiah because the glorious return from Babylon, the homecoming of those dispersed among the nations and the glorious rebuilding of Jerusalem were still awaited. 8 This makes exile the encompassing background of these chapters. 9 Bradley Gregory’s evaluation of Isaiah 61 also holds true for the TritoIsaianic chapters in general. They are “one of the earliest attestations of the idea of a theological exile that extends beyond the temporal and geographical bounds of the Babylonian captivity.” 10 It is furthermore important to note “that behind this theological imagery [stands] the typological association of the Babylonian Exile with the Egyptian captivity.” 11 In a kind of inner-biblical blending, the liberation from Egypt in the time of Moses and the return in the time of Cyrus (44:28; 45:1) were depicted as the ultimate proof of YHWH’s salvific will and irresistible power in the presence of all nations and their gods. One of the best examples of this merging is the salvation oracle in Isa 43:16–17: “Thus says YHWH, who makes a way in the sea, a path in the mighty waters, who brings out chariot and horse, army and warrior; they lie down, they cannot rise, they are extinguished, quenched like a wick.” 12 Undoubtedly, the exodus tradition of Exodus 14–15 has been re-used here, as in Isa 52:11–12 where the prophetic voice calls for the departure from Babylon: “Depart, depart, go out from there! Touch no unclean thing; go out from the midst of it, purify yourselves, you who carry the vessels of YHWH. For you shall not go out in haste, and you shall not go in flight; for YHWH will go before you, and the God of Israel will be your rear guard.” In contrast to the exodus from Egypt there will be no plundering of the enemy, in order 7 J. Stromberg, Isaiah after Exile: The Author of Third Isaiah as Reader and Redactor of the Book (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011). 8 According to D. Rom-Shiloni, Exclusive Inclusivity: Identity Conflicts between the Exiles and the People Who Remained (6th–5th Centuries BCE) (LHBOTS 543; London: Bloomsbury, 2013), 12, “Isa 49–66 and the final edition of the book of Isaiah” belong to the “[r]epatriate literature written in Persian Yehud.” This observation is certainly true. 9 Halvorson-Taylor, Enduring Exile, 149: “As long as the relevance of exilic language endures, the exilic period itself endures.” 10 Gregory, “Postexilic Exile,” 475. 11 Ibid., 487. 12 Cf. U. Berges, Jesaja 40–48 (HThKAT; Freiburg i. Br.: Herder, 2008), 296 ff.

The Individualization of Exile in Trito-Isaiah

65

to avoid any pollution by unclean objects. There is no need for haste anymore (Exod 12:11; Deut 16:3) because this time there will be no hostile army pursuing the Israelites. God’s protection is more powerful than ever because now he is at the same time in front and at the rear of his people (cf. Exod 13:21; 14:19). 13 The theological motif of exile is continually dealt with in the last part of the book of Isaiah. Not only does “Exile persist despite return,” 14 but once back home exile is experienced in a new, even more threatening way: “Trito-Isaiah is about not being at home even when at home, since the return is to a place that has become strange, even hostile, and is indefinitely deferred.” 15 Although correct, this explanation needs to be specified: Exile in Trito-Isaiah is also individualized and can be overcome under certain conditions of ethical behaviour. More than 40 years ago Rémi Lack coined the beautiful expression “L’exode sur place” for this development in the last part of the book of Isaiah: “Exodus on the spot” means that there is no geographical transition from one place to another but an internal movement away from one’s selfishness towards the will of God and the needs of the poor and disenfranchised. 16 With this in mind the fact that the vocabulary of “way” (‫)דֶּרְך‬, ֶ “walking” (‫)הלך‬, “guiding” (‫)נחה‬, “gathering” (‫)קבץ‬, “coming” (‫ )בוא‬marks all the chapters – except Isaiah 61 in the centre of the composition – is most significant. 17 Even back home in Jerusalem and Judah the addressees cannot relax but are exhorted to be on the move – towards God and their fellow man. This exhortation must be seen in a broader perspective, namely the postexilic search for belonging to Jacob /Israel. 18 Rémi Lack started his interpretation with Isaiah 56 because this was, and usually still is, held to be the beginning of Trito-Isaiah. Nevertheless, 13

Cf. U. Berges, Jesaja 49–54 (HThKAT; Freiburg i. Br.: Herder, 2015), 202 ff. Landy, “Exile,” 254. 15 Ibid., 241–242. 16 R. Lack, La Symbolique du Livre d’Isaïe: Essai sur l’image littéraire comme élément de structuration (AnBib 59; Rome: Editrice Pontificio Biblico, 1973), 134. 17 Ibid., 126: ‫ ֶדֶּרְך‬56:11; 57:10, 14 (bis), 17, 18; 58:2, 13; 59:8; 62:10; 63:17; 64:4; 65:2; 66:3; ‫ הלך‬57:2, 17; 58:8; 59:9; 60:3, 14; 63:12, 13; 65:2; ‫ נחה‬57:18; 58:11; ‫ קבץ‬56:8 (thrice); 60:4, 7; 62:9; 66:18; ‫ בוא‬56:1, 7; 57:2; 58:7; 59:14, 19, 20; 60:1, 4 (bis), 5, 6, 9, 11, 13, 17 (bis), 20; 62:11; 63:1, 4; 66:4, 7, 15, 18 (bis), 20 (bis), 23. 18 Cf. G. Knoppers, “Did Jacob Become Judah? The Configuration of Israel’s Restoration in Deutero-Isaiah,” in Samaria, Samarians, Samaritans: Studies on Bible, History and Linguistics (ed. J. Zsengellér; SJ 66; Berlin: De Gruyter, 2011), 39–67; G. Knoppers, “Who or What is Israel in Trito-Isaiah?,” in Let us Go up to Zion (ed. I. Provan and M. J. Boda; VTSup 153; Leiden: Brill, 2012), 153–165, 164: “Like Deutero-Isaiah, Trito-Isaiah gives imaginative and, at times, forceful expression to diverse aspirations within the community.” 14

66

Ulrich Berges

there is a growing consensus among scholars that the beginning is more difficult to establish and that Isaiah 55 can be seen as at least a bridging chapter. 19 I will not go into detail in this context. 20 For the present article it is sufficient to underline that Isaiah 55 fits this ethical exodus perfectly because, on the one hand, the terminological combination “way /walking” is very prominent in this chapter. On the other hand, there is a strong educative drive in these verses. The modern word “education” derives from Latin educere – leading into the open, to the departure from one’s egoism. 21 This is exactly what the exodus metaphor stands for. In this article, I will treat those texts that have mostly been ignored when it comes to the question of exile /exodus in Trito-Isaiah. I will try to close this gap especially in view of Gregory’s treatment of Isaiah 61.

2. Isaiah 55 As already mentioned, the question of the end of Deutero-Isaiah and the beginning of Trito-Isaiah is not the concern of the present article. But in order to reflect on the importance of exile in the last part of the book of Isaiah it makes good sense to start with Isaiah 55. The division of the chapter can be sketched as follows: The invitation to the thirsty at the beginning (vv. 1–5) is followed by an exhortation to return to YHWH (vv. 6–7). Subsequently, God’s plan, as well as the power of his word, are affirmed (vv. 8–11). The description of the changed reality (vv. 12–13) concludes the pericope. The emphatic beginning with the exclamatory particle ‫“ הוֹי‬ho!” is striking since the expression is normally used for woe oracles (1:4; 5:8, 11, 18, 20, 22; 10:1; 29:15; 31:1; 33:1; 45:9–10). How is this extraordinary use in line with the word of salvation in the present context? The answer is found in the parallel of the double ‫ הוֹי‬in Zech 2:10 (“Up, up! Flee from the land of the north, says YHWH”) followed by a third: “Up! Escape to Zion, you that live with daughter Babylon” (Zech 2:11). The exhortation to flee from Babylon to Zion /Jerusalem is the common background of both 19

U. Berges, “Where Does Trito-Isaiah Start in the Book of Isaiah?,” in Continuity and Discontinuity: Chronological and Thematic Development in Isaiah 40–66 (ed. L.-S. Tiemeyer and H. Barstad; FRLANT 255; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014), 63–76. 20 U. Berges, “Brücken über Grenzen: Lectio continua von Jes 54,17b–56,8,” in FS Rüterswörden, forthcoming. 21 R. Lack, “Symbolisme,” 134, makes this point for Isaiah 56–66, but it applies perfectly to Isaiah 55 as well.

The Individualization of Exile in Trito-Isaiah

67

accounts, Zechariah 2 and Isaiah 55. The conceptual overlap becomes even more evident considering the expectation stated in Zech 2:15: “Many nations (‫ )גוֹיִם ַר ִבּים‬shall join themselves to YHWH on that day, and shall be my people; and I will dwell in your midst.” How do “the many nations” fit in this picture of a salvific future? Perhaps Exod 12:38 has to be taken into account because in the time of Moses “a mixed crowd (‫)עֶרב ַרב‬ ֵ also went up with them.” Be that as it may, the parallel of the nations in Zech 2:15 and Isa 55:5 is striking: “See, you shall call a nation that you do not know, and a nation that do not know you shall run to you.” 22 Both passages are linked by the broadened perspective that nations are invited to join YHWH along with the homecoming Israelites. This widening exceeds by far the two earlier calls to leave Babylon and the diaspora in Isa 48:20–21 (“Go out from Babylon, flee from Chaldea.... They did not thirst when he led them through the deserts; he made water flow for them from the rock; he split open the rock and the water gushed out”) and 52:11–12 (“Depart, depart, go out from there! Touch no unclean thing.... For you shall not go out in haste, and you shall not go in flight; for YHWH will go before you, and the God of Israel will be your rear guard”). In these two significant moments of the literary drama of Isaiah 40 ff. the nations play no active part. And even in the commission of the Servant in Isa 42:6; 49:6, 8 to become a covenant to the people and a light to the nations they are left in the position of mere spectators. This changes in Isa 55:5 where people from afar run to “you,” i. e. to Israel, as God’s beloved nation in Jerusalem and Zion. 23 With all of them, with all those who listen to his word, YHWH will make an eternal covenant according to “the sure mercies to David (‫ֶא ָמנִים‬ ֱ ‫”)ח ְסֵדי ָדוִד ַהנּ‬ ַ (Isa 55:3). This David no longer represents the conqueror of peoples but their witness, leader and commander. He is not pursuing them but they run freely to “you” because YHWH has glorified you (Isa 55:5). The invitation to the thirsty is thus extended to each and every one on the condition of ethically right conduct: “the wicked forsake their way, and the unrighteous their thoughts” (55:7). This widening of the audience belongs to a concept of God that surpasses the previously known way of things. Since no analogy is found in the 22

Contra M. E. Stevens, “Who or Ho: The Lamentable Translation of ‫ הוי‬in Isaiah 55:1,” in Raising Up a Faithful Exegete (ed. K. L. Noll and B. Schramm; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2010), 275–282. Stevens interprets the “ho” as a sarcastic invitation to the addressees to rely on their own possibilities and as “a cry of lamentation over the coming distress on the nations” (ibid., 277). 23 M. P. Maier, Völkerwallfahrt im Jesajabuch (BZAW 474; Berlin: De Gruyter, 2016), 347: “Es ist das Gottesvolk, das sich in der Heimat neu konstituiert.”

68

Ulrich Berges

history of Israel, this new situation is depicted by metaphors borrowed from the course of nature. Like water and snow from heaven which ensure vegetation on earth – whenever and wherever they may fall – the word of God accomplishes its effects (55:10–11). Immediately, this intermingling of the human sphere and nature becomes visible: When Jews from the worldwide diaspora leave their places (“for you shall go out in joy and be led back in peace,” 55:12), all the trees clap their hands. The renewed vegetation (“instead of thorn shall come up the cypress,” 55:13) will be an “everlasting sign that shall not be cut off” (‫אוֹת עוֹלָם‬ ‫ִכֵּרת‬ ָ ‫)לֹא י‬. The subsequent verses of Isa 56:1–8 show that the trees of Isaiah 55 are not just trees in a literal sense. According to Isa 56:3, the eunuchs who keep the Sabbath, who choose the things that please God and hold fast to his covenant, are not dry trees. They will receive a better legacy than sons and daughters. YHWH will give them an everlasting name that shall not be cut off (‫ִכֵּרת‬ ָ ‫שׁר לֹא י‬ ֶ ‫;שׁם עוֹלָם ֶא ֶתּן־לוֹ ֲא‬ ֵ Isa 56:5). As a result, Isa 55:1–56:8 as a whole forms the introduction to the last part of the book of Isaiah, with far-reaching theological consequences. First, God’s coming to Zion /Jerusalem embraces not only his people but also affects the nations; and second, salvation comes only to the righteous: “The inclusion of the righteous from the nations and the exclusion of the wicked within Israel are two sides of the same coin.” 24 The references to exile in Isaiah 55 are numerous: “To be thirsty” (‫)צמא‬ refers back to the first occurrence of this word in Isa 5:13: “Therefore my people go into exile without knowledge; their nobles are dying of hunger, and their multitude is parched with thirst.” This verse is part of the woe oracle in 5:11–13. What was formerly announced as punishment – thirst as divine castigation (cf. Deut 28:48; Ezek 19:13; see also Isa 41:17) – is now revoked. This kind of thirst, which can only be quenched by listening to the word of God, has its parallel in the postexilic scriptural prophecy of Amos 8:11: 25 “The time is surely coming, says the Lord YHWH, when I will send a famine on the land; not a famine of bread, or a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of YHWH.” Even though an explicit allusion cannot be proven, the theological reasoning is the same. Thus, Marjo Korpel states: “It is as if the prophet deliberately alludes to Amos 8:11.” 26 24 U. Berges, “Isaiah: Structure, Themes, and Contested Issues,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Prophets (ed. C. J. Sharp; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 153–170, 164. 25 Cf. H. W. Wolff, Dodekapropheton 2: Joel und Amos (BKAT XIV /2; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1969), 379–380. 26 M. C. A. Korpel, “Second Isaiah’s Coping with the Religious Crisis: Reading Isaiah 40 and 55,” in The Crisis of Israelite Religion: Transformation of Religious Tradition in Exilic and

The Individualization of Exile in Trito-Isaiah

69

The only way to end the exile is to listen to the word of God. But Isaiah 55 exceeds this idea by stressing that the life-giving fountain of the word, i. e. the Torah, lies in Zion /Jerusalem. 27 The combination of the words “to purchase grain” (‫)שׁבר‬, “to eat” (‫)אכל‬, “silver” (‫)כּ ֶסף‬ ֶ and “water” (‫)מיִם‬ ַ occurs only once more in the OT, namely in Deut 2:6 at the beginning of the journey through the desert: “You shall purchase food from them [i. e. the Edomites] for money, so that you may eat; and you shall also buy water from them for money, so that you may drink.” The exodus motif pervades the text, 28 sometimes quite freely but with the clear intention to make the present time of salvation more glorious than the time of Moses. 29 The motif that God’s love and forgiveness, like the heavens high above the earth, are unlimited (Isa 55:7–11) has its closest parallel in the postexilic Psalm 103 which in v. 7 refers to Moses: “He made known his ways to Moses, his acts to the people of Israel.” The future after the exile is open to all who fear YHWH and who keep his covenant (v. 17) because “he does not deal with us according to our iniquities. For as the heavens are high above the earth so great is his steadfast love toward those who fear him” (vv. 10–11). 30 The theology of the word of God – effective as rain and snow (Isa 55:10–11) – is generally linked to Isa 40:8 (“The grass withers, the flower fades; but the word of our God will stand forever”). But it also stands very close to the late deuteronomistic text of Deut 8:3: “He humbled you by letting you hunger, then by feeding you with manna, with which neither you nor your ancestors were acquainted, in order to make you understand that one does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of YHWH.” Once again, the exilic and the (early) postexilic era are compared with the time of the exodus. The journey through the wilderness and the postexilic times share one central Post-Exilic Times (ed. B. Becking and M. C. A. Korpel; OTS 42; Leiden: Brill, 1999), 90–113, 100. See also Isa 55:6 and Amos 5:4. 27 Cf. the metaphor of water in Ezek 47; Joel 4:18; Zech 13:1; 14:8; Isa 30:25; Ps 46:5; 87:7. 28 Cf. I. Fischer, “Der Schriftausleger als Marktschreier: Jes 55:1–3a und seine innerbiblischen Bezüge,” in Schriftauslegung in der Schrift (ed. R. G. Kratz et al.; BZAW 300; Berlin: De Gruyter, 2000), 153–162, 162. 29 In contrast to Lam 5:4: “Our water we drink for silver (‫)בּ ֶכ ֶסף‬, ְ our wood comes against payment (‫”;)בּ ְמ ִחיר‬ ִ cf. U. Berges, Klagelieder (HThKAT; Freiburg i. Br.: Herder, 2012), 283. 30 Cf. F.-L. Hossfeld and E. Zenger, Psalmen 101–150 (HThKAT; Freiburg i. Br.: Herder, 2008), 60; also J. Gärtner, Die Geschichtspsalmen: Eine Studie zu den Psalmen 78, 105, 106, 135 und 136 als hermeneutische Schlüsseltexte im Psalter (FAT 84; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012), 260–269.

70

Ulrich Berges

theological trait: Israel can only survive by listening to the life-ensuring word of God. 31 In the final passage of the Song of Moses at the end of the Book of Deuteronomy, there is another striking parallel concerning the theology of the word of God. The motif that God’s word does not return to him empty (‫יקם‬ ָ ‫לֹא־יָשׁוּב ֵאלַי ֵר‬, Isa 55:11) is only found in Deut 32:47, where Moses issues the warning that the Torah “is not an empty thing for you (‫;)לֹא־ד ָבר ֵרק‬ ָ because it is your life. Through it you may live long in the land that you are crossing over the Jordan to possess.” The combination of “word” (‫)דּ ָבר‬ ָ and “empty” (‫)ריק‬ ֵ occurs only in these two passages in the OT. The call to leave in joy (Isa 55:12–13) refers to Isa 48:20 and 52:11–12 but also to 44:23: “Sing, O heavens, for YHWH has done it; shout, O depths of the earth; break forth into singing, O mountains, O forest, and every tree in it.” The call to come to Zion /Jerusalem is no longer restricted to the Babylonian golah or the worldwide diaspora. It includes everyone who thirsts and wants to get in contact with YHWH, the God of Israel and master of all creation. This broadening seeks a reorientation of postexilic Israel, where various groups differed as to their definition of God’s people. The main issue was determining the exact dividing line between insiders and outsiders. In this heated debate language becomes a weapon with which to foster one’s own ideas and denigrate others’ opinions: “The problem here in Isaiah 56–66 is that agreement breaks down, and so the game grinds to a halt. In Foucault’s terms, the veneer of language is peeled away, and the true repression becomes visible.” 32 Isaiah 56:1–8 makes clear that even the dry tree – the eunuch – will be among the trees full of joy and praise. The metaphorical and semantic connections (‫“ חפץ‬to please,” 56:4; 55:11; ‫שׁם עוֹלָם‬ ֵ “eternal name;” ‫ִכֵּרת‬ ָ ‫“ לֹא י‬not cut off,” 56:5; 55:13) are so close that the possibility of a coincidental parallel with Isa 55:12–13 can be excluded. 33 This being the case, the verb ‫“ עלה‬to go up” in 55:13 not only indicates the growth of the vegetation but points to the ascent of the diaspora and the nations to

31 E. Otto, Deuteronomium 4,44–11,32 (HThKAT; Freiburg i. Br.: Herder, 2012), 923: “Die Katastrophe hinter sich können sie in der Erinnerung der Erzählungen der Wüstenwanderung die eigene Erfahrung als Prüfung und Erziehung JHWHs begreifen, die zu der Einsicht führt, dass der Mensch nicht vom Brot allein, sondern von der geoffenbarten Satzung JHWHs lebe.” 32 J. L. Berquist, “Reading Difference in Isaiah 56–66: The Interplay of Literary and Sociological Strategies,” Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 7 (1995): 23–42, 36. 33 O. H. Steck, “Beobachtungen zu Jesaja 56–59,” in Studien zu Tritojesaja (O. H. Steck; BZAW 203; Berlin: De Gruyter, 1991), 169–186, 170.

The Individualization of Exile in Trito-Isaiah

71

YHWH’s holy mountain in Jerusalem. 34 Whoever leaves his sinful ways and climbs Mount Zion in order to dwell in God’s presence is like a thorn changed into a cypress, like a brier changed into a myrtle. 35

3. Isaiah 58 While the exile /exodus metaphor in Isaiah 55 (and the continuation in 56:1–8) is primarily used to extend the group of addressees, the focus of Isaiah 58 lies on individualization, with a strong emphasis on the ethical implication of the veneration of YHWH. Isaiah 55:7 already suggested this trait since “the wicked man” (‫שׁע‬ ָ ‫)ר‬, ָ that is, every single individual, was invited to forsake his evil path and turn to YHWH, the God of mercy and forgiveness. In postexilic times, the individual becomes more and more important as Moshe Weinfeld points out: “During the Persian period religious observance became a voluntary matter. People assemble and accept obligations but are not subject to externally imposed laws.” 36 In Isaiah 58, the ethics of the individual is focused on two central topics: fasting (vv. 1–7) and Sabbath observance (vv. 13–14). The middle section of the chapter (vv. 8–12) presents the rewards for those who change their way of life. This middle part can be divided into two strophes: While vv. 8–10 promise God’s light and proximity, vv. 11–12 assure his guidance. “Light” (‫ )אוֹר‬surrounds vv. 8–10 not only as a recurring term but also as a motif of increase, by changing from (dim) “morning light” (‫)שׁ ַחר‬ ַ in 8a to (blazing) “midday [sun]” (‫)צ ֳהַריִם‬ ָ at the end of v. 10b. The verb that introduces the metaphor in v. 8, ‫“ בקע‬to cleave /break open”, is unusual here because it is normally used for the gushing of water, especially during the exodus (Exod 14:16, 21; Isa 63:12; Ps 78:13; Neh 9:11), but also more generally in parched land (Isa 35:6; 48:21; Ps 74:15; 78:15). The term is even more striking since at the end of the strophe the expected word ‫זרח‬ “to rise” is used (v. 10; Isa 60:1, 2, 3; Ps 112:4; Mal 3:20). The combination 34 Cf. the ascent from Egypt to the promised land in Gen 13:1; 45:25; Exod 1:10; 12:38; Isa 11:16; Hos 2:17. In postexilic times it becomes the terminus technicus for the return to the homeland (see Ezra 2:1, 59; 7:6, 7, 28; 8:1; Neh 7:5, 6, 61; 12:1); cf. ‫“ עלייה‬aliyah”, as the immigration of Jews worldwide to modern Israel. 35 See M. C. A. Korpel, “Metaphors in Isaiah LV,” VT 46 (1996): 43–55, 55. 36 M. Weinfeld, “The Crystallization of the ‘Congregation of the Exile’ ( ‫ )קהל הגולה‬and the Sectarian Nature of Post-Exilic Judaism,” in Normative and Sectarian Judaism in the Second Temple Period (M. Weinfeld; LSTS 54; London: T&T Clark, 2005), 232–238, 233.

72

Ulrich Berges

of healing and light does not occur frequently in the OT (cf. Isa 30:26; Mal 3:20). In Jer 8:22; 30:17; 33:6 the word ‫“ ֲארוָּכה‬healing” refers to the recovery of Zion /Jerusalem (cf. “repairing” in Neh 4:1; 2 Chr 24:13). This might be also the case in Isa 58:8 since “your healing” affects first every single person and as a consequence the community of Zion as well. If the addressees remain in their sins the hope for light will be frustrated and they will stumble like the blind, at noon as in twilight (59:9–10). What is at stake is “no gradual healing and gradual growth but a miraculous transformation.” 37 This amazing renovation has the effect that “your righteousness shall go before you and that the glory of YHWH shall be your rear guard” (Isa 58:8). This promise is a reformulation of Isa 52:12: “For you shall not go out in haste, and you shall not go in flight; for YHWH will go before you, and the God of Israel will be your rear guard” (‫אסף‬ piel; cf. Exod 13:21; 14:19). But there is a significant modification because in Isa 58:8 it is not YHWH who leads the way but “your righteousness” (‫)צ ְד ֶקָך‬. ִ The question of what kind of ‫ ֶצֶדק‬is meant here – either divine salvation or righteous human behaviour – is out of place. The addressees cannot procure justice and salvation by themselves since these are divine gifts. 38 But it is equally true that divine justice will be realized only on the condition that righteousness is done (cf. v. 2: “as if they were a nation that practised righteousness”). If fasting is accompanied by ethical behaviour “your righteousness” will go before the addressee and YHWH will be at the rear. This is not so much a “[s]piritualization of second Isaiah’s Exodus motif ” 39 but a focusing on ethics. The departure from Babel and the diaspora has to correspond with an exodus from one’s own egoism in order to be in accordance with the will of God. As already mentioned in the introduction, Rémi Lack coined the apt expression “exodus on the spot” for this theological development in Trito-Isaiah: “L’exode sur place est sortie de soi-même et entrée dans le vouloir de Dieu.” 40 The fact that the verb ‫ אסף‬in Isa 58:8b stands in qal (“to gather”) and not in piel as in Isa 52:12 (“to form the rear guard”) calls for explication. Thus, the focus lies not only on the protection by God but also on his gathering (cf. Vulgate: “gloria Domini colliget te”) of all those who are willing to adhere to the prophetic Torah with its ethical implications:

37

J. Goldingay, Isaiah 56–66 (ICC; London: Bloomsbury, 2014), 176. W. A. M. Beuken, Jesaja deel IIIA (Prediking van het Oude Testament; Nijkerk: Callenbach, 1989), 110–111. 39 D. G. Meade, Pseudonymity and Canon (WUNT 39; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1986), 38. 40 Lack, Symbolique, 134. 38

The Individualization of Exile in Trito-Isaiah

73

“Anyone who provides accommodation and clothes for the shelterless is himself taken into God’s fellowship.” 41 The transition from the metaphor of light (vv. 8–10) to that of guidance (vv. 11–12) was already prepared for by the statement, “your righteousness shall go before you” (v. 8b). Guidance can only be successful when there is light (cf. Isa 42:16: “And I will bring the blind by a way that they knew not; I will lead them in paths that they have not known: I will make darkness light before them, and crooked things straight”). But there is more to this passage, because being led by God is equal to his healing. Therefore, Isa 57:18 states: “I have seen their ways, but I will heal (‫ )רפא‬them; I will lead (‫ )נחה‬them and repay them with comfort, creating for their mourners the fruit of the lips.” The verb ‫“ נחה‬to lead” alludes to the divine guidance during the exodus (Exod 13:17, 21; 15:13; 32:34; Deut 32:12; Ps 77:21; 78:14, 53, 72; Neh 9:12, 19). In the prophetic literature, it is only used in these two verses, Isa 57:18 and 58:11. In Deutero-Isaiah, exile was something that happened to Israel. In TritoIsaiah, it is something that happens within the people of God, in all those who are willing to hear. 42 The promise to “satisfy your nefesh in parched places” (‫יע‬ ַ ‫שׂ ִבּ‬ ְ ‫ְה‬ ִ‫ו‬ ‫שָׁך‬ ֶ ‫ַפ‬ ְ ‫;בּ ַצ ְח ָצחוֹת נ‬ ְ Isa 58:11) alludes to v. 10: those who offer their nefesh to the hungry can be sure that their own nefesh will be satisfied by God. 43 The hapax legomenon ‫“ ַצ ְח ָצחוֹת‬parched places” was probably chosen because of the assonance with ‫“ ָצ ֳהַריִם‬midday sun” in v. 10b. The reference of this metaphor to exile is made clear by the word ‫“ ִצ ֵחה‬dried up /parched” in Isa 5:13: “Therefore my people go into exile without knowledge; their nobles are dying of hunger, and their multitude is parched with thirst.” The exodus motif is further strengthened by the provision of water as was already the case in Isa 41:18; 43:19–20; 44:3; 48:21. But now the divine gift of water is not made to the entire people on its way home but to the individuals who act ethically. The expression ‫מוֹצא ַמיִם‬ ָ “spring of water” (Isa 58:11) is taken from Isa 41:18 (“I will open rivers in high places, and fountains in the midst of the valleys; I will make the wilderness a pool of water, and the dry land springs of water”) and is used outside of the book of Isaiah only in 41

J. L. Koole, Isaiah III/Isaiah 56–66 (HCOT; Leuven: Peeters, 2001), 143. Halvorson-Taylor, Enduring Exile, 149: “Exile, something that in Second Isaiah ‘happens to’ Israel and is redressed by YHWH, becomes a way of speaking about things that ‘happen within’ Israel – and that Israel is now called upon to redress.” 43 Cf. Goldingay, Isaiah 56–66, 161; M. A. Sweeney, Isaiah 40–66 (FOTL; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2016), 284. 42

74

Ulrich Berges

Ps 107:33, 35 (cf. 2 Chr 32:30 in the context of the tunnel of Hezekiah). Erich Zenger holds that Psalm 107 was written about 400 BCE by Korahites and that this poem has close connections to Isaiah 40–66. 44 The simile “as a watered garden” (‫)כּגַן ָרוֶה‬ ְ derives from Jer 31:12 where the image applies to those returning to Zion: “They shall come and sing aloud on the height of Zion, and they shall be radiant over the goodness of YHWH, over the grain, the wine, and the oil, and over the young of the flock and the herd; their life shall become like a watered garden, and they shall never languish again.” This reuse makes good sense since Isa 51:3 spoke of Zion as “the garden of Eden” (cf. 61:11). Jeremiah 31:12 is clearly the literary source since the imagery of “watering /satisfying” (‫ )רוה‬the nefesh reappears two more times in the chapter (v. 14: soul of the priests; v. 25 weary soul). In Isa 58:11 this divine promise is restricted to those who act ethically towards the needy by fasting the right way (cf. Lev 16; 23:24–32). 45 One last application of the exodus /exile imagery can be detected at the end of Isaiah 58. In vv. 13–14, correct Sabbath observance is at stake. The question of whether this passage was originally an integral part of this chapter or constitutes a later addition can be left aside for the moment. 46 What makes the end of the chapter especially striking is the divine promise to those who refrain from pursuing their economic interests on the Sabbath: “I will make you ride upon the heights of the earth; I will feed you with the heritage of your ancestor Jacob” (v. 14). This idea has its closest parallel in Jer 17:25. When the people listen to God and carry no burden on the Sabbath and do no work on it, the following promise awaits them: “then there shall enter by the gates of this city kings who sit on the throne of David, riding in chariots (‫כבים ָבֶּר ֶכב‬ ִ ְ ‫ ) ֹר‬and on horses, they and their officials, the people of Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and this city shall be inhabited forever” (see also Jer 22:4). When reading this passage, one has to take into account the fact that “riding” (‫)רכב‬ was a mode of transport reserved for kings and higher officials only. 47 In Isa 58:14, this promise is even intensified because those who refrain 44

Zenger /Hossfeld, Psalms 101–150, 146. M. Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988, repr. 2004), 306: “Isa. 58:1–12 is thus an aggadic exposition of legal traditum; it is not a legal exegesis of it.” 46 See K. Koenen, Ethik und Eschatologie im Tritojesajabuch: Eine literarkritische und redaktionsgeschichtliche Studie (WMANT 62; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1990), 88 ff. 47 G. Fischer, Jeremia 1–25 (HThKAT, Freiburg i. Br.: Herder, 2005), 566–567; see also Isa 66:20; 2 Kgs 5:9. 45

The Individualization of Exile in Trito-Isaiah

75

from “trampling” the Sabbath will not only ride into Jerusalem but will “ride on the heights of the Land” (‫ ֶאֶרץ‬+ ‫ ָבּ ָמה‬+ ‫)רכב‬. This wording is used only once more in the OT, namely in the Song of Moses: “He made him ride on the high places of the earth, that he might eat the increase of the fields; and he made him to suck honey out of the rock, and oil out of the flinty rock” (Deut 32:13). 48 But now God himself announces the promise in the first person singular: “I will make you ride.” The pragmatics of Isa 58:13–14 thus becomes clear: If the post-exilic community obeys the Sabbath and keeps the day holy, YHWH will let Israel ride on the high places of the entire land ensuring him the “heritage of Jacob, your father” (‫ַעקֹב ָא ִביָך‬ ֲ ‫ַחלַת י‬ ֲ ‫)נ‬. In the Song of Moses, Jacob was the heritage of God; now the land with all its richness is the heritage of Jacob. 49 But while “Jacob” in the Song of Moses meant the people as such, now only those who obey the prophetic word belong to “Jacob.” The disobedient are no longer part of Jacob. Instead, they are considered to be Esau, the ancestor of Edom (cf. Isa 63:1–6). The debate about Jacob /Esau, that is, Israel / Edom, constitutes an integral part of the continual redefinition of identity in postexilic times. The hiphil of ‫“ אכל‬to feed” is used several times in the context of the way through the wilderness (Exod 16:32; Num 11:4, 8; Deut 8:3, 16; Hos 11:4; Ps 81:17). But there is also a reference back to Isa 55:1–2, namely the invitation to delight oneself in the rich food prepared by God, because only in 55:2 and 58:14 the two verbs ‫“ אכל‬to eat” and ‫“ ענג‬to take delight” do stand together. The affinity with the Song of Moses makes it probable that the expression “heritage of Jacob” in Isa 58:14 has its origin in Deut 32:9: “For YHWH’s portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance (‫ַעקֹב‬ ֲ‫י‬ ‫ַחלָתוֹ‬ ֲ ‫)ח ֶבל נ‬.” ֶ The strong personal relationship of YHWH to Jacob (cf. Isa 19:25; 47:6; 63:17; Jer 10:16; 51:19; Ps 47:5; 78:71) is restricted to only those in Jacob who obey God’s will and word. Therefore, Isa 59:20 (right at the end of Isaiah 56–59) states that God will come to Zion as redeemer, but only to those in Jacob who turn away from transgression. The others, that is, the enemies of YHWH and his servants, are not Jacob but belong to the offspring of Esau (cf. 63:1–6). This point is made very clear at the end of Isaiah 59. After the prophetic formula ‫ְאם יְהוָה‬ ֻ ‫“ נ‬says YHWH” and the speech about God in the third 48 Cf. Beuken, Jesaja deel IIIA, 121; see also B. Sommer, A Prophet Reads Scripture: Allusion in Isaiah 40–66 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998), 171. 49 The “high places” indicate the richness of the land (cf. Gen 49:25; Deut 33:15; Ps 50:10; 72:16). This is clearly seen in the translation of the LXX τὰ ἀγαθὰ τῆς γῆς.

76

Ulrich Berges

person (v. 20), the first person with the emphatic “I” (‫ַאנִי‬ ֲ ‫ )ו‬comes as a surprise. 50 But there is no reason to contend that v. 21 is misplaced in its present context and to relocate it, for example, to the end of the whole book. 51 The connection to v. 20 is clear and instructive: YHWH bestows his spirit only upon those in Jacob who turn away from the sins, that is, from the misconduct of postexilic Israel. He puts his divine words into their mouths and the mouths of their children and grandchildren forever and ever. God’s spirit upon the Servant (Isa 42:1) and the divine word (Isa 51:16) are combined and imparted on faithful Israel. 52 Conveying of the divine word is the key task of the prophets and especially of the father of all prophets. God promised that through the history of his people there would always be a prophet like Moses: “I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their own people; I will put my words in the mouth of the prophet, who shall speak to them everything that I command” (Deut 18:18). 53 In the days of Jeremiah it was the prophet from Anathoth in whose mouth YHWH had put his words (Jer 1:9). 54 The authors of Isa 59:21 apply the status of true prophecy to those who turn away from the sins of Jacob and who become members of the group of “servants” (from 54:17b onwards). These writing prophets (Schriftpropheten) not only reinterpreted the Mosaic Torah (compare Isa 56:3–4 with Deut 23:2); they are also convinced that their children and grandchildren will be gifted with this prophetic charisma as well. They even apply Joshua’s succession of Moses to themselves and their offspring, as can be deduced from the allusion to Josh 1:8: “This book of the law shall not depart out of your mouth ” (‫תּוֹרה ַהזֶּה ִמ ִפּיָך‬ ָ ‫)לֹא־יָמוּשׁ ֵס ֶפר ַה‬. In the context of the divine word the verb ‫“ מושׁ‬to depart” is only found in these two Old Testament passages. As Joshua is the faithful servant of the Mosaic Torah, so are the scribes of Trito-Isaiah the servants of the prophetic Torah (cf. 1:10; 2:3; 42:4, 21, 24; 51:4, 7). 55 Correspondingly, they are also the successors 50

See the gap of seven millimeters in 1QIsaa between v. 20 and v. 21; cf. O. H. Steck, Die erste Jesajarolle von Qumran (1QJesa). Textheft (SBS 173/2; Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1980), 74. 51 C. Westermann, Das Buch Jesaja. Kapitel 40–66 (ATD 19; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986), 280 and 338 note 1. 52 Berges, Jesaja 49–54, 167. 53 Concerning the theology of the passage, see E. Otto, Deuteronomium 12,1–23,15 (HThKAT; Freiburg i. Br.: Herder, 2016), 1499–1500. 54 See Fischer, Jeremia 1–25, 136. 55 Cf. U. Berges, “Überlegungen zur Bundestheologie in Jes 40–66,” in Für immer verbündet: Studien zur Bundestheologie der Bibel (ed. C. Dohmen and C. Frevel; SBS 211; Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 2007), 19–26, 24.

The Individualization of Exile in Trito-Isaiah

77

of the Servant of God (cf. ‫“ ֶפּה‬mouth” in 49:2; 51:16). 56 The group is open to all those who turn to YHWH with clear knowledge of the ethical implications.

4. Conclusion Exile represents one of the most characteristic features of the book of Isaiah. But it is not dealt with as directly and explicitly as, for example, in the books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel, where readers are drawn into the history of destruction and deportation to Babylon (cf. Jer 39–45; 52; Ezek 1–5; 12; 24). The “silent treatment,” as it were, of exile in the book of Isaiah has to do with the strong emphasis on Zion as the centre of God’s creation, his royal bride and a true mother to her children. 57 Wherever the so called Deutero-Isaianic chapters were written – in Babylon, in Judah / Jerusalem or in somewhere in the diaspora – the scenery of especially Isaiah 40–48 is located far from home in a situation of exile and displacement. 58 Otherwise the calls to leave Babylon and the other places of dispersion (48:20–21; 52:11–12) would not make much sense. The invitation in Isaiah 55 to come to the place of water and rich food must be interpreted correspondingly: The movement back home is no longer restricted to Israel /Jacob. It is open to everyone who wants to be nourished by the word of God. But this implies that the individual leaves his sinful ways and as a consequence is rewarded with the transformation from thorns to cypresses. Once this has happened, not even the eunuch will say anymore that he is a “dry tree” (56:3), because he is surely part of the divine gathering of God’s people (56:8). Thus, in Isa 55:1–56:8 the matrix of exile is enlarged to a worldwide audience but only on the condition of proper ethical behaviour (Isa 55:7; 56:2). This aspect is fostered in Isaiah 58. The one who acts ethically by caring for the needy, fasting the right way and observing the Sabbath will encounter his own personal God of the exodus (Isa 58:8b). Exile is thus transformed from an external movement into an ethical reordering, into a way out of one’s own egoism. Isa 59:21 offers a glimpse of the self-understanding of the writers and composers of the Trito-Isaianic chapters. God’s spirit rests on them and 56 Goldingay, Isaiah 56–66, 237: “They are moral and religious offspring, like those promised to the servant in 53.10.” 57 U. Berges, “Die Zionstheologie des Buches Jesaja,” EstBib 58 (2000): 167–198. 58 Cf. R. Albertz, Die Exilszeit: 6. Jahrhundert v. Chr. (BE 7; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2001), 296 ff.

78

Ulrich Berges

the divine words will never leave them, their children and grandchildren. These chapters of Isaiah, written in the aftermath of exile, impressively show how biblical authors creatively handled the traditum by moulding it into a multiform tradition.

Part II Jeremiah and Ezekiel

A Rebirth of Images? Theme and Motif in Jeremiah and Ezekiel Paul M. Joyce

The books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel share a great deal. Neither mentions the other, overtly or obliquely, 1 but that they are connected one way or another seems clear, and the question of their literary relations has generated a large body of scholarly literature. 2

1. The Literary Relations of Jeremiah and Ezekiel To illustrate the general phenomenon of shared images in the two books I begin by briefly citing five motifs: First, consumption of divine words: In Jer 1:9 we read “Then the LORD put out his hand and touched my mouth; and the LORD said to me, ‘Now I have put my words in your mouth’” and in Jer 15:16 “Your words were found, and I ate them, and your words became to me a joy and the delight of my heart.” Comparably, in Ezek 3:1–3 we find “He said to me, ‘O mortal, eat what is offered to you; eat this scroll, and go, speak to the house of Israel.’ So I opened my mouth, and he gave me the scroll to eat. He said to me, ‘Mortal, eat this scroll that I give you and fill your stomach with it.’ Then I ate it; and in my mouth it was as sweet as honey.”

1 See the valuable discussion of D. Rom-Shiloni, “Ezekiel and Jeremiah: What Might Stand Behind the Silence?,” HeBAI 1 (2012), 203–230. Still of interest is the much earlier and more popular brief reflection of G. W. Anderson, Prophetic Contemporaries: A Study of Jeremiah and Ezekiel (London: Epworth, 1967). 2 For example, M. Burrows, The Literary Relations of Ezekiel (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society Press, 1925); J. W. Miller, Das Verhältnis Jeremias und Hesekiels sprachlich und theologisch untersucht mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Prosareden Jeremias (Assen: van Gorcum, 1955); D. Vieweger, Die literarischen Beziehungen zwischen den Büchern Jeremia und Ezechiel (BEATAJ 26; Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1993). On the need for methodological caution, see P. M. Joyce, Ezekiel: A Commentary (LHBOTS 482; New York and London: T & T Clark /Continuum, 2007), 33–41.

82

Paul M. Joyce

Second, the deity fortifying the prophet against resistance: In Jer 1:18–19 we read “‘And I for my part have made you today a fortified city, an iron pillar, and a bronze wall, against the whole land, against the kings of Judah, its princes, its priests, and the people of the land. They will fight against you; but they shall not prevail against you, for I am with you,’ says the LORD, ‘to deliver you’”; and in Ezek 3:8–9 we read “See, I have made your face hard against their faces, and your forehead hard against their foreheads. Like the hardest stone, harder than flint, I have made your forehead; do not fear them or be dismayed at their looks, for they are a rebellious house”. Third, watchmen or sentinels: In Jer 6:17 we read “Also I raised up sentinels for you: ‘Give heed to the sound of the trumpet!’ But they said, ‘We will not give heed’”, and in Ezek 3:17–21 “Mortal, I have made you a sentinel for the house of Israel; whenever you hear a word from my mouth, you shall give them warning from me”. Fourth, traditional paragons of virtue: In Jer 15:1 we read “Then the LORD said to me: ‘Though Moses and Samuel stood before me, yet my heart would not turn toward this people. Send them out of my sight, and let them go!’”, and in Ezek 14:14, 20, “‘Even if Noah, Daniel, and Job, these three, were in it, they would save only their own lives by their righteousness’, says the Lord GOD”. Fifth and finally, bad and good shepherds: In Jer 23 we read “‘Woe to the shepherds who destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture!’ says the LORD”, and in Ezek 34:2 “Mortal, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel: prophesy, and say to them – to the shepherds: Thus says the Lord GOD: ‘Ah, you shepherds of Israel who have been feeding yourselves! Should not shepherds feed the sheep?’” As for good shepherds, in Jer 3:15 we find “I will give you shepherds after my own heart, who will feed you with knowledge and understanding”, and in Ezek 34:11 “For thus says the Lord GOD: I myself will search for my sheep, and will seek them out” and in verse 23, “I will set up over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he shall feed them: he shall feed them and be their shepherd”. 3 These and other cases 4 inevitably raise the question of how to explain such similarities between Jeremiah and Ezekiel. Are we speaking 3 Alongside such cases we may note also the non-verbal communication embodied in the numerous “sign-acts” that are to be found in the two books, which share both similarities and differences in this regard. Cf. K. G. Friebel, Jeremiah’s and Ezekiel’s Sign-Acts: Rhetorical Nonverbal Communication (JSOTSup 283; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999). 4 For an attempt to assemble an exhaustive list, see W. L. Holladay, Jeremiah 2 (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1989), 81–84.

A Rebirth of Images?

83

of prophets here or of texts? And when we speak of prophets, do we mean historical figures or literary characters in texts? All of these: as readers we encounter texts in the first instance, and within them appear characters, who in my view bear at least some relation to historical figures. It is evident that people had a role in generating these texts and it is legitimate to speculate on the relationship between those individuals (and perhaps groups) and the named prophetic characters who appear in the books. 5 As for the images we have briskly reviewed, some of them may of course derive from common cultural stock predating both books, such as the metaphor of shepherds for leaders (widely evidenced in the ancient world), and so it is hard to prove direct connection between Jeremiah and Ezekiel. 6 In other cases, however, images are rarer in the extant literature and a closer link of some kind seems plausible, reflecting more specific tradition. The motif of the consumption of divine words (Jer 1:9; 15:16; Ezek 3:1–3) may provide an example. Unless one regards the presented settings of the two books as entirely fictional, it would appear that Jeremiah was active as a prophet for a significant period of time before Ezekiel, 7 and so it is tempting to assume that Ezekiel is often the borrower in such cases. It seems not unlikely that Ezekiel inherited the theme of the consumption of the words of God from Jeremiah, 8 and then developed it in a significant way. 9 Some other similarities may well be explained that way; this could involve dependence on written material or just oral

5 Cf. J. C. de Moor, ed., The Elusive Prophet: The Prophet as a Historical Person, Literary Character and Anonymous Artist (OtSt 45; Leiden: Brill, 2001). 6 Holladay (Jeremiah 2, 83) may be too confident in venturing that “Ezek 34:1–16 ... is evidently an expansion of Jer 23:1–4.” 7 For critical discussion of this issue, see R. R. Wilson, “Historicizing the Prophets: History and Literature in the Book of Jeremiah,” in On the Way to Nineveh: Studies in Honor of George M. Landes (ed. S. L. Cook and S. C. Winter; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1999), 136–54; C. L. Crouch, An Introduction to the Study of Jeremiah (T & T Clark Approaches to Biblical Studies; London: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2017), 2–9; Joyce, Ezekiel, 3–6. 8 Affinities with the ordeal described in Num 5:11–31 are noted by M. Greenberg in his commentary, Ezekiel 1–20 (AB 22; New York: Doubleday, 1983), 78, but the similarity of imagery between Jeremiah and Ezekiel is significantly closer. This is not to say that the distinctive theological use to which the image is put in Ezekiel should not be closely interrogated, in which connection see M. S. Odell, Ezekiel (Smyth and Helwys Bible Commentary; Macon: Smyth and Helwys, 2005), 44. 9 The significance of the motif in Ezekiel is explored at length in E. F. Davis, Swallowing the Scroll: Textuality and the Dynamics of Discourse in Ezekiel’s Prophecy (Bible and Literature series 21; JSOTSup 78; Sheffield: Almond Press, 1989).

84

Paul M. Joyce

influence. 10 On such a model (which does indeed seem to me plausible, if insufficient) we could speak of finding within Ezekiel, to borrow a phrase from Austin Farrer, a “rebirth of images” from Jeremiah. 11 The issue is more complicated than this, however, especially if we think of the developed works. Christopher Seitz writes: “The final form of the Book of Jeremiah reflects significant redactional intervention carried out under the influence of Ezekiel traditions,” 12 and Terence Collins comments: “In terms of the production of the books there is no doubt that Ezekiel in fact preceded Jeremiah, which has a very lengthy and complicated redactional history behind it.” 13 Overall, the probability is that there has been mutual influence between Jeremiah and Ezekiel. 14

2. Images of Exile in Jeremiah and Ezekiel To focus now on some specifics relating to our theme of images of exile in particular, a preliminary word is in order about the discussion of imagery. We have some good models to follow. Writing of the language and imagery of the Bible, George Caird presented a rich and subtle exploration of biblical language in the light of the study of semantics, 15 while John Gibson focused specifically on the Old Testament /Hebrew Bible in his exploration of the use of language and imagery. 16 We should not think simplistically of theological or other content being packaged in an image, 10 Holladay (Jeremiah 2, 84) even speculates that Ezekiel heard Jeremiah preaching in Jerusalem specifically in the period 601/600 BCE. See the judicious discussion of RomShiloni, “Ezekiel and Jeremiah.” 11 A. Farrer, A Rebirth of Images: The Making of St John’s Apocalypse (Westminster: Dacre Press, 1949). 12 C. R. Seitz, Theology in Conflict: Reactions to the Exile in the Book of Jeremiah (BZAW 176; Berlin and New York: De Gruyter, 1989), 295. 13 T. Collins, The Mantle of Elijah: The Redaction Criticism of the Prophetical Books (The Biblical Seminar 20; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 8. 14 My discussion of material in Jeremiah and Ezekiel that seems related is presented in diachronic mode, in terms of possible dependence and allusion (on which approach, see further M. Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel [Oxford: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press, 1985]). But we could come at this matter rather in terms of intertextuality, in a thoroughgoing synchronic sense (cf. G. D. Miller, “Intertextuality in Old Testament Research,” CBR 9 [2011]: 283–309). As I have acknowledged, some proper agnosticism about diachronic conclusions is appropriate; such agnosticism might itself justify a synchronic approach or one could defend a synchronic approach on its own literary terms. Both diachronic and synchronic surveys could be conducted and each might yield valuable and complementary insights. 15 G. B. Caird, The Language and Imagery of the Bible (London: Duckworth, 1980). 16 J. C. L. Gibson, Language and Imagery in the Old Testament (London: SPCK, 1998).

A Rebirth of Images?

85

as though it were a shell. Rather, the relationship between content and image is always a more subtle one, as Janet Soskice demonstrates clearly. 17 Jeremiah and Ezekiel are in many ways similar on the central themes of exile. The two books are largely united in their theology of judgement and in this they stand on the shoulders of the eighth century Prophets and their response to the Assyrian crisis. The Assyrian and Babylonian crises were crucial catalysts for the religious thinking of ancient Israel. Deeply troubling events (such as the looming shadow and then the reality of imperial conquest) demanded explanation, essential if some structure of meaning were to be sustained. The violent and bloody attack of the foreign invader does not represent chaos or the triumph of other gods, it was claimed, but the just and powerful action of Israel’s own God, punishing the nation’s sins. There are, to be sure, significant differences between Jeremiah and Ezekiel in this area, for example relating to the presentation of sin (Ezekiel being more purity-focused, e. g. Ezek 22:26; 44:23) and to how Babylon features (Jeremiah being represented as aligning himself more overtly with Babylon as the agent of divine punishment, e. g. Jer 27:12–15, in a book that nonetheless also contains, unlike Ezekiel, explicit oracles against Babylon, in Jeremiah 50–51). Even so, there is here a largely common theological basis to these two traditions. 18 As for the images employed, the deity is modelled as a just authority figure who is very angry. Though we might sometimes forget it, even this is metaphorical. In a time of national crisis these prophets projected anger onto the national deity, a strategy that appeared to provide an explanation of national disaster more satisfactory than the victory of other gods or indeed the advent of meaningless chaos. This is a discourse widely evidenced in both prophetic books. For example, we read in Jer 21:5 “I myself will fight against you with outstretched hand and mighty arm, in anger, in fury, and in great wrath,” and in Ezek 5:13 “My anger shall spend itself, and I will vent my fury on them and satisfy myself; and they shall know that I, the LORD, have spoken in my jealousy, when I spend my fury on them.” Such language is found also in some other Prophets of the Hebrew Bible (e. g. Isa 10:5). But a feature more specific to Jeremiah and Ezekiel is their privileging of the exiles (in contrast to the community back in 17 J. M. Soskice, Metaphor and Religious Language (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985); see also J. M. Soskice, The Kindness of God: Metaphor, Gender, and Religious Language (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007). 18 Cf. P. D. Miller, Jr., Sin and Judgment in the Prophets: A Stylistic and Theological Analysis (SBLMS 27; Chico: Society of Biblical Literature, 1982).

86

Paul M. Joyce

the land) and their presentation of Babylonia as the location where the future of the nation lay. 19 Jeremiah uses very metaphorical language to highlight this. We read in Jer 24:5–8 “Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel: ‘Like these good figs, so I will regard as good the exiles from Judah, whom I have sent away from this place to the land of the Chaldeans ...’ But thus says the LORD: ‘Like the bad figs that are so bad they cannot be eaten, so will I treat King Zedekiah of Judah, his officials, the remnant of Jerusalem who remain in this land, and those who live in the land of Egypt’”. On this occasion, uncharacteristically, the presentation in Ezekiel is in part more literal and prosaic. We read in Ezek 33:24–25 “Mortal, the inhabitants of these waste places in the land of Israel keep saying, ‘Abraham was only one man, yet he got possession of the land; but we are many; the land is surely given us to possess.’ Therefore say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD: You eat flesh with the blood, and lift up your eyes to your idols, and shed blood; shall you then possess the land?’” We note related language in Ezek 11:15: “Mortal, your kinsfolk, your own kin, your fellow exiles, the whole house of Israel, all of them, are those of whom the inhabitants of Jerusalem have said, ‘They have gone far from the LORD; to us this land is given for a possession’”, after which comes the remarkable verse 16, “Therefore say: Thus says the Lord GOD: ‘Though I removed them far away among the nations, and though I scattered them among the countries, yet I have been a sanctuary to them for a while in the countries where they have gone.’” 20 The two books present the judgement in gendered sexual and marital metaphorical language. Jeremiah 2:2 recalls “I remember the devotion of your youth, your love as a bride.” But as early as verse 20 comes the lament “On every high hill and under every green tree you sprawled and played the whore.” And in Ezekiel 16 is found a similar narrative sequence. In verse 8 we read “‘I passed by you again and looked on you; you were at the age for love. I spread the edge of my cloak over you, and covered your nakedness: I pledged myself to you and entered into a covenant with you,’ says the Lord GOD, ‘and you became mine.’” And yet by verse 15 the 19 Rom-Shiloni explores very effectively the complex polarities and also affinities between the two communities: D. Rom-Shiloni, Exclusive Inclusivity: Identity Conflicts between the Exiles and the People who Remained (6th–5th Centuries BCE) (LHBOTS 543; New York and London: T & T Clark, 2013). 20 On the language of Ezek 11:16, see further P. M. Joyce, “Dislocation and Adaptation in the Exilic Age and After”, in After the Exile: Essays in Honour of Rex Mason (ed. J. Barton and D. J. Reimer; Macon: Mercer University Press, 1996), 45–58. See also J. Høgenhaven’s treatment of Ezek 11:15 in the present volume.

A Rebirth of Images?

87

picture has changed: “You trusted in your beauty, and played the whore because of your fame, and lavished your whorings on any passer-by.” In both books judgement that is presented as fitting follows. For example, Ezek 16:37: “Therefore, I will gather all your lovers, with whom you took pleasure, all those you loved and all those you hated; I will gather them against you from all around, and will uncover your nakedness to them, so that they may see all your nakedness.” Both books feature also the motif of Israel and Judah as two wayward sisters. In Jer 3:6 –8 we read: “The LORD said to me in the days of King Josiah: Have you seen what she did, that faithless one, Israel, how she went up on every high hill and under every green tree, and played the whore there? And I thought, ‘After she has done all this she will return to me’; but she did not return, and her false sister Judah saw it. She saw that for all the adulteries of that faithless one, Israel, I had sent her away with a decree of divorce; yet her false sister Judah did not fear, but she too went and played the whore.” Similarly in Ezek 23:2–4 we read “Mortal, there were two women, the daughters of one mother; they played the whore in Egypt; they played the whore in their youth; their breasts were caressed there, and their virgin bosoms were fondled. Oholah was the name of the elder and Oholibah the name of her sister. They became mine, and they bore sons and daughters. As for their names, Oholah is Samaria, and Oholibah is Jerusalem.” We should set such gendered language in a long prophetic tradition, including in this case Hosea (e. g. Hos 2). Within this general tradition, the continuity between Jeremiah and Ezekiel seems nonetheless strong and yet Ezekiel also radicalizes the language to an extreme level. 21 Significant too is shared language and imagery when looking to the future. J. W. Miller in 1955 showed that the number of significant points of contact between the books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel is greater where the material concerns future hope and restoration from exile. 22 We should not overlook here the fact that consideration of language about hope in the two books often involves debate about the secondary, redactional nature of the material involved. Indeed we may say that in general the greatest commonality between the books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel is found in material that is both concerned with restoration and also likely to be secondary. 21 S. Moughtin-Mumby, Sexual and Marital Metaphors in Hosea, Jeremiah, Isaiah, and Ezekiel (Oxford Theological Monographs; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008). See also the contributions of M. A. Halvorson-Taylor and A. Klein on related themes in the present volume. 22 J. W. Miller, Das Verhältnis Jeremias und Hesekiels (Assen: van Gorcum, 1955).

88

Paul M. Joyce

To illustrate the affinities with regard to future hope, two texts in Ezekiel, employing strongly metaphorical language, may be highlighted. In Ezek 11:19–20, we read “I will give them one heart, and put a new spirit within them; I will remove the heart of stone from their flesh and give them a heart of flesh, so that they may follow my statutes and keep my ordinances and obey them. Then they shall be my people, and I will be their God”, and in 36:26–27 “A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will remove from your body the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. I will put my spirit within you, and make you follow my statutes and be careful to observe my ordinances.” A number of passages in the book of Jeremiah exhibit significant similarities to these verses of Ezekiel. Of these, the three most striking are found in Jeremiah chapters 24, 31 and 32. In Jer 24:7 we read “I will give them a heart to know that I am the LORD; and they shall be my people and I will be their God, for they shall return to me with their whole heart.” In Jer 31:31–3 we read “The days are surely coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant that I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, says the LORD. But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.” And finally in Jer 32:38–40 we read “They shall be my people, and I will be their God. I will give them one heart and one way, that they may fear me for all time, for their own good and the good of their children after them. I will make an everlasting covenant with them, never to draw back from doing good to them; and I will put the fear of me in their hearts, so that they may not turn from me.” Von Rad regarded these parallels as so significant that he wrote: “one feels that Ezekiel must somehow have had Jeremiah’s prophecies in front of him.” 23 We cannot, however, overlook the fact that these three passages in Jeremiah that bear the closest resemblance to Ezek 11:19–20 and 36:26–27 are among those Jeremianic prose passages in which deuteronomistic influence seems most apparent. It is likely that deuteronomistic influence played a part, in different degrees, both in the formation of the two prophets and in the development of their thought and style, both at the primary level and in the redactional development of their work. This is a complex and long-term phenomenon, one whose 23

G. von Rad, Old Testament Theology, vol. 2 (Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1965), 235.

A Rebirth of Images?

89

consideration should be set also within the context of the redaction of the prophetic corpus as a whole and indeed of reflection upon canonical process. 24 Reflection on the restoration images shared by Jeremiah and Ezekiel is instructive in its own right, but it is also relevant because the models presented for restoration after exile typically carry implications about how the exilic situation is perceived and presented, since both books characteristically feature a pattern of recapitulation. For example, the restoration oracles cited above clearly reverse a situation marked by hardness of heart and by failure to follow the statutes and ordinances and to keep the covenant, in short by failure to be the people of YHWH. A couple of other recapitulations found in the two books (with Ezekiel generally markedly more systematic and stylized) may be cited, by way of example. One is that whereby desolation and despoliation (e. g. Jer 4:7, “A lion has gone up from its thicket, a destroyer of nations has set out; he has gone out from his place to make your land a waste; your cities will be ruins without inhabitant”; Ezek 6:6, “Wherever you live, your towns shall be waste and your high places ruined, so that your altars will be waste and ruined, your idols broken and destroyed, your incense-stands cut down, and your works wiped out”) is turned to rebuilding and blossoming (Jer 31:27–28 “‘The days are surely coming,’ says the LORD, ‘when I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with the seed of humans and the seed of animals. And just as I have watched over them to pluck up and break down, to overthrow, destroy, and bring evil, so I will watch over them to build and to plant,’ says the LORD”; Ezek 36:8–10: “But you, O mountains of Israel, shall shoot out your branches, and yield your fruit to my people Israel; for they shall soon come home. See now, I am for you; I will turn to you, and you shall be tilled and sown; and I will multiply your population, the whole house of Israel, all of it; the towns shall be inhabited and the waste places rebuilt”). And another recapitulation is that whereby kings are first condemned (e. g. Jer 22:18–19: “Therefore thus says the LORD concerning King Jehoiakim son of Josiah of Judah: They shall not lament for him, saying, ‘Alas, my brother!’ or ‘Alas, sister!’ They shall not lament for him, saying, ‘Alas, lord!’ or ‘Alas, his majesty!’ With the burial of a donkey he shall be buried – dragged off and thrown 24 Cf. Collins, Mantle of Elijah; B. S. Childs, Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture (Philadelphia: Fortress; London: SCM, 1979); J. A. Sanders, From Sacred Story to Sacred Text: Canon as Paradigm (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987); R. E. Clements, Old Testament Prophecy: From Oracles to Canon (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996).

90

Paul M. Joyce

out beyond the gates of Jerusalem”; Ezek 7:27: “The king shall mourn, the prince shall be wrapped in despair, and the hands of the people of the land shall tremble. According to their way I will deal with them; according to their own judgements I will judge them. And they shall know that I am the LORD”) and then hopes of royal restoration are presented (Jer 23:5–6: “The days are surely coming, says the LORD, when I will raise up for David a righteous Branch, and he shall reign as king and deal wisely, and shall execute justice and righteousness in the land. In his days Judah will be saved and Israel will live in safety. And this is the name by which he will be called: ‘The LORD is our righteousness’”; Ezek 34:23–24: “I will set up over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he shall feed them: he shall feed them and be their shepherd. And I, the LORD, will be their God, and my servant David shall be prince among them; I, the LORD, have spoken.”) 25

3. Marked Differences between Jeremiah and Ezekiel When Using the Same Image We can attempt to distinguish between common cultural stock, general prophetic tradition, and more idiosyncratic features shared by Jeremiah and Ezekiel. But there are also ways in which Jeremiah and Ezekiel diverge in striking ways even while appearing to share language in common. Three cases may illustrate this phenomenon.

3.1. Dry Bones Both books feature grim scenes of dry bones, symbolizing judgement. In Jer 8:1–3 we read “At that time, says the LORD, the bones of the kings of Judah, the bones of its officials, the bones of the priests, the bones of the prophets, and the bones of the inhabitants of Jerusalem shall be brought out of their tombs; and they shall be spread before the sun and the moon and all the host of heaven, which they have loved and served, which they have followed, and which they have inquired of and worshipped; and they shall not be gathered or buried; they shall be like dung on the surface of the ground. Death shall be preferred to life by all the remnant that remains of this evil family in all the places where I have driven them, says 25

Cf. T. M. Raitt, A Theology of Exile: Judgment /Deliverance in Jeremiah and Ezekiel (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977).

A Rebirth of Images?

91

the LORD of hosts.” In Ezek 37:1–2 we read “The hand of the LORD came upon me, and he brought me out by the spirit of the LORD and set me down in the middle of a valley; it was full of bones. He led me all around them; there were very many lying in the valley, and they were very dry.” Thus far an image very like that of Jeremiah 8. But then matters take a different turn. We read in verse 3 “He said to me, ‘Mortal, can these bones live?’ I answered, ‘O Lord GOD, you know.’ Then he said to me, ‘Prophesy to these bones, and say to them: O dry bones, hear the word of the LORD. Thus says the Lord GOD to these bones: I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live. I will lay sinews on you, and will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and you shall live; and you shall know that I am the LORD.’” When Ezekiel prophesies as commanded the bones indeed come together, and are covered with sinews, flesh and skin. Then in verse 9 we read “He said to me, ‘Prophesy to the breath’”. Ezekiel does so and breath comes into them. They stand on their feet, a vast multitude, which is then explained to be the whole house of Israel, restored. While one can consider other antecedents, 26 it seems to me likely that Jeremiah 8 supplies the imaginative seed which in Ezekiel 37 is developed at great length and with a very different, positive turn. 27

3.2. Sour Grapes This is a case in which it is too often assumed that Jeremiah and Ezekiel are saying the same thing. In Jer 31:29–30 we read “In those days they shall no longer say: ‘The parents have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge.’ But all shall die for their own sins; the teeth of everyone who eats sour grapes shall be set on edge.” In Ezek 18:1–4 we read words that might seem to have a similar meaning: “The word of the LORD came to me: What do you mean by repeating this proverb concerning the land of Israel, ‘The parents have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge’? As I live, says the Lord GOD, this proverb shall no more be used by you in Israel. Know that all lives are mine; the life of the parent as well as the life of the child is mine: it is only the person who sins that shall die.” 26 Cf. B. Lang, “Street Theater, Raising the Dead, and the Zoroastrian Connection in Ezekiel’s Prophecy”, Ezekiel and His Book: Textual and Literary Criticism and their Interrelation (ed. J. Lust; BETL 74; Leuven: Leuven University Press and Peeters, 1986), 297–316. 27 Images of death and life are explored elsewhere in this volume by F. Landy and L.-S. Tiemeyer.

92

Paul M. Joyce

As for the relative dating of these passages, there are clear indications that Jer 31:29–30 is secondary to Ezekiel 18. 28 But it is important that these sour grapes references in the two books, though often aligned, are very different in their meaning. Ezekiel’s renunciation of the proverb that “The parents have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge” (Ezek 18:2) amounts to a radical rejection of the saying of Exod 20:5–6 (“You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me, but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments”) and parallels. Ezekiel insists that the present generation is punished for its own sins and not for the sins of previous generations. Ezekiel’s is a statement of what is now the case. In sharp contrast to this, it is important that the words of Jeremiah 31 are cast as future hope. Jeremiah 31:27 opens “The days are surely coming ...” and verse 29 follows on “In those days ...” This is a notable example of the complex way that eschatological hopes may affirm an aspiration for the future and yet may also work to reinforce the understanding of the present as distinct from that future hope. And in this case Jeremiah, unlike Ezekiel, stands with the Deuteronomistic History, notably 2 Kgs 23:26 (see also Jer 15:4).

3.3. Theological Geography I have in mind here the movement of peoples from one place to another in the books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel. It is easy perhaps to overlook the metaphorical dimension of journey language, but we know that exile and dispersion are about more than mere physical journeying. 29 We are dealing here with stylized language, metaphor writ large. Both Jeremiah and Ezekiel speak of journeying, but with different emphases. In characterizing the diversity of the Jeremiah and Ezekiel traditions here, I contrast (with, I trust, at least some heuristic value) Jeremiah as centrifugal (that is, moving outwards) with Ezekiel as ultimately centripetal (moving inwards). In speaking of Jeremiah as centrifugal I have in mind not least the so-called “letter to the exiles” in chapter 29. 30 In 28

Holladay (Jeremiah 2, 163–4) summarizes the evidence. P. R. Davies, “Exile? What Exile? Whose Exile?,” in Leading Captivity Captive: ‘The Exile’ as History and Ideology (ed. L. L. Grabbe; JSOTSup 278; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), 128–38. 30 See E. K. Holt’s contribution to this volume. 29

A Rebirth of Images?

93

Jer 29:5–7 we read “Build houses and live in them; plant gardens and eat what they produce. Take wives and have sons and daughters; take wives for your sons, and give your daughters in marriage, that they may bear sons and daughters; multiply there, and do not decrease. But seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the LORD on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare.” This is quite possibly redactional, 31 but represents an aspect of the Jeremiah tradition that acknowledges in a pragmatic and descriptive way the extent and nature of the dispersion of the people. A more complex case is the settlement in Egypt. In Jeremiah 42 the Prophet summons Johanan son of Kareah and all the people and reports the divine will. In verse 10 we read “If you will only remain in this land, then I will build you up and not pull you down.” The alternative is enunciated in verses 15–16: “If you are determined to enter Egypt and go to settle there, then the sword that you fear shall overtake you there.” The message is clear: “O remnant of Judah, do not go to Egypt” (Jer 42:19). And yet in Jeremiah 43 it is reported that Johanan son of Kareah and the commanders took all the remnant of Judah, including Jeremiah, to Egypt. This is clearly not what was meant to happen. And yet, despite the obvious complexities (the motifs of divine disapproval and prophetic reluctance), the book of Jeremiah hereby acknowledges ongoing existence outside the land of Israel; again, pragmatic and realistic. In Ezekiel, on the other hand, again despite some complexities (such as the appearance of YHWH on a moving throne in Babylonia in chapter 1 and the statement of Ezek 11:16 that the deity will be “a sanctuary to them for a while in the countries where they have gone”), there is the ultimate orientation to a Jerusalem-focused future (Ezekiel 40–48). This is expressed above all in the overarching narrative of the journey of the deity away from and back to Jerusalem (Cf. Ezek 11:22–23; 43:1–7). 32 The metaphorical nature of journeying language is well highlighted, I suggest, by the fact that it is possible to speak, as here, of a god journeying. Ezekiel is in all this (true to form) more stylized and more prescriptive than Jeremiah. In each of these three cases, then, we may speak of the two books sharing language and imagery and yet taking them in very different directions. 31 Cf. H. G. M. Williamson, 1 and 2 Chronicles (New Century Bible Commentary; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1982), 306–7. 32 See the discussion of the journeying of the deity in J. Høgenhaven’s contribution to this volume. On “Theological Geography” in Ezekiel, see further Joyce, Ezekiel, 30–32.

94

Paul M. Joyce

4. Closing Reflections Finally, two reflections of a different kind. First, I cannot finish without acknowledging that in the ancient world (as indeed in our day) the human realities of exile and dispersion involved rape, cannibalism, trauma and all the terrible features of warfare. Reference was made earlier to the shared metaphor of the judging divine agent. The Prophets’ projection of anger onto the national deity was a strategy that appeared to provide an explanation of national disaster at a time when all familiar frames of reference were falling away. I have profound respect for human beings in extremis seeking meaning in such a time of the loss of all things. Nonetheless, there are dark themes close to hand here. Some of the implications of modelling the deity as an angry authority figure call for ethical critique, which will often be informed also by insights gleaned from feminist criticism. We have learned much from tragic reports about how the abused can find comfort in a relationship in which they are tortured by a more powerful person. Such relationships are sustained for complex reasons. Though I stand myself within a scriptural tradition of which this language of the Prophets is a part, I believe we should not be closed to the insight that when traumatized peoples interpret their sufferings as just punishment by their father-figure gods they may be in part replicating perennial dysfunctional family situations. 33 Second, a marked feature of the past twenty years in Biblical Studies is the attention given to the reception of the Bible over the centuries since ancient times. Much reception work celebrates the very diversity of usage; indeed there is often something of an “anything goes” spirit. There is also a place, however, for an ethical, indeed a political, critique of the use and impact of the Bible. I am not thinking here of Nazi or Apartheid uses of the Bible, important themes though those are, but of a matter closer to home. Our world today is dominated by the issues of mass migration. There is debate about the extent to which the biblical legacy remains formative in diaspora discourse today; with Robin Cohen 34 and others, I am of the view that biblical influence is extensive here. A prominent feature of this is the lingering effect of the widespread biblical idea of exile as deserved punishment, found not only in Prophets such as Jeremiah and Ezekiel, but also in the Deuteronomistic History (e. g. 2 Kgs 17; 24–25) 33 J. M. O’Brien, Challenging Prophetic Metaphor: Theology and Ideology in the Prophets (Louisville and London: Westminster John Knox Press, 2008). 34 R. Cohen, Global Diasporas: An Introduction (2nd edn; London: Routledge, 2008).

A Rebirth of Images?

95

and in Torah texts such as Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28. Moralistic language relating to migration persists to this day – the often implicit notion of displacement as somehow deserved. This is in serious ways a toxic legacy, not least in our own time, when it is often found alongside deep tendencies to xenophobia and racism, whether the migrants in question are Syrian or Mexican. As experts on the Hebrew Bible /Old Testament, critical custodians of this great text, I suggest that biblical scholars have a responsibility to help our contemporaries understand the roots of moralistic interpretations of exile, migration and dispersion, explaining that such ideas – at least in their biblical form – began not in the pointing of fingers at others but in the human reality of people such as the sixthcentury Judahites desperately trying to make sense of their own tragic experiences in the light of their religious faith in a powerful and just God, clinging onto a sense of meaning at a time of the loss of all things.

Leave or Remain? A Theological Discussion in Jeremiah 29 and Beyond Else K. Holt

Direct information about daily life in Babylon is rather sparse in the Hebrew Bible outside Ezekiel, and even in Ezekiel there are only a few references to the living conditions of the exiles. Instead, as discussed in the present volume, the exile, its cause and its effects, are primarily cast in vivid metaphorical language. In the book of Jeremiah information about daily life in exile, whether of a direct or a metaphorical kind, is almost absent. Like in many other books of the Hebrew Bible, the main problem at issue in Jeremiah is the reason for the catastrophe, the traumatized search for a meaning and for theodicy, the question of how and when to return. We do not hear much about everyday life for the Judaeans who were left behind after the fall of Jerusalem and even less about the exiles in Babylon and Persia. Considering that important parts of Jeremiah allegedly represent the viewpoints of the exiles, 1 this is shocking. Chapter 29 is the only part of the book of Jeremiah where the circumstances of everyday life in Babylon are within the author’s perspective, at least on the surface. Jeremiah 29 is a redactional corpus mixtum. From a synchronic point of view, it is an ellipse with two thematic focal points: 1) the question of life in the diaspora; and 2) the dangers of false prophecy. These focal points are presented to the audience through the medium of epistolary correspondence, the only thing of this kind in the prophetic corpus, and this raises several questions. Why are the discussions presented through correspondence by mail? What can a letter signify that could not be shown by some other oft-used prophetic medium – a sign act, a speech, or a sermon? Who is the audience? My proposal is that we must reckon with at least two groups of addressees from different periods, the Babylonian and 1

See e. g. C. Sharp, Prophecy and Ideology in Jeremiah: Struggles for Authority in the Deutero-Jeremianic Prose (London: T & T Clark, 2003).

98

Else K. Holt

the Persian, to account for the text in its final form and perhaps even with two Persian-period audiences, the golah and the returnees in Jerusalem. To substantiate this proposal, we must take a few detours to familiarize ourselves with the theology of Jeremiah 29, before returning to our main questions.

1. Text According to Jeremiah 29, some time after the first deportation from Jerusalem to Babylon in 597 BCE 2 Jeremiah sends a letter by diplomatic post to the leaders of the golah community, that is, the surviving elders, priests, and prophets. In this letter he urges the community to settle down in the new land: 3 Build houses (‫)בּנוּ ָב ִתּים‬ ְ and live in them; plant gardens (‫ִטעוּ גַנּוֹת‬ ְ ‫ ) ְונ‬and eat what they produce. Take wives (‫נשׁים‬ ִ ָ ‫)קחוּ‬ ְ and have sons and daughters; take wives for your sons, and give your daughters in marriage, that they may bear sons and daughters; multiply there, and do not decrease. But seek the welfare of the city (‫ו ְִד ְרשׁוּ‬ ‫ת־שׁלוֹם ָה ִעיר‬ ְ ‫)א‬ ֶ where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the LORD on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare. 4 (Jer 29:5–7)

The reason for this command is the postponing yet encouraging promise that after seventy years God will bring them back to Jerusalem (Jer 29:10). The superficial motivation for the letter, however, is that some prophets in Babylon are preaching a much more immediate return to the homeland. 5 As an answer to the recipients’ objection that God has sent prophets to 2 The narrative is set in the fourth year of King Zedekiah, i. e. seven years before the fall of Jerusalem. The dating in 27:1 (MT), “in the beginning of the reign of King Jehoiakim, son of Josiah ...” is lacking in the LXX, and may have been inspired by the general anti-Jehoiakim tendency in Jeremiah 26–36, rather than simply being an erroneous insertion; contra E. Tov, “Exegetical Notes on the Hebrew Vorlage of the LXX of Jeremiah 27 (34),” ZAW 91 (1979): 73–93, 81. 3 As appears from the analysis below, I do not consider Jeremiah 29 to be a historical account of a correspondence between Jeremiah and the exiles and his opponents, or of life among the exiles of 597 BCE in Babylon in general. 4 All translations are from the NRSV. 5 Jeremiah 29 follows the lengthy discussion of true and false prophecy in Jeremiah 26–28. In Jeremiah 26, Jeremiah’s status as a true prophet is confirmed in the trial against him, along with a harsh accusation against the arch-villain of the book, King Jehoiakim. Jeremiah 27–28 describe Jeremiah’s fight with the (false) prophet Hananiah over the immediacy of God’s intervention in the situation of the first group of exiles. Hananiah’s position is that after only two more years God will lead the exiles and the temple vessels back to Jerusalem, while Jeremiah opposes such an immediate end to the exile. Jeremiah’s position is substantiated by the letter in chapter 29. Thus, the discourse in chapter 29 can be considered a follow-

Leave or Remain?

99

the golah community, Jeremiah warns against trusting any prophets at all. He presents the fate of the king and inhabitants of Jerusalem in general as a warning example, and in particular the fate of the two prophets Ahab and Zedekiah, who are not mentioned elsewhere in the book. God will hand them over to Nebuchadrezzar and he will kill them, because they committed adultery with their neighbours’ wives, and have spoken with lying words that God did not command them (cf. Jer 29:23). Chapter 29 continues with a follow-up message to one of the leaders in the Babylon community. In response to Jeremiah’s call to the golah community to settle down, Shemaiah of Nehelam, who apparently lives in Babylon and seems to be an important priest, has sent a letter to the leader of the priests at the Jerusalem temple, Zephaniah, urging him to caution Jeremiah because of his message of settling down in Babylon. Zephaniah reads Shemaiah’s letter to Jeremiah in Jerusalem, but he answers with a spoken oracle that God will punish Shemaiah and keep him and his descendants in an eternal exile in Babylon.

2. Date and Setting From the outset, the correspondence in Jeremiah 29 seems to fit in nicely with the period of Jeremiah’s ministry indicated in the rubric in Jer 1:1–3. However, too many things indicate a much later dating, making this correspondence imaginary. Carolyn J. Sharp argues that the “heavily edited” chapter 29 is an important attestation to the struggle for authority between the golah and a traditionalist Jerusalem community after 597 BCE. 6 This may very well be so. But read in its final form, Jeremiah 29 like so many other parts of the book of Jeremiah also bears the marks of the Persian period, or maybe even of a later period, since 29:16–20 are absent from LXX which normally is considered to witness to an older version of the book than the MT. 7 Thus the image of the Babylonian exile should be considered a retrospective description, bearing, I would suggest, as much on life in the Persian period as on the early exilic age. Jeremiah 29 might very well belong to the Babylonian period of the exile but it speaks most definitely to the Judahite communities of the Persian period as well. up and globalizing extension of the previous discussion. For a synchronic approach to Jeremiah 26–29, see A. Osuji, “True and False Prophecy in Jer 26–29 (MT): Thematic and Lexical Landmarks,” ETL 82 (2006): 437–452. 6 Sharp, Prophecy, 105–111, and the conclusions, 157–159. 7 Cf. the extensive work of Emanuel Tov; see e. g. his “Exegetical Notes” mentioned above.

100

Else K. Holt

What, then, is the image of exile like in Jeremiah 29? Rather good humoured and, what’s more, realistic, compared with the knowledge about Judaean life in Babylon and Persia that we gain from archival material, and very different from the dark images in, for instance, Psalm 137. 8 The message is: Do settle down. There is no need to consider your stay in the golah a short interim period. Your exile will last for three generations, and it will be possible, and even advisable, for you to take part in societal life in the diaspora. There you will be fruitful and numerous, when you let your children marry just as if you were living in Judah, and there the welfare of your adopted country will help you yourself prosper.

3. How to Settle Down – and Where? Some scholars have proposed that Jer 29:5–7 urges the Judaeans to intermarry with their Babylonian cohabitants; 9 this, however, is not indicated in the text. Sharp mentions that the danger of exogamy over a period of three generations in Babylon would have been obvious. 10 This is possible though not necessarily so, and in my opinion the subject is outside the scope of the text. What we find is the ideal, positive image of life abroad as a continuation of life at home, where the model marriage was endo- not exogamic, not a report on the situation that in fact obtained in the golah.

8 For an introduction to the archives of the various Judaean communities, see R. G. Kratz, Historical and Biblical Israel: The History, Tradition, and Archives of Israel and Judah (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015). This is an English translation of his Historisches und biblisches Israel: Drei Überblicke zum Alten Testament (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013). The English version includes a chapter on the recently discovered Al-Yahudu archives from the period of the early Babylonian exile; cf. also L. E. Pearce and C. Wunsch, “Documents of Judean Exiles and West Semites in Babylonia in the Collection of David Sofer,” Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology [CUSAS] 28 (2014); and C. Wunsch, “Glimpses on the Lives of Deportees in Rural Babylonia,” in Arameans, Chaldeans, and Arabs in Babylonia and Palestine in the First Millennium B. C. (ed. A. Berlejung and M. P. Streck; LAS 3; Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2013), 247–260. For an overview of the Mesopotamian material in general, see G. Granerød, “Siste skrik fra elvene i Babel: Nye kilder til det judeiske eksilet i Babylon,” Teologisk Tidsskrift 4 (2015): 357–372 (Norwegian). 9 E.g. H. Weippert, “Fern von Jerusalem: Die Exilsethik von Jer 29,5–7,” in Zion: Ort der Begegnung (ed. F. Hahn et al.; Bodenheim: Athenäum Hain Hanstein, 1993), 127–139. 10 Sharp, Prophecy, 107. Unfortunately, neither the Al-Yahudu texts nor the Murashu archive indicate whether the Judaeans in Babylon /Persia married within the Judaean population (endogamy) or intermarried with Babylonians (exogamy); see Granerød “Siste skrik,” 369.

Leave or Remain?

101

More helpful in our investigation, then, is Adele Berlin’s proposal of an intertextual allusion in the admonitions of settling down between Jer 29:5–7 and Deut 20:5–10: 11 “Has anyone built a new house (‫ִת־חָדשׁ‬ ָ ‫)בָּנה ַבי‬ ָ but not dedicated it? He should go back to his house, or he might die in the battle and another dedicate it. Has anyone planted a vineyard (‫נטע ֶכֶּרם‬ ַ ָ ) but not yet enjoyed its fruit? He should go back to his house, or he might die in the battle and another be first to enjoy its fruit. Has anyone become engaged to a woman but not yet married her (‫ְק ָחהּ‬ ָ ‫ ?)ל‬He should go back to his house, or he might die in the battle and another marry her.” The officials shall continue to address the troops, saying, “Is anyone afraid or disheartened? He should go back to his house, or he might cause the heart of his comrades to melt like his own.” When the officials have finished addressing the troops, then the commanders shall take charge of them. When you draw near to a town (‫)עיר‬ ִ to fight against it, offer it terms of peace (‫ְשׁלוֹם‬ ָ ‫)ל‬. (Deut 20:5–10)

The verbal connection between the two examples is obvious, even though the situation and the messages are as different as can be; 12 Deut 20:5–7 is spoken by officials regarding war against an undefined enemy, while Jeremiah speaks about a time of ‫שׁלוֹם‬. ָ 13 Berlin’s recognition of an allusion between the vocabulary string “build, plant, marry” and the phrase “well-being of the city” in both passages calls for consideration. Build (‫ )בנה‬and plant (‫ )נטע‬are lexical associates conveying the notion of establishing a community, and they are often found together, both in Jeremiah and elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible. 14 The series “build – plant – wives /children” is much rarer, though, and thus points to a more specific intertextual (or intellectual) connection between Deuteronomy 20 and Jeremiah 29. As a further but differing example of semantic continuation, Berlin mentions the curses in Deut 28:30–32 which threaten that God might “un-create” the blessing: You shall become engaged to a woman, but another man shall lie with her. You shall build a house, but not live in it. You shall plant a vineyard, but not enjoy its fruit. Your ox shall be butchered before your eyes, but you shall not eat of it. 11

A. Berlin, “Jeremiah 29:5–7: A Deuteronomic Allusion,” HAR 9 (1984): 3–11. I do not agree with Berlin’s dating of the passages in question, but considering the widespread shift in dating of the Hebrew Bible texts since 1984 that is of no consequence for my argument. 13 Berlin, “Deuteronomic Allusion,” 4. Berlin considers this pericope a subtle counsel against revolt; Sharp might be right that Berlin is overinterpreting her material, but if Berlin is right it is an interesting supplement to the understanding of Jeremiah 29 as well. 14 E.g. Jer 1:10; 24:6; 31:3–4, 27; 35:7, 42:10; 45:4; Josh 24:13; Ezek 28:26; 36:36; Amos 5:11; 9:14; Zeph 1:13; Eccl 2:4; cf. Berlin, “Deuteronomic Allusion,” 5. 12

102

Else K. Holt

Your donkey shall be stolen in front of you, and shall not be restored to you. Your sheep shall be given to your enemies, without anyone to help you. Your sons and daughters shall be given to another people, while you look on; you will strain your eyes looking for them all day but be powerless to do anything. (Deut 28:30–32)

If we accept the idea that Deuteronomy mirrors concerns in the Persian period, there is good reason to pay attention to the lexical association between these texts, with the heavy Deuteronomistic impact on the book of Jeremiah taken into consideration. The designation for the speakers ‫שּׁוֹט ִרים‬ ְ ‫( ַה‬Deut 20:5) is interesting in this connection, since it places the pericope within Persian-period Deuteronomistic parlance and thus strengthens the proposal for a possible late dating of Jer 29:5–7 as well. 15 However, a couple of other texts, also mentioned by Berlin as exhibiting the same motif, might be even more illuminating. Isaiah 65:21–23 reads: They shall build houses and inhabit them; they shall plant vineyards and eat their fruit. They shall not build and another inhabit; they shall not plant and another eat; for like the days of a tree shall the days of my people be, and my chosen shall long enjoy the work of their hands. They shall not labor in vain, or bear children for calamity; for they shall be offspring blessed by the LORD – and their descendants as well.

Psalm 107:36–38 also speaks about settlement, vineyards, and increase: He turns a desert into pools of water, a parched land into springs of water. And there he lets the hungry live, and they establish a town to live in; they sow fields, and plant vineyards, and get a fruitful yield. By his blessing they multiply greatly, and he does not let their cattle decrease.

The two examples from Third Isaiah and Psalm 107 16 support my suggestion that Jeremiah 29 be read not only as a text for the Babylonian period, but also as a later, Persian-period actualization for a context beyond the Babylonian period. The two indisputably Persian-period texts paint the 15

Cf. E. S. Gerstenberger, Theologies in the Old Testament (trans. J. Bowden; London: T & T Clark, 2002), 281, note 151, 297. 16 I follow Erich Zenger’s dating: “Psalm 107 is the work of the (Korahite /Levitical) group of Temple musicians; favoring this interpretation is, above all, the linguistic and conceptual affinity to Is 40–66. As the work of the redactors of Psalms 107–136, this psalm must have originated around 400 b.c.e.” See F.-L. Hossfeld and E. Zenger, Psalms 3: A Commentary on Psalms 101–150 (trans. L. M. Maloney; Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2011), 102.

Leave or Remain?

103

same picture of life in the Persian diaspora as Jeremiah 29 does. They promise and argue for a life-style close to what was “the average” in the past and by no means a life of trials and tribulations. Building houses and towns and planting vineyards are projects with a long-term perspective, and giving a daughter away in marriage or taking a wife for one’s son also has a long-term perspective, since it concerns alliances with other families. But Jeremiah 29, Isaiah 65, and Psalm 107 are not only images of life retrojected into the Babylonian diaspora and contemporaneously into the Judaean diaspora in the Persian Empire; they also speak to the community of returnees to Yehud in the Second Temple Period. Life in Yehud will be a life of building and planting (cf. Jer 1:10) and it will be a life of rebuilding a wasteland. Psalm 107:35–36 especially is explicit on this point: He turns a desert into pools of water, a parched land into springs of water. And there he lets the hungry live, and they establish a town to live in.

Psalm 107 presents the myth of the empty land to the returnees, and talks of Yahweh’s work of reinstating the blessing and recreating a fertile land for their sake: “By his blessing they multiply greatly, and he does not let their cattle decrease” (v. 38). He promises to care especially for the needy, while “he pours contempt on princes and makes them wander in trackless wastes” (vv. 40–41) – yet another example of the so-called Armentheologie of the Persian and Hellenistic periods. And the psalm concludes: “The upright (‫ְשׁ ִרים‬ ָ ‫ )י‬see it and are glad; and all wickedness stops its mouth (‫יה‬ ָ ‫כל־ע ְולָה ָק ְפ ָצה ִפּ‬ ַ ָ )” (v. 42) – two discursive constructions expressing a religious contradistinction typical for the period and for the Jerusalem faith community. 17 Jeremiah 29:5–7, then, is both an encouragement to integrate in the diaspora and, like Isaiah 65 and Psalm 107, a call to return to the Yehud community. But more than that – and here I turn to the second focal point in the textual ellipse – it is also a warning to the very same communities against leaving the wisdom of the days of old. If life in the postexilic communities is going to be prosperous, the congregations in the golah and Yehud must follow the way of the authentic prophet Jeremiah and no other competing contemporary prophets. Now true prophecy is delivered in writing.

17

Cf. Gerstenberger, Theologies, 207–272.

104

Else K. Holt

I shall not go into detail about the discussion in Jeremiah 26–29 of true and false prophecy. 18 The bottom line is that these chapters present Jeremiah as the one true prophet among the multitude of lying prophets. All other prophets are by definition false and misrepresent God’s plans not only to the golah community but also to the remnant in Yehud. One could also hypothesize that the accusation of immoral sexual behaviour against the two named prophets in 29:21 is typical of the period’s focus on righteousness. Out of the blue, after a long denunciation of the people’s religious misconduct comes the condemnation of Ahab son of Kolaiah and Zedekiah son of Maaseiah: “... they have perpetrated outrage in Israel (‫ִשָׂר ֵאל‬ ְ ‫ְבלָה ְבּי‬ ָ ‫ )נ‬and have committed adultery with their neighbours’ wives (‫יהם‬ ֶ ‫ְשׁי ֵר ֵע‬ ֵ ‫ַאפוּ ֶאת־נ‬ ֲ ‫( ”)ַו ְינ‬Jer 29:23). This harsh accusation is by no means typical for the rest of the book of Jeremiah, where the main interest is adherence to the word of God and its social and religious consequences. The interest in the morality of the individual, however, makes sense in the Second Temple period where the role of leadership in the communities had become different from the leadership of the monarchic period. 19

4. Writing a Letter To sum up: there is no doubt that the authenticity and authority of the charismatic prophetic leader is at issue in Jeremiah 29, and there is no doubt that the only legitimate and authoritative prophet in this chapter is Jeremiah. 20 Sharp states the impact of chapter 29 as follows: “The confrontations recorded in ch. 29 have important ramifications within the larger literary context of Jeremiah 27–9, for the juxtaposition of chs. 28 and 29 ensures that Jeremiah’s opponents both in Jerusalem and Babylon are effectively silenced.” 21

18

See the references in note 6. Cf. Gerstenberger, Theologies, and especially E. S. Gerstenberger, Israel in the Persian Period: The Fifth and Fourth Centuries B. C. E. (trans. S. S. Schatzmann; BibEnc 8; Atlanta: SBL, 2011): 103–110. For the theoretical background for understanding the faith community in Persian-period Jerusalem as a religious enclave, see M. Douglas, In the Wilderness: The Doctrine of Defilement in the Book of Numbers (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 63–83. 20 In Jeremiah 26 other prophets are authorized too: Micah from Moresheth by a quote from his book; and Uriah by the reference to his death as a martyr at the command of King Jehoiakim. 21 Sharp, Prophecy, 106. 19

Leave or Remain?

105

The problem, of course, for the Second Temple audience is that this prophet died decades earlier and probably never talked about life in the diaspora community. How then can one transmit his words to the very same community? In the world of the book of Jeremiah the obvious answer is: in a letter! Writing is of utmost importance in Jeremiah. A whole chapter, Jeremiah 36, is dedicated to the writing and reading aloud of a scroll by a person who is not the prophet himself but a professional sofer, Baruch ben Neriah. The chapter even ends with a rewriting of Jeremiah’s scroll because the ungodly King Jehoiakim burned the first version in a brazier: “Then Jeremiah took another scroll and gave it to the secretary Baruch son of Neriah, who wrote on it at Jeremiah’s dictation all the words of the scroll that King Jehoiakim of Judah had burned in the fire; and many similar words were added to them” (Jer 36:37). In this way, chapter 36 points to the possibility of rewriting and re-actualizing the prophetic book, just as the tablets containing the Decalogue were rewritten by Moses in Exodus 34. 22 The question remains, though: Why is Jeremiah’s message presented in a letter? Letters had been known for centuries, and Klaas A. D. Smelik has thrown interesting light on Jeremiah’s letter by comparing it to the sixth-century BCE letters found at Lachish. 23 Smelik’s comparison shows that “the biblical text does not have the structure of a common letter from this period;” rather, it “contains formulas typical of written prophecy,” such as ‫ְהוָה‬ ֹ ‫( כּוֹה ָא ָמר י‬nine times) and ‫ְאם־יְהוָֹה‬ ֻ ‫( נ‬eight 24 25 times). Referring to Robert P. Carroll, Smelik therefore tentatively considers whether “there was no [historical] letter at all,” and that the letter might have been inserted by the authors for the purpose of communication between Jerusalem and Babylon. He substantiates this with a reference to Jeremiah’s ‫( ֵס ֶפר‬book /letter) to the community in Babylon in Jer 51:59–64. Carroll’s original analysis of Jeremiah 27–29 is less cautious: Jeremiah 27–29 have “produced a quite late and legendary image of Jeremiah the prophet whose status as the divine word in the community makes him the dominant figure, whether in the Jerusalem temple or 22 In addition, Baruch the scribe receives the blessing that closes the book of Jeremiah in its Greek, i. e. earlier, form. 23 See D. Pardee et al., Handbook of Ancient Hebrew Letters: A Study Edition (Sources for Biblical Study 15; Chico: Scholars Press, 1982); K. A. D. Smelik, Writings from Ancient Israel: A Handbook of Historical and Religious Documents (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1991), 116–131. 24 K. A. D. Smelik, “Letters to the Exiles: Jeremiah 29 in Context,” SJOT 10 (1996): 282–295, 284. 25 R. P. Carroll, Jeremiah: A Commentary (OTL; London: SCM, 1986), 567.

106

Else K. Holt

among the communities in Babylon. He now bestrides both countries like a prophetic colossus, and opposition to his viewpoint is evidence of being false.” 26 Returning, then, to one of our initial questions: Why not convey the message to the golah in a standard prophetic genre such as an oracle, a sign act or a sermon? I would suggest that Jer 29:4–23 indeed belongs to the genre of prophetic oracles, as shown by Smelik, but is presented in the written form of the letter. Both Carroll and Smelik argue from a narrative – critical point of view. From a historical perspective, the Persian Empire was famous for its postal service, as can be seen both from contemporary sources and in the biblical book of Esther. In Esther, King Ahasuerus sends his decrees to all the peoples in his vast empire via the Persian postal system, 27 and later Esther uses the same system, granting authenticity to the letter about Purim to the Jews in the 127 provinces of the empire. In both Ezra and Nehemiah there is a lively correspondence between Persia and Yehud. 28 Thus, there is a fine rationale behind the author’s choice of transmitting a message to the future by means of correspondence by letter. Letters transfer authoritative words to a distant audience, as seen in the examples above, and this is similarly achieved in Jeremiah by using the letter as a medium instead of other typical prophetic means of communication like a sign act, an oracle, or sermon which demand that the prophet is present. 29 Jeremiah communicates his will by a written word that can be sent and answered over a long distance of time and space.

5. Conclusion So, in the end: Should the Judaeans leave or remain? Jeremiah 29 does not give us a simple answer. The promise that God will bring them back to the land of their fathers after seventy years was more or less fulfilled when the Persians gave leave to the golah community to return. But after the seventy years, when people with Yahwistic names still lived in Persia, 26

Ibid., 567. See Esth 8:13–14: “A copy of the writ was to be issued as a decree in every province and published to all peoples, and the Jews were to be ready on that day to take revenge on their enemies. So the couriers, mounted on their swift royal steeds, hurried out, urged by the king’s command. The decree was issued in the citadel of Susa.” 28 Ezra 4–5; Nehemiah 2; 6. 29 In 2 Chron 21:12–15 the prophet Elijah in Israel sends a letter to the king of Judah. It is interesting that the letter incident is absent from the report of Joram’s reign in 2 Kgs 8:16–24. 27

Leave or Remain?

107

did Jeremiah’s letter still apply? Were the people of Yahweh supposed to remain Persia’s loyal citizens and build, plant and celebrate weddings, or should they return to the land of their fathers? Should they live there peacefully together with “the bad figs” who had been left in the land by the Babylonians – and who possibly had taken ownership of the farmland? 30 In Jer 29:32 Shemaiah of Nehelam and his family are threatened with never-ending exile as a punishment for Shemaiah’s challenge to Jeremiah’s spiritual authority. He gets his just deserts, for his message was that Jeremiah was wrong and that the exile would last for less than seventy years. But after the seventy years, the end goal is the return to Judah to build up and plant after God had plucked up and pulled down, destroyed and overthrown. Now the exiles’ penalty has been paid, since they have received from Yahweh’s hand double for all their sins (cf. Isa 40:2). Now they can return, as promised in Jer 3:14–15: “Return, O faithless children, says the LORD, for I am your master; I will take you, one from a city and two from a family, and I will bring you to Zion. I will give you shepherds after my own heart, who will feed you with knowledge and understanding.” In fact, however, this propaganda did not persuade all the exiles. Many of them and of their descendants extended their stay in the diaspora by several hundred years and there fulfilled Jeremiah’s words: “Build houses and live in them ...”

30 The discussion and literature concerning the conditions in Israel and Judah after 587 BCE is extensive and fragmented. For an overview, see J. Kessler, “Persia’s Loyal Yahwists: Power Identity and Ethnicity in Achaeminid Yehud,” in Judah and the Judeans in the Persian Period (ed. O. Lipschits and M. Oeming; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2006), 91–121.

Prophetic Images of Women as Metaphors for Exile Jeremiah’s Book of Consolation Martien A. Halvorson-Taylor

A number of the images for exile in the prophetic literature come to us with something of a biography. That is, reading across the prophetic corpus, we can trace how these images grow and change over time, following them through the course of their reshaping by the various hands that gave rise to prophetic books. In the book of Isaiah, for example, the images that have been inherited by the contributors to Second Isaiah are reshaped and revalorized to speak to the exilic experience; the later chapters of the book, which arise long after the restoration, further refashion and redeploy exilic images for new purpose and new meaning. This is true, too, in a number of other prophetic books – Ezekiel, Jeremiah, and others – that have discernible earlier and later strands of tradition. In considering images of exile – many of which have a long history, some of which flourish, and others of which must have met an early end – one might wonder: what made certain images particularly appealing as metaphors about exile and not others? Why not, for example, speak directly about exile and promise eventual restoration in literal terms? Why does the prophetic corpus opt instead for images, for example, of bodily distress, bereavement, and painful labour? And how were these transformed in order to speak compellingly about – to capture – the experience? To take a more focused example, we might consider Jeremiah’s poetic Book of Consolation, Jer 30:1–31:22, which comes to us as six major poems replete with vivid exilic metaphors. These have been framed, late in the redactional process, with an introduction (30:1–4) that tells us how to read the cycle of poems that follows: YHWH is about to effect a comprehensive restoration of all the people – not just Judah, but Israel,

110

Martien A. Halvorson-Taylor

too – that includes a return to the land (v. 3). 1 Each of the poems themselves has a complex literary history, appearing to be built out of an older strand of poetry that may originally have had little to do with exile and that describes some tribulation – be it warriors clutching their loins like labouring women (30:5–7), a battered and spurned lover bewailing her suffering (30:12–15), or Rachel weeping for her children (31:15). Each of these earlier fragments, in turn, was supplemented in its new context with language that builds out the image as a metaphor for exile, anchoring it to that historical experience and then describing a magnificent reversal for the restoration of the people, as forecast by the introduction that frames the Book (30:1–4). For example, in Poem One, 30:5–7 has been glossed with vv. 8–11; in Poem Two, 30:12–15 with vv. 16–17; in Poem Six, 31:15 with vv. 16–17. The restoration promised is comprehensive and sweeping, such that the end of exile seems to dance like a vision before its audience while simultaneously remaining tantalizingly elusive. I have written elsewhere about how metaphors for exile and the language of restoration, both in the Book of Consolation and in the wider prophetic corpus, have the effect of making exile an enduring existential condition. 2 That project sought to travel forward with exilic metaphors, to pursue their reception into the Second Temple period. This essay will lead us in a different direction to the related but distinct questions that I have just raised: why were certain images chosen as metaphors for exile in the Book of Consolation and not others? What I am proposing here for getting a handle on this rich topic of exilic metaphors is admittedly more speculative, as reaching further back often is. Instead of charting how metaphors for exile continued to develop in the Second Temple period, I propose to trace the origins of these metaphors themselves: to examine the selection of particular materials to become metaphors for exile and to consider the antecedents for each of these, as much as we can know them, in the earlier poetic core of the book of Jeremiah. What made certain preexisting materials particularly appealing for speculation about exile and how were they transformed in order to speak to the experience? While our conclusions about the selection will need to remain tentative, we might get further insight into ancient thinking about exile and its meaning by considering how certain images were selected for inclusion 1 For a more complete description of the formation of the Book of Consolation and an annotated translation of each of its poems, see my Enduring Exile: The Metaphorization of Exile in the Hebrew Bible (VTSup 141; Leiden: Brill, 2011), 43–106. 2 Halvorson-Taylor, Enduring Exile, 1–42.

Prophetic Images of Women as Metaphors for Exile

111

in the Book of Consolation and paired with promises of redemption. We may also uncover something of the effort to interpret and organize perception of the experience: metaphors that lent themselves to the notion of exile as durative suffering were particularly appealing to the redactors of the Book of Consolation – and most of these deal with the female body and its capacity to be healed and create new life. The redactors redeployed images that originated in the poetic core of the book of Jeremiah in order to describe the seemingly interminable pain of exile, but also to envision the restoration of a nation. While the “why” of this choice may not be possible to nail down with any certainty, “how” these images come to work as metaphors for exile can be traced in meaningful ways and can provide insight into how the redactors of biblical books sought to convey exile. I will consider three metaphors, each of which is oriented around female or feminized figures. The first poem in the Book of Consolation uses the image of men who seem to be in the throes of labour (30:5–11); the second uses the image of a wounded woman spurned by her lovers (30:12–17); and in the sixth and final poem, Rachel, conceived of as a bereaved or barren woman, is weeping for her children (31:15–17). We can find antecedents for each of these images back in the poetic core of the book of Jeremiah, chapters that were edited before the Book of Consolation. We can then trace the conscious reshaping of each image into a powerful metaphor for the experience of exile in the Book of Consolation. Finally, we can return to the question of why these particular images might have been selected as vehicles to communicate the experience of exile.

1. Poem One (Jer 30:5–11) and Jeremiah 4 From the outset, we should observe that most of the poems in the Book of Consolation do not speak about exile directly; this is especially true when we consider the material that provides the earliest layers of their formation. To take our first poem as an example, men who behave like women in labour will become the metaphoric vehicle for conveying the terror of anticipated disaster, but this first part of the poem, its earliest layer, is devoid of references to destruction or exile: For thus says YHWH: We have heard [‫ ]שמענו‬the sound of fear, of terror, and no peace. Ask and see,

112

Martien A. Halvorson-Taylor

can a man bear a child? Why then do I see every man with his hands on his loins [‫]ידיו על חלציו‬ like a woman in labour [‫?]כיולדה‬ Why has every face turned pale? Alas! that day is so great there is none like it! 3 It is a time of distress [‫ ]צרה‬for Jacob ... (Jer 30:5–7c)

Were it not for the introduction to the Book of Consolation that sets the subject as exile and restoration (30:1–4), it would not be clear that these verses speak to those experiences. The second half of the poem (30:8–11), in its own fashion, will further make this connection, establishing defeat as the tenor for the vehicle. But, again, the first poem opens with an image, the earliest layer of its formation, that lacks such references. The beginnings of what will become a metaphor for exile in 30:5–7 are likely drawn from even earlier strands of tradition, two interrelated snippets from the earlier poetic core of the book of Jeremiah. First, though it does not speak of the Day of YHWH, Jer 6:24 uses a similar simile to speak of immanent defeat: We have heard [‫ ]שמענו‬report of it; our hands fail [‫]רפו ידינו‬, distress [‫ ]צרה‬seizes us, pain like a woman in labour [‫]כיולדה‬. (Jer 6:24)

Indeed, it has been proposed that the phrase “like a woman in labour,” which is not found in the LXX comparable to MT Jer 30:6 (LXX Jer 37:6), was a later gloss that sought to harmonize with Jer 6:24. Even without the phrase, Jer 30:6 takes up some of the imagery of 6:24. Second, and perhaps more important for our question, this image has a counterpart within the long cycle of poems in Jer 4–6 that vividly narrate the advance of the “foe from the north.” Within this cycle, it is possible to isolate a short poem, Jer 4:19–31, that describes the devastation that ensues using some of the same imagery that will resurface in Jer 30:5–7. The original poem consisted of Jer 4:19–21 and concluded with v. 29; its eventual extension in vv. 30 and 31 bears particularly on the shape of the metaphor of distress in Jer 30:5–11. This early poem begins in 4:19 as a lament over the certain defeat by the foe from the north. Like Poem One (30:5–11) in the Book of Consolation, it describes a visceral reaction to the sound of battle, but it goes a step further in describing the actual devastation. As it says, “disaster overtakes 3 The MT points this “whence, from where,” but the LXX, which often reflects an earlier form of the Book of Consolation, preserves another form, so that the phrase reads, “There is nothing like it.” See Halvorson-Taylor, Enduring Exile, 51, n. 20.

Prophetic Images of Women as Metaphors for Exile

113

disaster,” the kind of specificity that will be missing in the earlier layer of Jer 30:5–7: My belly, my belly [‫ !]מעי מעי‬I writhe [‫ ]אוחילה‬in pain! The walls of my heart! It roars in me, my heart! I cannot keep still; For I hear the sound of the shofar, my nefesh, the alarm of war. Disaster overtakes disaster, the whole land is devastated [‫]שדדה‬. Suddenly my tents are devastated [‫]שדדו‬, my curtains in a moment. (Jer 4:19–20)

Jer 4:19–21, 29 opens with a voice describing physical affliction in the face of defeat: intestinal distress (“My belly, my belly! I writhe in pain!”) and a pounding heart (“It roars in me, my heart!”), which are explained as physical responses to the sounds of war. It is important to note that in Jer 4:19–21 (which, again, originally concluded with v. 29), the identity of the first-person narrator is initially not specified, which makes the poem’s eventual extension in vv. 30–31 and its later appearance in Jer 30:5–7 possible, if not provocative. The variety of proposals – that the narrator in Jer 4:19–21 is Jeremiah, the land of Judah, or the City of Jerusalem personified – only confirm this lack of clarity about the speaker. 4 Moreover, we should note that the speaker’s gender would likely be female if the voice is the voice of personified Jerusalem and Judah, but this too is not specified with the poem. Even as we might lean toward this association, it remains an open question – perhaps even intentionally so – in the poem. The figure’s “writhing pain” and “roaring heart” may use the taxonomy of labour, but men writhe, too, and their hearts beat hard as well. This ambiguity is why there are various translations of the poem’s opening words: ‫ מעה‬can be “the innards,” “the belly,” and, yes, in certain cases “the womb.” In the context of the poem, however, v. 19 seems to focus on that part of the body as the seat of emotions, which is why some prefer to translate ‫ מעה‬as the more gendercomprehensive “My anguish, my anguish!” 5 (Indeed, in the next strophe, this body part is compared and contrasted to the heart, ‫לב‬, as the seat of reason.) 4 For example, even when R. P. Carroll (Jeremiah: A Commentary [OTL; London: SCM Press, 1986], 167) suggests that the speaker may be either “the land (Judah) or the city (Jerusalem),” he also notes “nothing in the text indicates who the speaker might be.” 5 For example, Carroll, Jeremiah, 166.

114

Martien A. Halvorson-Taylor

The gender and identity of the speaker, left ambiguous in Jer 4:19–21, 29, is clarified in two short passages appended to the end of the poem. Verses 30 and 31 respectively extend the original poem to trace out two different semantic ranges, both of them retroactively defining the speaker in the original poem (4:19–21, 29) as female; it is this second extension, v. 31, that is recalled in Jer 30:5–11. Both of the additions of vv. 30 and 31 draw on the vocabulary of the original poem – using, for example, the verbs ‫חיל‬, “to writhe,” and ‫שׁדד‬, “to be desolate” – but they map it onto a distinctly female body. In the first extension, v. 30, Jeremiah addresses the speaker, who exploded with distress in vv. 19–21, as ‫את‬, using the feminine second-person singular pronoun. 6 Now cast as a woman, her distress has been met with judgment: this desolate one is accused of tarting herself up for no cause: “What are you doing – that you dress yourself in scarlet? That you adorn yourself with ornaments of gold? That you enlarge your eyes with paint?” The image has been extended from voiced pain to now include a female body, beautified but beaten, and a backstory has been provided. This is the voice of a woman who has been abandoned to her fate: “In vain you beautify yourself. Your lovers despise you; they seek your life!” The second extension of the poem, in v. 31, accepts this identification of the speaker of 4:19 ff. as a woman and now trades in the simile that lies behind our poem in the Book of Consolation: For I heard [‫ ]שמעתי‬a sound as of a woman in labour [‫]קול כחולה‬, distress [‫ ]צרה‬as of one bringing forth her first child, the sound of daughter Zion gasping for breath, stretching out her hands, “Woe is me! I am fainting before killers!” (Jer 4:31)

The new semantic range begins by building on a simile to suggest that the ‫מעה‬, the “belly” of 4:19, is now located in a female body – a womb in labour (Gen 25:23; Ps 71:6; Isa 49:1 and Ruth 1:11). Now the reason for the notice that the speaker in Jer 4:19 “writhes” and “cannot keep still” is because something like the pangs of labour take hold of her. Jeremiah hears the “sound” like a labouring woman, “distress” like one bearing her first child (4:31). Generic, if not non-gendered, language of distress now yields a fuller figure and the beginnings of metaphor. They are embodied in daughter Zion, who senses her imminent demise: “Woe is me! I am fainting before killers!” 6

The qere is the conventional second feminine singular pronoun; the ketib is archaic.

Prophetic Images of Women as Metaphors for Exile

115

To take stock of this very complex travel of the image of one who seems to be writhing in anguish in chapter 4: Relatively ungendered language that is not anchored to a specific personage in 4:19–21, 29 becomes specified as female in two extensions of the poem, vv. 30 and 31. These associations may have been forged first through implicit resonances with a variety of other metaphorical complexes, including the wife as harlot and the barren woman as plundered nation. Furthermore, we might note that in both the original poem and the first addition, if not the second, the actual destruction wrought by the invaders is narrated. The Book of Consolation, on the other hand, develops the image of the figure in travail in a different direction. Remarkably, the first Poem (30:5–11) returns to this image of fear as evoking the image of a woman in labour and re-genders it male, so that we have men acting like women in labour; the poem specifies that it is Jacob in the high distress of advanced childbirth, in the liminal space between life and death, between male and female. Furthermore, focusing so intensely on the dread that anticipates destruction, the poem actually skips over the destruction spelled out in Jer 4, and the deportations that followed, to offer words of restoration in vv. 8–11: not only will Jacob’s fear dissipate, but he will be loosed from the bonds of foreign servitude, his king will be restored, and the people will return from exile. Indeed, only these promises of restoration make it clear that the image of travail is in fact a metaphor for exile. It is interesting, further, that Poem One (Jer 30:5–11) dwells on images that communicate a feeling of anguish as opposed to a particular event or series of events. The poem describes the anticipation of a disaster, not the disaster itself; it describes a state of being. The condition of exile is likened to the prolonged foreboding and insecurity experienced by those awaiting a military invasion. In place of an explicit description of events, there is the assertion that exile is inexpressible and incomparable, that “there is nothing like it” (v. 7; following the LXX, see note above). The combination of expectation and terror is enacted through gestures that parody childbirth (another moment that combines expectation and terror.) The poem asks, “can a man indeed bear a child? Why then do I see every warrior with his hands on his loins?” In MT, this gesture is clarified by a simile that such a posture is “like a woman in labour” (v. 6). 7 Likely drawn from the metaphorical complex of Jer 6:24 and 4:31, the image conveys the emasculation of the men, even the warriors, of Judah, and 7

This phrase is not found in the corresponding LXX Jer 37:6 and, since LXX can indicate an earlier form of the Book of Consolation, the phrase in MT may be a later gloss.

116

Martien A. Halvorson-Taylor

it may even internalize the military taunt of Israel’s oppressors, namely, “Your military men are weak like women – labouring women at that!” 8 But it further conveys the utter futility of the situation; they are in an agony akin to labour but without the possibility, the hope, of a child. The image conveys that the natural order of things has been upended, and how utterly futile the new order is. In the context of this earliest strophe of Poem One, the image of the labouring warrior constructs the condition of exile as a fruitless and interminable state of suffering – a state that can only be dispelled by liberation, the breaking of the oppressor’s yoke, and so on (30:8–11). The remainder of the poem, however, promises a startling reversal: exile yields to return, distress yields to quiet and ease, and the one who sought to make an end of Judah will instead meet an end. Most remarkably, the fear and distress of the people – which is akin to a labouring woman but, more perplexing, is located in men who cannot give birth – will in fact yield children: YHWH promises, “for I am going to save you from far away, and your offspring from the land of their captivity” (v. 10). This restoration promise brings children, offspring, back from exile, making the labour productive. Indeed, over the course of the Book of Consolation, this dimension of the restoration – that agonizing distress like a labour that would seem to have no futurity, no prospects, but yields surprising results – resurfaces several times. Later in the Book of Consolation, in Jer 31:8, labouring women as well as their pregnant sisters are actually envisioned in the restoration. While we are used, from Isaiah, to seeing the poor and the lame and the blind returning to a renewed Zion, the vision in Jer 31:8 includes, too, “those with child and those in labour”: ‫הנני מביא אותם‬ ‫מארץ צפון וקבצתים מירכתי ארץ בם עור ופסח הרה וילדת יחדו קהל גדול‬ ‫ישׁובו הנה‬. This, too, may be another dimension for using images of men in labour to evoke the experience of exile: this futile labour could later be complemented by a promise of successful childbirth and repopulation. This “startling reversal” may bear a resemblance to the theology of divine intervention in Gen 2, when YHWH creates the man from the dust of the earth and the woman from the man – and from this man and woman, the nations of the world will emerge. Here the deity again creates life from a man – and the nation is restored, returned, revived.

8

C. Chapman, The Gendered Language of Warfare in the Israelite-Assyrian Encounter (HSM 62; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2004).

Prophetic Images of Women as Metaphors for Exile

117

2. Poem Two (Jer 30:12–17) and Jeremiah 10 The second poem in the Book of Consolation, Jer 30:12–17, also approaches the topic of exile obliquely: it speaks of a wounded and abandoned feminine subject to convey the destruction of the people. Jeremiah 30:12–15 describes the devastation of a female figure who has been forgotten by her lovers and dealt the blow of an enemy (v. 14). The verdict appears final: her cries are futile since her “pain is incurable” (v. 15). Poem Two appears to reuse images from Jer 10, as well as Jer 4. In Jer 10:19, a speaker cries out, using the same sequence of vocabulary that the wounded woman of Poem Two will use: “Woe is me because of my hurt; my wound is severe.” Not unlike 4:20, in Jer 10, this physical pain, her “affliction,” is quickly associated with destruction (“My tent is destroyed and all my cords are broken,” v. 20) and also with the loss of children (“my children have gone from me, and they are no more”). But just as the first poem in the Book of Consolation refrains from describing the actual devastation that will follow the approach of battle, so does the second poem avoid the notices of destruction that were included in Jer 10, simply noting instead that the wounded woman has been abandoned. In both cases, the Book of Consolation shies from presenting a narrative about destruction and exile, preferring instead to dwell on a single, interminable moment. In the final form of Poem Two, the redactors have added two verses (vv. 16–17) that introduce references to exile (including captivity and plunder) and identify the nameless wounded woman of the first part as Zion. The redactors of the Book of Consolation of 30:12–15 lifted up imagery, furthermore, that evoked the events of the sixth century – whether or not this earlier layer of the poem originally referred to the exile. The addition of these verses not only enlarges the figure of the anonymous woman into a metaphor for the devastations of the sixth century, revalorizing an early literary tradition for a newer circumstance, but it also offers her a remarkable restoration. As in Poem One, the later strand of Poem Two, Jer 30:16–17, reverses the unmitigated judgment of the earlier strand, vv. 12–15. What was incurable and without remedy in the first part of the poem will now be resolved; while YHWH had earlier warned Zion that her wounds would not and could not be healed (vv. 13, 15), YHWH now promises to heal them (v. 17a). In other words, in Poem Two, the redactors have fashioned a poem of hope out of pre-existing pieces of poetry that were devoid of hope. And again, as in Poem One, the redactors have

118

Martien A. Halvorson-Taylor

chosen to use an image that communicates a state of protracted suffering rather than an event. As in Poem One, the redaction of Poem Two as a whole more firmly anchors the first part of the poem in the exilic situation as the tenor for the medical metaphor. By building a metaphor and a longer poem on this snippet of physical and emotional pain (vv. 12–15), Poem Two renders exile as initially irremediable, if not interminable suffering.

3. Poem Six (Jer 31:15–22) The third poem to deal with this complex, intertwined relationship between metaphors for exile and restoration comes in the final poem of the Book of Consolation, Poem Six (Jer 31:15–22). And, indeed, of the three, the Rachel poem comes the closest to a “literal” representation of exile, since it talks of the separation of families, concrete dimensions of that experience. The poem opens with an agonized cry (Jer 31:15), one that echoes the cry of the wounded woman in Jer 10:20: “my children have gone from me, and they are no more.” In Poem Six, however, the absence of children is associated with a specific figure, Rachel, which gives the lament a rich set of associations. Thus says YHWH: A sound is heard in Ramah, lamentation and bitter weeping. Rachel, who is weeping for her children, refuses to be comforted over her children, for “There is no one!” [‫( ]איננו‬Jer 31:15)

The expression ‫ איננו‬functions both in a literal, geographic sense, meaning “he is not here,” and also as a euphemism for death, a starker statement of nonexistence, in which ‫ איננו‬approximates the modern euphemism, “he is no longer with us.” In a remarkable reference, Jacob uses the expression both ways when he says, in Gen 42:36, “Joseph is no more [‫איננו‬, meaning he is dead], and Simeon is no more [‫איננו‬, meaning he is in exile in Egypt], and now you would take Benjamin?” That Jacob uses the same phrase to refer to both sons suggests a parallel between Joseph’s assumed death and Simeon’s detention in a foreign land. They are roughly equivalent: an irreversible, permanent condition of separation. 9 9

See Halvorson-Taylor, Enduring Exile, 78–79.

Prophetic Images of Women as Metaphors for Exile

119

In this sense, Rachel’s lament could have two meanings: as a lament over death and as a lament over exile, which in the biblical sense are comparable. In either, she bemoans the loss of her future. And, in this regard, we could say that the image is not unlike the futility of labour in the first poem, in which men labour like women; they will not yield a future. All have a durational power, are irremediable. Infertility, death, an agonizing and unproductive labour – all these are of a piece with defeat and exile. And yet, once again, from this impossible situation, restoration is promised: the redactors of the poem appropriated Rachel’s lament to be a prelude to, a part of, a brief oracle, whose purpose is to compare the desolation of exile to Rachel’s bereavement (vv. 16–17). In so doing, they redefined the meaning of her lament and the meaning of ‫איננו‬. Verses 16–17, the actual oracle, promise, “They shall come back from the land of the enemy ... your children shall return to their own country.” The oracle, then, interprets Rachel’s lament to mean that she is bereaved of her children through exile which it then promises will be remedied; exile becomes the new root cause of her suffering, and it will be overcome.

4. Taking Stock of the Poems as a Sequence: Why These Images? We have seen how three of the poems in the Book of Consolation approach exile metaphorically by selecting certain images from the earlier Jeremiah tradition and re-contextualizing them as ways of describing the otherwise indescribable experience of exile. Can we now say anything about the choice of these images in particular for inclusion in the Book of Consolation? First, it seems to me noteworthy that the three images become increasingly specific across the Book of Consolation, moving from “there is nothing like it” to a description of the wound that precipitates exile, to Rachel’s pain of loss and separation, perhaps the closest to a “literal” representation of exile. The three images move from something that cannot be described, to something that can be described in relatively general terms, to something that can be described in terms of a specific person, Rachel. Second, we could go even further to note that these three poems create something of a narrative thread: they can be aligned with the three phases that a conquered and exiled nation would experience, namely, defeat, destruction, and finally deportation and exile. In the first poem, men labour

120

Martien A. Halvorson-Taylor

in anticipation of military defeat; in the second the woman suffers the incurable wound of destruction; in the third Rachel mourns over those who “are not” because they are slain in the destruction and those who “are not” here because they are in exile. But, finally, more than a chronology, we have three cases of durative suffering: a protracted and futile labour, an irremediable wound, Rachel bereft of children. These images have less to do, too, with the geographical dimensions of the experience, but rather express the experience, a persistent suffering that is apparently irreversible. This is something to consider: why did the redactors of the Book of Consolation choose to render exile metaphorically? They might have used literal depictions of defeat, exile, and restoration to vivid effect. But instead they trade in metaphors, all of which draw on protracted anguish, both physical and emotional. Finally, all three are told of women or of men who are like women. One is tempted to speculate why exilic suffering is inscribed upon the female body or described in female terms. To be sure, here and elsewhere, exile is rendered through a dense web of metaphors; the image of the woman is but one thread in the tangle, but these female images also pull the knot tighter, at least in the Book of Consolation. This may again be because the futile labour in the beginning of the cycle can now end with children restored to mother Rachel by the end, or, as the poetic cycle ends by saying in Jer 31:22, ‫כי ברא יהוה חדשׁה בארץ נקבה תסובב גבר‬, “For YHWH has created a new thing on the earth: A woman encompasses a warrior!” More than that, however, the new thing that has been made has been fashioned through a remarkable resetting of pieces of pre-existent poetry. Our probing back into the poetic core of the book of Jeremiah suggests that the redactors of the Book of Consolation have pared away the narrative context associated with these earlier images in order to create metaphors with deliberate intent to dwell on what it feels like to be in exile – and the improbable turn when that state of being is reversed. The poems we have examined are neither literal depictions nor allegories of the destruction of Jerusalem and the subsequent deportations, but rather attempts to conjure inner experience, mostly inscribed on a female self, reaching toward some universal experience. And it is this reconfiguration of exile as a persistent, enduring inner experience, the inner experience of women, that paved the way for the idea of exile as a protracted if existential condition.

Voting with One’s Feet Emigration as a Matter of Choice in the Jeremiah Narratives 1 Sonja Ammann

In and out of prison, down into the pit and up again, out of the city and off to Egypt: Jeremiah 2 seems to be constantly on the move within the narratives in Jer 37–43. Changes of location in these chapters are often related to particular political stances in the final phase of the Judean monarchy. Common readings of Jer 37–43 assume that Jeremiah’s movements – whether voluntary or forced – also have political significance. Does Jeremiah thus convey a political message not only in his words, but also by his changes of place – is he, as it were, voting with his feet? In the present article, I will explore whether Jeremiah’s movements in Jer 37:11–16; 40:1–6; and 43:6 take on political significance within the world of the narrative. In other words, does the text indicate that the changes of location express a political (or, theopolitical) stance? Close attention to textual difficulties in these chapters will show that a political motivation for Jeremiah’s movements is not stated explicitly. Rather, the texts suggest that Jeremiah’s changes of place follow the requirements of the narrative and correspond to a particular understanding of his prophetic role. It is Jeremiah’s words that communicate the prophetic (and political) message. His feet, however, serve to keep the message close by the people on their dissenting way.

1 I would like to thank the organizers and participants of the conference for inspiring discussions. In particular, I thank Martien A. Halvorson-Taylor for her helpful suggestions on the manuscript. 2 I use the term “Jeremiah,” as well as all other personal names in Jer 37–43, to designate the literary persona.

122

Sonja Ammann

1. Introduction: Choice, Movement, and Politics in Jeremiah 37–43 1.1. Choice A cursory reading of the so-called Deuteronomistic History gives the impression that the story runs inexorably towards its tragic end. The wrongdoing of the people necessarily leads to their eventual doom, and even a good king like Josiah cannot change this course of events. Unlike in the books of Kings, however, the narratives in Jer 37–43 do not present the end of the kingdom of Judah and the deportation of its population as a necessary consequence of earlier wrong behaviour. Rather, destruction and loss of the land are presented as the consequence of a series of fatal decisions. 3 In particular, Jer 38 narrates how King Zedekiah fails to make the decision commended by Jeremiah, that is, to surrender to the Babylonians. In several instances in this chapter (Jer 38:2, 17, 21), Jeremiah calls upon the king to make a decision. His choice between two alternative options will entail two alternative outcomes. Moreover, the fate of the land does not lie in the hands of the king alone. In the book of Jeremiah, individuals can and should make choices. The idea of individual political agency is not without risks: Jeremiah’s call to defect to the Babylonians (Jer 21:9; 38:2) brought trouble upon him not only within the narrative but also in the history of reception. 4

1.2. Movement In the Jeremiah narratives, choices have a spatial dimension; they generally involve or entail a change of place. The political decisions narrated in Jer 37–43 are almost all linked to movement: People choose whether they stay or go, and if they go, where to (e. g., 38:17–18; 40:4; 42:13–14). It has often been noted that the narrative in Jer 37–43 contains many references to movement and changes of place. 5 Most of the movements 3 In addition to Zedekiah’s fatal decision in Jer 38 (contrary to Jeremiah’s advice, he does not surrender to the Babylonians), see Jer 40:17 (contrary to Johanan’s advice, Gedaliah does not assassinate Ishmael) and Jer 42–43 (contrary to Jeremiah’s advice, the people do not remain in Judah). 4 “To advocate a policy of capitulation on the regular government is one thing, but to incite soldiers or civilians to break their allegiance and go over to the enemy is a disloyal and treasonable act, which every right-minded man would condemn as inexcusable under any circumstances whatsoever.” J. Skinner, Prophecy and Religion: Studies in the Life of Jeremiah (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1922), 261–262. 5 For an analysis of verbs of movement within these chapters, see S. Laufer, “‘Should We Stay or Should We Go?’: A Study of Narrative Space in Jeremiah 37–45” (PhD diss.,

Voting with One’s Feet

123

related in these chapters involve a decision on the part of the protagonists: In Jer 37, Jeremiah freely decides to leave the city of Jerusalem during a temporary break in the Babylonian siege. In Jer 40, the Babylonian officer Nebuzaradan urges Jeremiah to choose whether he wants to go to Babylonia or to stay in Judah with Gedaliah. Finally, chs. 42–43 present the emigration of the remaining people to Egypt as a voluntary decision. On the other hand, there are also forced displacements in Jer 37–43, and Jeremiah’s freedom of movement, in particular, is restrained by enclosed spaces. Until the Babylonian conquest, no one in this narrative leaves the city; all the action takes place within Jerusalem. Jeremiah’s attempt to leave the city in Jer 37 leads to his imprisonment, thus restricting his scope of action even further. The nadir of the story is reached when Jeremiah is confined in a pit (in 38:6) – “sunk in the mud is Jeremiah’s lowest and deepest position.” 6 With his feet stuck in the mud, Jeremiah cannot speak or act. His freedom of movement (or lack thereof) is directly tied to his theological mission and his political intervention. 7

1.3. Politics The voluntary and involuntary movements in Jer 37–43 also have a political dimension. Jeremiah is depicted as a political figure, his prophetic interventions advocating a particular stance in the conflict with the Babylonians and of direct concern to the future of the Judaean community. In his message, the political positioning is connected to spatial positioning and to movement, as in his repeated statement: New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, 2009), 98–140. As pointed out by H. Kremers, “Leidensgemeinschaft mit Gott im Alten Testament,” EvTh 13 (1953): 122–140, 131, and G. Wanke, Untersuchungen zur sogenannten Baruchschrift (BZAW 122; Berlin: De Gruyter, 1971), 92, each scene in Jer 37:11–40:6 concludes with the formulaic statement of Jeremiah’s location (‫)וישׁב ירמיהו‬. 6 B. Green, “Sunk in the Mud: Literary Correlation and Collaboration between King and Prophet in the Book of Jeremiah,” in Jeremiah Invented: Constructions and Deconstructions of Jeremiah (ed. E. K. Holt and C. J. Sharp; LHBOTS 595; London: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2015), 34–48, 36. 7 For an interpretation of Jeremiah’s confinements in Jer 37–38 as “an attempt to silence Jeremiah, the word of God,” see E. K. Holt, “The Potent Word of God: Remarks on the Composition of Jeremiah 37–44,” in Troubling Jeremiah (ed. A. R. Diamond, K. M. O’Connor and Louis Stulman; JSOTSup 260; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999), 161–170, 164–165. It is noteworthy that, as in Jer 40:1, Jeremiah depends on a foreigner to liberate him from his situation of helplessness.

124

Sonja Ammann

Those who stay (‫ )ישׁב‬in this city shall die by the sword, by famine, and by pestilence; but those who go out (‫ )יצא‬to the Babylonians shall live, and have their lives as spoils. (Jer 38:2 // 21:9 MT) 8

Accordingly, people’s whereabouts and movements related in Jer 37–43 have political implications. Zedekiah refuses to move out of Jerusalem against Jeremiah’s theopolitical advice. Similarly, in Jer 43, the people do not listen to Jeremiah’s sermon and decide to move to Egypt, that is, out of the realm of Babylonian sovereignty. Jeremiah’s own movements also raise political issues: His attempt to leave Jerusalem in ch. 37 arouses suspicion of defection. The fact that he joins the community in Mizpah is often interpreted as theological support for Gedaliah’s rule. Jeremiah’s emigration to Egypt, in contrast, is considered a forced move against his will and own advice. In what follows, I will re-examine the possible political significance of Jeremiah’s movements in chs. 37; 40; and 43 and argue that Jeremiah’s changes of location do not express a political stance in these narratives. The three texts I will discuss have two points in common. First, in each case there is a strong exegetical tradition concerning the motivation for Jeremiah’s movement. Second, in these texts, the motivation for Jeremiah’s movement is not stated explicitly in the dialogue (in contrast, cf. Jer 38:19; 42:14). Moreover, textual difficulties obscure the choice or decision which leads to the narrated movement. In exegetical discussions, the evaluation of the textual difficulties often falls back eventually on assumptions about the historical facts of Jeremiah’s life or about Jeremiah’s character. In the following reading, I will try to avoid this kind of argument and keep to the text and its possible meanings.

2. Jeremiah 37:11–16 In Jer 37, Jeremiah appears to be voting with his feet when he attempts to leave the city of Jerusalem, especially if we compare the impact of movement in ch. 37 to a parallel account in ch. 38. It has often been noted that the plot of Jer 38:1–13 shares some features with Jer 37. In both stories, Jeremiah is a free man in the beginning (37:4; 38:1). Subsequently, he is arrested (37:14–15; 38:6) and held under life-threatening conditions (37:20; 38:9–10). After an intervention, Jeremiah is then moved to the 8

Biblical translations are my own, made with close reference to the NRSV.

Voting with One’s Feet

125

courtyard, where both stories end (‫ ;וישׁב ירמיהו בחצר המטרה‬37:21 // 38:13). 9 Therefore, the two stories have been considered parallel accounts or “variations on a theme” (R. Carroll). 10 For the topic of the present study, it is noteworthy that while in ch. 38 Jeremiah is arrested because of what he says, in ch. 37 he is arrested because of where he goes. In ch. 38, Jeremiah obediently proclaims Yhwh’s words (cf. the prophetic messenger formula “Thus says Yhwh:...,” 38:2, 3) and is arrested without any resistance (as far as we are told). The image of Jeremiah in ch. 37 is quite different: without any divine order, Jeremiah decides to leave the city and defends himself when arrested. 11 Whereas in 38:2 Jeremiah prophesies that one should go out (‫ )יצא‬rather than stay in Jerusalem, in 37:12 this is what he does (‫)ויצא ירמיהו מירושׁלם‬. Is Jeremiah thus voting with his feet in 37:12? A closer look at Jer 37:11–16 and its textual difficulties is needed to discuss this question. As we will see, in all possible translations of the difficult phrase that conveys Jeremiah’s motivation, he appears to leave Jerusalem for personal reasons rather than as a political statement. When the Babylonian army had withdrawn from Jerusalem at the approach of the Pharaoh’s army, Jeremiah set out to leave Jerusalem to go to the land of Benjamin to ‫[ חלק‬see discussion below] from there among the people. As he arrived at the Benjamin gate, there was a sentinel whose name was Irijah son of Shelemiah son of Hananiah, and he seized Jeremiah the prophet saying: “You are deserting to the Babylonians!” And Jeremiah said: “That is a lie! I am not deserting to the Babylonians.” And he did not listen to him, and Irijah seized Jeremiah and brought him to the officials. The officials were angry at Jeremiah and beat him and put him in prison, in the house of Jonathan the scribe (for they had made it into a prison). ‘Thus’ 12 9

Moreover, in both stories the “Benjamin Gate” plays a special role (37:13; 38:7). R. P. Carroll, The Book of Jeremiah (OTL; London: SCM, 1986), 672. For the view that Jer 37 and 38 are parallel accounts of the same events, see Skinner, Prophecy, 258–259, n. 1; followed by J. Bright, Jeremiah: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB; Garden City: Doubleday, 1965), 233; W. McKane, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Jeremiah: Vol. II: Commentary on Jeremiah XXVI–LII (ICC; Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1996), 968–969; and others. R. Goldstein, “Rumors and Lies: Zedekiah and Ancient Forms of Dealing with the Existence of Rival Narratives [Hebrew],” in Shai le-Sara Japhet: Studies in the Bible, Its Exegesis and Language (ed. M. Bar-Asher et al.; Jerusalem: Bialik, 2007), 23–36, argues that the account in Jer 38 corrects the weak image of the prophet in Jer 37 (I would like to thank the author for providing me with an English translation of this article). 11 This is all the more salient if one understands that Jeremiah is the subject of Jer 37:14a, with P. Volz, Der Prophet Jeremia (KAT 10; Leipzig: Deichert, 1922), 332. While many commentators assume that Irijah did not listen to Jeremiah, the syntax suggests that Jeremiah is the subject of the sentence, meaning that “Jeremiah attempted to ignore or shrug off the accusation, to thrust aside the challenge and go through the gate, but was physically restrained by Irijah” (McKane, Jeremiah II, 928). 12 The MT ‫ כי בא‬is unintelligible and might be a scribal error influenced by the preceding ‫כי‬. My translation follows Driver’s suggestion to emend to ‫ ;כה‬see S. R. Driver, The Book 10

126

Sonja Ammann

Jeremiah was put in the cistern house, in the vaults[?], and Jeremiah stayed there for many days. (Jer 37:11–16 MT)

Verse 11 sets the stage 13 for the following story: The Babylonians (temporarily) lifted the siege, which made it possible to leave the city. Verse 12 tells us that Jeremiah goes out of Jerusalem: ‫ויצא ירמיהו מירושׁלם‬. Readers might be reminded of the prophetic recommendation to leave the city in Jer 21:9 // 38:2: “Those who go out (‫ )היצא‬to the Babylonians shall live!” However, since the Babylonians are no longer outside the gates, the reader might wonder whether Jeremiah actually intends to defect to the Babylonians. Indeed, a different explanation follows: ‫ללכת ארץ בנימן‬. Considering that Benjamin is Jeremiah’s homeland (Jer 1:1; 32:8, 44), this might provide sufficient explanation for him to go there. But the text adds another final clause, and this is where things start to get quite mysterious: ‫לחלק משׁם בתוך העם‬. In particular, the meaning of ‫ לחלק‬is uncertain. I will discuss various options and argue that the verb most probably conveys the idea of Jeremiah leaving the city on personal grounds rather than in the interest of a larger community, namely to escape. If we read only the consonants, the term ‫ לחלק‬looks like a qal infinitive ‫ַחלֹק‬ ֲ ‫ל‬. 14 This is indeed what the Vulgate, the Peshitta, and the Targum seem to read. 15 They all translate “to divide” which corresponds to ‫חלק‬ II qal “to divide, to apportion.” However, this reading does not fit easily with the rest of the sentence, which they render rather freely as “to divide of the Prophet Jeremiah: A Revised Translation with Introductions and Short Explanations (2nd ed.; New York: Scribner, 1908), 230. Others emend to ‫ ויבא‬with LXX (καὶ ἦλθεν), cf. C. H. Cornill, Das Buch Jeremia (Leipzig: Tauchnitz, 1905), 398; W. Rudolph, Jeremia (3rd ed.; HAT 12; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1968), 238. 13 The syntactic function of ‫ והיה‬is disputed among scholars. While many commentators assume an original reading ‫ויהי‬, cf. H.-J. Stipp, “w’=hay¯a für nichtiterative Vergangenheit?: Zu syntaktischen Modernisierungen im masoretischen Jeremiabuch,” in Text, Methode und Grammatik (ed. W. Gross, H. Irsigler and T. Seidl; St. Ottilien: Eos-Verl., 1991), 521–547; others argue that ‫ והיה‬introduces background information. Adhering to the latter interpretation, H. Migsch, Gottes Wort über das Ende Jerusalems: Eine literar-, stil- und gattungskritische Untersuchung des Berichtes Jeremia 34,1–7; 32,2–5; 37,3–38,28 (ÖBS 2; Klosterneuburg: Verl. Österr. Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1981), 133–134, n. 60, and B. Isaksson, “‘Aberrant’ Usages of Introductory wehaya in the Light of Text Linguistics,” in “Lasset uns Brücken bauen ...”: Collected Communications to the XVth Congress of the International Organization for the Study of the Old Testament, Cambridge 1995 (ed. K.-D. Schunck and M. Augustin; BEAT 42; Frankfurt a. M., New York: P. Lang, 1998), 9–25, 22 argue that the main narrative resumes with ‫ ויהי‬in v. 13. This interpretation of the narrative syntax converges with my conclusion (see below) that Jeremiah’s reason for leaving the city (v. 12) is a necessary presupposition for the story rather than its focus. 14 Or piel ‫ְח ֵלּק‬ ַ ‫“ ל‬to apportion.” 15 Thus Cornill, Jeremia, 396.

Voting with One’s Feet

127

there (‫ שׁם‬instead of ‫ )משׁם‬a property (object added).” 16 Perhaps this is why the Masoretes transmitted a different vocalisation: ‫ַחלִק‬ ֲ ‫ל‬, a hiphil 17 infinitive. Most commentators derive this unique form from ‫ חלק‬II qal “to divide,” translating the hiphil as “to perform a division (of an inheritance)” 18 and assume that it refers to the division of land. This interpretation not only is in line with the Vulgate (and other versions), it is further suggested by the use of ‫ חלק‬and ‫ בתוך‬in similar contexts (e. g., Num 18:20). 19 However, the hiphil of ‫ חלק‬II “to divide” is not attested in any other instance. 20 Moreover, it is difficult to make sense of ‫ משׁם‬in this interpretation. Some commentators venture a connection to Jeremiah’s purchase of a field in the land of Benjamin, narrated in Jer 32. 21 However, a historicizing reading of the symbolic prophetic action in Jer 32 seems problematic. Moreover, there is no verbal connection between Jer 37:12 and Jer 32. In other words, the interpretation that Jeremiah leaves the city because he has to divide a property in his homeland is no more than an educated guess. The reading proposed by the Septuagint could be related to this exegetical tradition. In place of the Hebrew ‫לחלק‬, the Greek text reads 16 Thus the Vulgate (divideret ibi possessionem); similarly Peshitta and Targum. ‫ משׁם‬should not be assimilated to ‫ שׁם‬without further explanation (contra Rudolph, Jeremia, 238, followed by H.-J. Stipp, Jeremia im Parteienstreit: Studien zur Textentwicklung von Jer 26, 36–43 und 45 als Beitrag zur Geschichte Jeremias, seines Buches und judäischer Parteien im 6. Jahrhundert [Frankfurt a. M.: Hain, 1992], 162; with Cornill, Jeremia, 396; McKane, Jeremiah II, 926), since out of more than 100 attestations of ‫ משׁם‬in the Hebrew Bible, Isa 65:20 (adduced as evidence for ‫ שׁם = משׁם‬by Rudolph) is, to my knowledge, the only case where ‫ משׁם‬could be taken to mean “there” (but probably rather “from that place,” referring to inhabitants). 17 The regular hiphil infinitive would be ‫חלִיק‬ ֲ ‫ְה‬ ַ ‫ ;ל‬the present form must be taken as a defective writing with elided ‫ ה‬at the beginning, cf. W. Gesenius, Hebräische Grammatik (ed. E. Kautzsch, repr. 28th ed.; Hildesheim: Olms, 1991 [= 1909]), §53q. 18 Thus Rudolph, Jeremia, 238, followed by W. Gesenius, Hebräisches und Aramäisches Handwörterbuch über das Alte Testament (ed. R. Meyer and H. Donner; trans. Udo Rüterswörden; 18th ed.; Heidelberg: Springer, 2013): “eine Erbteilung vornehmen;” HALOT s.v. suggests “to take part in the dividing.” 19 See also Josh 15:13 (‫ ;)נתן חלק בתוך בני־יהודה‬Prov 17:2 (‫ ;)בתוך אחים יחלק נחלה‬cf. K.-F. Pohlmann, Studien zum Jeremiabuch: Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach der Entstehung des Jeremiabuches (FRLANT 118; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1978), 60, n. 73. 20 One might doubt whether such a technical legal term, if it existed, would not be attested in any other text within or outside the Hebrew Bible; cf. Cornill, Jeremia, 396. 21 Cf. Volz, Jeremia, 333; Bright, Jeremiah, 229; Rudolph, Jeremia, 237; A. Weiser, Das Buch des Propheten Jeremia (6th ed.; ATD 20/21; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1969), 333–334, n. 4; W. L. Holladay, Jeremiah 2: A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Jeremiah Chapters 26–52 (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989), 288; C. R. Seitz, Theology in Conflict: Reactions to the Exile in the Book of Jeremiah (BZAW 176; Berlin, New York: De Gruyter, 1989), 256.

128

Sonja Ammann

ἀγοράσαι “to buy” from there. Some manuscripts further add the object ἄρτον “bread,” meaning that Jeremiah intended to leave the besieged city in order to purchase food from his homeland. 22 This reading makes good sense. However, it is unclear how the Hebrew ‫ לחלק‬might have derived from a Hebrew text meaning “to purchase.” The Greek text might have read a different Vorlage (i. e., ‫)לקח‬, 23 but the sense would not be very clear since the object is missing. It seems more plausible that the Greek text already encountered a difficult Hebrew text and tried to make sense of it. A further interpretation takes ‫ לחלק‬to mean that Jeremiah is making an exit. Commentators since the Middle Ages have suggested that ‫לחלק‬ in this verse has the meaning “to slip” out of Jerusalem 24 or “to fade” into the crowd. 25 They derived the form from ‫ חלק‬I “to be smooth” – the hiphil of this verb, meaning “to make smooth,” is well attested 26 – and suggested that the term might be used here in a figurative sense. The same meaning can be ascribed to ‫ לחלק‬without recourse to a figurative sense. As Sperber proposed, ‫ לחלק‬could be a qal infinitive of a verb ‫ חלק‬III, related to Akk. hal¯aqum “to run away.” 27 The interpretation of ‫ לחלק‬in the sense “to run˘ away” has the advantage of making better sense of both ‫ משׁם‬and ‫בתוך‬. ‫ משׁם‬can be translated in its usual sense “from there.” ‫בתוך‬ ‫ העם‬is used in Jer 39:14; 40:5, 6 28 in closing formulas stating Jeremiah’s 22 The reading is common in manuscripts representing or influenced by the Lucianic text, cf. J. Ziegler, Ieremias. Baruch. Threni, Epistula Ieremiae (vol. 15 of Septuaginta. Vetus Testamentum Graecum /Societatis Scientiarum Gottingensis auctoritate; 2nd ed; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1976) and for discussion McKane, Jeremiah II, 926–927. 23 Cf. A. W. Streane, The Double Text of Jeremiah (Massoretic and Alexandrian) Compared (Cambridge: Deighton Bell, 1896), 243; Cornill, Jeremia, 396; followed by Migsch, Gottes Wort, 20. 24 This meaning is suggested by medieval lexicographers, cf. McKane, Jeremiah II, 927. According to M. Jastrow, A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature (Peabody: Hendrickson, 2005 [=1943]), s.v., ‫ חלק‬hiphil is used in the sense of “to slip” in rabbinic literature (ʿErub. X, 14; B. Mes.. VI, 3). The KJV (following Kimchi) translates “to separate himselfe thence in the mids [sic] of the people” and notes in the margin “Or, to slip away from thence in the midst of the people” (I quote the reprint The Holy Bible: An Exact Reprint in Roman Type, Page for Page, of the Authorized Version Published in the Year 1611 [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985]). 25 Cf. W. Gesenius, Thesaurus philologicus criticus linguae Hebraeae et Chaldaeae Veteris Testamenti (Leipzig: Vogel, 1835), 384 (“um sich von da unter dem Volke zu verlieren”) who refers to 1 Sam 23:28 for ‫ חלק‬hiphil being related to the idea of escape. A medieval Greek manuscript reading αποδρασαι (“to escape,” ms. 239) points to the same understanding. 26 Mostly in figurative use (“to flatter”); cf. Gesenius, Hebräisches und Aramäisches Handwörterbuch and HALOT s.v. ‫ חלק‬I (e. g., Prov 2:16; Ps 5:10). 27 Cf. J. Sperber, “Zu Jer. 37,12,” OLZ 19 (1916): 132 (“um von dort zu entfliehen unter dem Volk”); this interpretation is also proposed by M. Tsevat, “‫ חלק‬II,” TDOT IV (1980): 450. 28 The attestation in Jer 37:4 is uncertain, since LXX reads διὰ µέσου τῆς πόλεως “through the midst of the city.” It is possible that the Hebrew Vorlage contained ‫( בתוך העיר‬thus

Voting with One’s Feet

129

whereabouts at the end of an episode. In both cases, it refers to people outside Jerusalem, and Jeremiah dwells among them as a free man (in contrast to his preceding confinement). 29 The same meaning could apply in Jer 37:12. 30 The ancient versions thus attest to a variety of exegetical traditions explaining Jeremiah’s reason to leave the city. None of them suggests Jeremiah follows a divine order. Rather, he appears to act on his own initiative and for some personal reason. The Hebrew text obscures rather than explains the motivation Jeremiah has to leave the city by piling up final clauses and – if the translation of ‫“ חלק‬to run away” is correct – by using an uncommon term. It does not suggest, however, that Jeremiah is putting into practice the prophetic advice of Jer 21:8 // 38:2. The idea of defection to the Babylonians is brought up only by the guard, and the text does not raise doubts about Jeremiah’s protest in v. 13. 31 If Jeremiah could be regarded as “voting with his feet” in this passage, he seems merely concerned about his own well-being. The text does not present his leaving the city as a political action in the sense that it would affect a community of people.

3. Jeremiah 40:1–6 As there are two accounts of Jeremiah’s imprisonment, there are also two accounts of how he was released by the Babylonians and settled with Gedaliah at Mizpah. The first account is very brief. In the short version attested by the Greek text, Jeremiah’s release immediately follows the McKane, Jeremiah II, 923) and was changed in other manuscripts to ‫בתוך העם‬, which is more frequent in the context of Jer 37–40. 29 Cf. ibid., 981 (on 39:14): “‫ וישׁב בתוך העם‬is certainly an idiomatic expression for ‘and he enjoyed complete freedom of movement.’” 30 Many commentators suggest instead that the phrase must have a different meaning in Jer 37:12 than in 39:14; 40:5, 6 and relate it to family; cf. among others Volz, Jeremia, 333, Rudolph, Jeremia, 238; implicitly also Cornill, Jeremia, 396 (“Familienangelegenheiten”). Against this view, Holladay, Jeremiah, 288 rightly points out that in Jer 37:12 the definite article is used rather than a pronominal suffix (as in 2 Kgs 4:13, for instance). 31 The case might be slightly different in the LXX, where Jeremiah is stopped by “a person with whom he used to lodge” (ἄνθρωπος παρ᾿ ᾧ κατέλυε, Jer 44:13 LXX). As P. Diamond suggested, in this version the situation is more ambiguous: “The reader ... is caught between the knowledge of the privileged narrator (v. 12) and the knowledge of Jeremiah’s privileged associate” (A. R. P. Diamond, “Portraying Prophecy: Of Doublets, Variants and Analogies in the Narrative Representation of Jeremiah’s Oracles – Reconstructing the Hermeneutics of Prophecy,” JSOT 57 [1993]: 99–119, 104).

130

Sonja Ammann

Babylonians’ takeover of the city of Jerusalem in Jer 39:3 and fits into a single verse (39:14): 32 And they [= the Babylonian officers] sent and took Jeremiah from the court of the guard. They entrusted him to Gedaliah son of Ahikam son of Shaphan and released him. So he stayed in the midst of the people.

In this account, Jeremiah is treated by the Babylonians more or less like an object; he ends up with Gedaliah because the Babylonian officers put him there. The second account in Jer 40, to which I will now turn, presents a different version which seems to involve a choice on the part of Jeremiah. Many commentators consider Jeremiah’s choice as the very raison d’être of this passage and invest it with theopolitical significance. For instance, Robert Carroll states: “The presentation of Jeremiah as actively choosing to stay in Judah and associate himself with Gedaliah underwrites the legitimation of the community with its centre at Mizpah.” 33 Jer 40:1–6 reads in the shorter version of the Greek text: The word that came from the Lord to Ieremias after Nabouzardan the chief cook 34 from Dama sent him off, when he took him in handcuffs in the midst of the exile of Iouda, those led away to Babylon. And the chief cook took him and said to him, ‘The Lord, your God, has given in oracles these evils against this place, and the Lord acted, because you sinned against him and did not obey his voice. Behold, I have released you from the handcuffs on your hands. If it is good before you to come with me to Babylon, come, and I will set my eyes on you. But if not, depart, and return to Godolias son of Achikam son of Saphan, whom the king of Babylon has appointed in the land of Iouda, and live with him among the people in the land of Iouda. Go to all that is good in your eyes to go to.’ And the chief cook gave him presents and sent 32 The MT has a slightly longer version, in which Jeremiah’s release is attributed to an order by the Babylonian king (39:11–12). It is likely that here MT represents a secondary extension of the account, adding in vv. 4–10 details on the taking of Jerusalem from Jer 52 and in vv. 11–13 Nebuchadnezzar’s concern for Jeremiah. See, among others, Stipp, Jeremia, 176–177; P. M. Bogaert, “La libération de Jérémie et le meurtre de Godolias: le texte court (LXX) et la rédaction longue (TM),” in Studien zur Septuaginta (ed. D. Fraenkel; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1990), 312–322; McKane, Jeremiah II, 976–81. 33 Carroll, Jeremiah, 700; cf. similarly C. Hardmeier, Prophetie im Streit vor dem Untergang Judas: Erzählkommunikative Studien zur Entstehungssituation der Jesaja- und Jeremiaerzählungen in II Reg 18–20 und Jer 37–40 (BZAW 187; Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1990), 215; S. V. Davidson, “Chosen Marginality as Resistance in Jeremiah 40:1–6,” in Jeremiah (Dis)Placed: New Directions in Writing /Reading Jeremiah (ed. A. R. P. Diamond and Louis Stulman; LHBOTS 529; London, New York: T & T Clark, 2011), 150–161, 150. This view is held by many commentators, cf. Stipp, Jeremia, 179 (“Der Abschnitt dient anerkanntermaßen dem Ziel, zu betonen, daß Jeremia die Nähe Gedaljas gesucht habe, und zwar aus freien Stücken und obgleich Alternativen offengestanden hätten.”). 34 ἀρχιµάγειρος, literally “chief cook,” is the usual rendering of ‫ רב־טבחים‬and similar titles in the Septuagint; cf. Gen 37:16; 2 Kgs 25:8; Jer 41:10; 52:14; Dan 2:14; etc.

Voting with One’s Feet

131

him off. And he went to Godolias at Massepha and settled among the people who were left in the land. (Jer 47:1–6 LXX, translation: NETS)

The MT is considerably longer and seems to present in some instances a conflated text. 35 Both the Greek and the Hebrew text contain a number of interpretive problems, but I will focus here only on issues related to choice and movement. It is noteworthy that the presentation of Jeremiah’s choice is more elaborate in the MT. Thus, v. 4 MT reads: Now look, I release you today from the fetters on your hands. If it is good in your eyes to come with me to Babylon, come, and I will keep my eye on you (i. e., take good care of you 36); but if it is bad in your eyes to come with me to Babylon, leave it. See, the whole land is before you; go wherever it is good and right in your eyes to go. (Jer 40:4 MT)

The longer text of the MT shows a tendency to emphasize the voluntary nature of Jeremiah’s movement and his free choice. 37 The phrase “the land is before you” is used three times in the book of Genesis (Gen 13:9; 20:15; 47:6). In each of these texts, a landlord offers someone a place to live. 38 The closest parallel is found in Gen 13:9: 39 Is not the whole land before you? Separate yourself from me! If you take the left hand, I will go to the right; and if you take the right hand, I will go to the left. (Gen 13:9 MT) Like Jeremiah, Lot is given the choice between two options (left or right). The reason for Lot’s choice is explicit in Gen 13: Lot looks at the land and prefers the more fertile region. The narrator’s remark “this was before Yhwh had destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah” (13:10) immediately foreshadows that – despite all appearances – Lot’s choice will turn out to be not as good as it seemed. If the allusion to Gen 13 is intended in Jer 40 MT, one might wonder whether the gruesome ending of Gedaliah’s rule is already anticipated here. Rather than supporting Gedaliah’s legitimacy through Jeremiah’s choice, the Masoretic wording of Jer 40 might actually cast some doubt on whether Mizpah really is the place to be.

Moreover, a textual difficulty in the Masoretic text of v. 5 calls into question whether Jeremiah is really choosing as freely as many commentators 35 Cf. J. G. Janzen, Studies in the Text of Jeremiah (HSM 6; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973), 22; McKane, Jeremiah II, 998–999. 36 Cf. Gesenius, Hebräisches und Aramäisches Handwörterbuch, 956; the same phrase is used in Jer 39:12. 37 A similar tendency is evident in Jer 39:12 (absent from the Greek text). 38 For a discussion of the allusion to Gen 13:9; 20:15 and 47:6 in Jer 40:4, cf. J. Hill, “Jeremiah 40.1–6: an appreciation,” in Seeing Signals, Reading Signs: The Art of Exegesis (ed. M. O’Brien et al.; JSOTSup 415; London, New York: T & T Clark, 2004), 135–137. 39 The similarity was noted already by Streane, Double Text, 249.

132

Sonja Ammann

suggest. The meaning of ‫ ועודנו לא־ישׁוב ושׁבה‬at the beginning of v. 5 is unclear. Some commentators suggest heavy emendation so as to reach a shorter text similar to the Greek, which translates: “If it is good in your eyes to remain, (then) turn back to Gedaliah ...” 40 It seems doubtful, however, whether the MT and the confusion attested in the versions could have developed from such a clear and simple text. 41 It is possible that the shorter Greek text smooths out a difficult Hebrew Vorlage closer to the MT of v. 5. In this case, v. 5a would have interrupted Nebuzaradan’s discourse. The Hebrew text can be translated either “he was not yet turning” 42 or “he had not yet answered,” 43 which would be short for “Jeremiah had not yet turned or answered when Nebuzaradan went on: Make your way to Gedaliah ...” 44 Reading v. 5a with the MT as an interruption of Nebuzaradan’s discourse, the choice is not made freely by Jeremiah but rather is strongly suggested by Nebuzaradan. Barthélémy’s attempt to avoid this consequence underlines the fact that he has sensed this implication when he explains: “Jeremiah hesitates to express his refusal of the generous offer made to him. But Nebuzaradan, realizing his lack of enthusiasm, wants to ease his mind by issuing as an order what he senses to be Jeremiah’s desire.” 45 This attempt to attribute the decision to Jeremiah 40 ‫אם טוב בעיניך לשׁבת שׁבה‬. The emendation goes back to Volz, Jeremia, 346. He eliminates ‫ ואל־הישׁר בעיניך ללכת שׁמה לך‬in v. 4 as dittography to the similar phrase in v. 5 and emends ‫( אל־טוב ועודנו אל־ישׁוב‬v. 4*.5) to ‫אם טוב בעיניך לשׁבת שׁבה‬. His suggestion is followed by Rudolph, Jeremia, 246, and Wanke, Untersuchungen, 104–105. 41 The Septuagint text does not represent ‫ועודנו לא־ישׁוב‬. Some Greek manuscripts closer to the MT, however, read a first person (καὶ ἔως ἐµοῦ ἔτι οὐκ ἐπιστρέψεις, Origen’s recension; similarly ms. 233, Qmg; καὶ πρὶν ἣ ἀπαλλαγῶ ἐγὼ, Lucianic recension and Theodoret); cf. also the Vulgate (et mecum noli venire). The Targum reads “if you do not want to return.” 42 Cf. Bright, Jeremiah, 242; similarly Hardmeier, Prophetie, 215 (“noch war er einer, der nicht zurückkehren wollte”). J. M. Abrego, Jeremías y el final del reino: Lectura sincrónica de Jer 36–45 (Estudios del Antiguo Testamento 3; Valencia: Institución San Jerónimo, 1983), 95 translates “¡Y aun así no se volvía!” and points to Job 2:3 as a parallel. However, it should be noted that ‫ עוד‬+ suffix is generally followed by a participle (as in Job 2:3); the only other attestation of a conjugated verb, Lam 4:17, is a poetic text with textual difficulties. 43 Cf. F. E. König, Historisch-kritisches Lehrgebäude der hebräischen Sprache. Band III. 2. Hälfte 2. Teil: Historisch-comparative Syntax der Hebräischen Sprache (repr., Hildesheim / New York: Georg Olms Verl., 1979 [=1897]) II /2 §383b (“und noch war er einer, der nicht erwiederte [sic],” correcting to ‫ ;)ישׁיב‬McKane, Jeremiah II, 1000–1001. 44 Cf. ibid. and Gesenius, Hebräisches und Aramäisches Handwörterbuch, 931. A different interpretation is proposed by M. Dijkstra, “Legal Irrevocability (l¯o’ y¯ašûb) in Ezekiel 7.13,” JSOT 43 (1989): 109–116, 113, who reads the clause as a legal “formula of irrevocability” (“As long as he [=Jeremiah] lives, let nobody go back [on this decree]”); but the texts he adduces as evidence always include the adjective ‫ חי‬which seems to be a necessary part of the expression. 45 “Jérémie hésite à exprimer ainsi son refus de l’offre généreuse qui lui a été faite. Mais Nebuzaradân, constatant son manque d’enthousiasme, veut le mettre à l’aise en lui intimant

Voting with One’s Feet

133

can hardly conceal that, on the level of the text, it is Nebuzaradan and not Jeremiah who is making decisions. Finally, the outcome of the situation in v. 6b corresponds exactly to Nebuzaradan’s suggestion in v. 5b: Jeremiah “stayed with him [i. e., Gedaliah] among the people” (‫וישׁב אתו בתוך העם‬, cf. ‫וישׁב אתו בתוך‬ ‫ העם‬in v. 5). Jeremiah thus seems to carry out in v. 6 what Nebuzaradan told him to do in v. 5. Moreover, the final emphasis is placed on Jeremiah’s staying with the people rather than his choosing Gedaliah. In my view, this passage therefore illustrates two principles which are dominant in the composition of the Jeremiah narratives: a) the Babylonians treat Jeremiah well and are not to be feared; b) Jeremiah stays among the people (who, within the Jeremiah narratives, are not generally deported to Babylonia).

4. Jeremiah 43:6 The last case I would like to discuss is the people’s emigration to Egypt in Jer 43 and, in particular, the departure of Jeremiah and Baruch in 43:6. I will be brief on this case since there is a detailed study on the voluntary or involuntary character of the emigration by Hermann Stipp. 46 Stipp argues that the widespread opinion that Jeremiah was forced to emigrate to Egypt is not supported by the text. After a long speech in which Jeremiah transmits Yhwh’s warnings against emigration to Egypt, the leaders of the people reject the advice as a “lie” (‫)שׁקר‬. Jeremiah 43:5–7 reports the emigration of the people without further discussion: And Johanan son of Kareah and all the leaders of the forces took all the remnant of Judah who had returned to settle in the land of Judah from all the nations where they had been driven – the men and the women and the children and the daughters of the king and all those who Nebuzaradan, the captain of the guard, had left with Gedaliah son of Ahikam son of Shaphan, and Jeremiah the prophet and Baruch son of Neriah, and they came into the land of Egypt, for they did not obey the voice of Yhwh, and they came to Tahpanhes. (Jer 43:5–7 MT)

comme un ordre ce qu’il pressent être l’objet de son désir.” D. Barthélemy, Critique textuelle de l’Ancien Testament. Bd. 2: Isaïe, Jérémie, Lamentations (OBO 50/2; Fribourg /Göttingen: Ed. Univ./Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986), 738. Abrego, Jeremías, 93–96 construes Jer 40:1–6 as a scene of trial, with Jeremiah resisting the Babylonians’ tempting offer. 46 H.-J. Stipp, “Legenden der Jeremia-Exegese (II): Die Verschleppung Jeremias nach Ägypten,” VT 64 (2014): 654–663.

134

Sonja Ammann

Many commentators interpret these verses to mean that Jeremiah and Baruch were taken to Egypt by force. 47 Although such an interpretation softens the contradiction between Jeremiah’s words and his moves, the text does not indicate that Jeremiah’s emigration to Egypt was any less voluntary than the people’s in general. As Stipp points out, no terminology indicating violence is used. The term ‫ לקח‬is also used in the similarly phrased 41:16: “Then Johanan son of Kareah and all the leaders of the forces with him took all the remnant of the people ...” (‫ויקח יוחנן בן־‬ ‫)קרח וכל־שׂרי החילים אשׁר־אתו את כל־שׁארית העם‬. 48 In 41:16, the phrase refers to the liberation of the people who were forcefully led away – the term ‫ שׁבה‬is used in this case – by Ishmael after he assassinated Gedaliah. Moreover, syntactically, Jeremiah and Baruch are objects of the action led by Johanan in the same way as all the remaining people, and nothing indicates that they were given special treatment. 49 Rather than narrating a forced deportation, the text implies that Jeremiah and Baruch remain with the people even when the people’s decision does not concur with their own prophetically informed assessment. Jeremiah merely transmits Yhwh’s advice. He does not take decisions on his own or perform individual political actions. Whereas the people might be seen as “voting with their feet” in leaving what they consider a Babylonian-dominated war zone, Jeremiah’s emigration to Egypt seems to follow a narrative rather than political logic: throughout a series of fatal decisions, Jeremiah stays among the people and delivers his message like the soundtrack to a journey out of the frying pan into the fire.

5. Conclusion In conclusion, according to Jer 37–43, it is not primarily the deportations by the Babylonians, but a series of fatal decisions that leads to the abandonment of the land of Judah. However, these decisions are generally not

47 This is a common opinion found in many commentaries; see the list provided ibid., 657, n. 15. 48 Cf. ibid., 660–661. 49 It is likely that the reference to Jeremiah and Baruch, singled out after an enumeration concluded by ‫ואת כל־הנפשׁ‬, constitutes a secondary addition; cf. R. Goldstein, “Jeremiah between Destruction and Exile: From Biblical to Post-Biblical Traditions,” DSD 20 (2013): 433–451, 449. G. Wanke, Jeremia. Teilband 2: Jeremia 25,15–52,34 (ZBK.AT; Zürich: TVZ., 2003), 372 and Stipp, Jeremia, 201 argue that v. 6aβ.b, including the reference to Jeremiah and Baruch, was added secondarily.

Voting with One’s Feet

135

narrated in explicit verbal statements. Rather, they are manifest in where people do or do not move. Jeremiah, in these stories, is not the one who takes political decisions. In Jer 37 – the only instance where Jeremiah moves on his own initiative – he seems to do so for personal reasons. The text does not make clear his motivation. At the same time, Jer 37 effects a transition from Jeremiah as a protagonist moving around freely (cf. Jer 37:4 and the narratives in chs. 18–35) to a passive character whose movements are determined by others, his independent agency being limited to speech. 50 In Jer 40 and 43, Jeremiah follows decisions regarding movement suggested by others. Unlike in the imprisonment stories in Jer 37–38, he is not forced to do so. Contrary to the traditional interpretation of this passage, nothing in Jer 43 indicates forced deportation. On the other hand, nothing in Jer 40 indicates that Jeremiah expresses political support for Gedaliah’s rule by joining the community in Mizpah. In both cases, the main rationale behind Jeremiah’s movements seems to be to stay with the people, even where the people’s way goes against his prophetic advice. Thus, we can hardly say that Jeremiah is “voting with his feet” in the same way Johanan and the people are in Jer 43. Jeremiah’s movements in Jer 37–43 do not express a particular political stance nor do they follow Yhwh’s advice. While Jeremiah forcefully voices political recommendations in his prophetic utterances, he does not communicate them through exemplary actions. Rather, his movements correspond to a particular understanding of his prophetic role. He accompanies the people with Yhwh’s word even though they move in the opposite direction. The people and their leaders, rather than Jeremiah, are voting with their feet. An interesting side effect of Jeremiah’s movements in these narratives is that they define “the people” by a spatial dimension. Those who did not defect to the Babylonians, those who were not deported to Babylonia, those who decided to go to Egypt against the prophetic advice – they are the people who remain in dialogue with Yhwh’s word. Jeremiah’s movements do not express his approval or disapproval; rather, his role is to stay among them and to keep up the prophetic communication.

50

For related observations, cf. Carroll, Jeremiah, 717, and Laufer, “Should We Stay,” 153–155.

Departure and Return of the Divine Glory in Ezekiel? Jesper Høgenhaven

Images of exile permeate the Book of Ezekiel: The book in its entirety is situated in an exilic framework. The narrative of the book presents the seer /prophet as receiving divine messages and delivering them to an audience of deported Judaeans in Mesopotamia. The place names found in Ezekiel reflect the locations where the narrative is acted out and these are situated in a Mesopotamian context: the land of the Chaldeans (‫ארץ‬ ‫כשדים‬, 1:3; 12:13), the Chebar canal (‫נהר כבר‬, 1:1, 3; 3:15, 23; 10:15, 20, 22; 43:3), the settlement of Tel-abib (‫תל אביב‬, 3:15), and the location called “the Valley” (‫הבקעה‬, 3:22–23; 8:4; 37:1–2). 1 In relation to images of exile one of the most conspicuous aspects of the book is the series of descriptions in chapters 1; 8–11; and 43 of the appearance of the divine glory and the movements undertaken by this apparition – in Mesopotamia, and in or at the temple precinct in Jerusalem. When read together, the passages describing the successive visions of the divine glory form a coherent picture of the prophet’s (or the author’s) notions of divine presence and absence and of judgment and salvation. In what follows, I attempt to carry out a reading of these passages in light of their mutual interdependence. The validity of such a reading is supported by a number of explicit internal references in the biblical text. Thus, the descriptions both in Ezek 8–11 and in 43 explicitly refer to the opening vision (Ezek 1). Ezekiel 43 also contains an unambiguous reference to the earlier vision in Ezek 8–11 (Ezek 43:3).

1 R. P. Carroll ( “Deportation and Diasporic Discourses in the Prophetic Literature,” in Exile: Old Testament, Jewish, and Christian Conceptions [ed. James M. Scott; JSJSup 56; Leiden, New York and Köln: Brill, 1997], 63–85, 80–82) favours an understanding of the exilic setting in Ezekiel as “misdirection by the writer” (80); rather, the book is “a series of textual representations of Jerusalem life in terms analogous to living in the diaspora” (81).

138

Jesper Høgenhaven

1. Exile and Diaspora in Ezekiel In the opening chapter of the book, a narrative opens in the first person singular. The narrator – the seer – characterizes himself as an exile, embedded in the state of collective captivity: ‫( ואני בתוך הגולה‬Ezek 1:1). The ‫ גולה‬is spoken of here as a definite and well-known entity, consisting of the exiled Judaeans, united by their common fate into a community, a fellowship of deportees. The geographical location ‫ על נהר כבר‬adds a spatial perspective, locating the exile in an area of Mesopotamia close to the Euphrates. A temporal aspect is presented in the following verse, which states that the narrative takes place in the fifth year after the deportation ( ‫ )גלות‬of King Jehoiachin. From the outset, then, the exile is presented to the readers of Ezekiel as a firmly established concept, comprising the collective of deported Judaeans located in Mesopotamia. This collective, ‫הגולה‬, is depicted as the addressees to whom the seer figure Ezekiel is instructed by God to direct his words: “And go to the exiles, to your people” (‫ולך בא אל הגולה‬ ‫אל בני עמך‬, Ezek 3:11). 2 At the same time, however, the book also speaks in many places of the dispersion or banishment of the people of Israel into many countries: Ezek 20:23 (“that I would scatter them among the nations and disperse them through the countries”, ‫;)להפיץ אתם בגוים ולזרות אתם בארצות‬ 22:15; 36:19. 3 This state of dispersion among the nations is the point of departure for the future restoring act of God, when he is to gather the Israelites from among the nations, as stated in the predictions of salvation. The existence of different images of exile in Ezekiel – a community of deportees in Mesopotamia, among whom the seer dwells, and to whom he is sent to speak; and a wider dispersion among the nations and countries – should warn us against any overly simplistic reading of the exile motifs in the book. It is also necessary to keep in mind the literary character of Ezekiel in this context. Ezekiel narrates visions – ‫מראות אלהים‬, as they are called in Ezek 1:1 – and to a considerable extent it is the nature of such vision narratives to defy the logic of everyday reality. 4 A particularly 2

Biblical quotations generally follow the ESV. See further in J. Gile, “Deuteronomy and Ezekiel’s Theology of Exile,” in From Our Good Always: Studies on the Message and Influence of Deuteronomy in Honor of Daniel I. Block (ed. J. S. DeRouchie, J. Gile and K. J. Turner; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2013), 287–306. 4 Cf. the description of Ezekiel’s imagery by C. F. Keil, Biblischer Commentar über den Propheten Ezechiel (Biblischer Commentar über das Alte Testament 3; Leipzig: Dörffling und Franke, 1882), 5–6: “Mehr als bei allen anderen Propheten waltet bei ihm die symbolis3

Departure and Return of the Divine Glory in Ezekiel?

139

remarkable example of this are the journeys undertaken by the seer, who is transported by the divine spirit back and forth between various locations, above all between the ‫ גולה‬in Mesopotamia and the land of Judah. The nature of the imagery in Ezekiel has often been noted for its affinity to apocalyptic literature in these respects. The book of Ezekiel, in its present shape, and I refer here primarily to the MT, is very probably the end result of an extensive and perhaps complicated process of composition and redaction. 5 Much as I recognize the legitimacy of diachronic analysis and redactional criticism, I am not in this article concerned with the chronology of possible redactional layers in the book. Furthermore, my aim here is not to put forward an argument in favour of a particular date of composition for the book of Ezekiel – although, for the record, I hold it to be a product of the Persian period – or indeed to contribute to the discussion about the processes through which literary interdependence between Ezekiel and related texts must have arisen. The images conveying the prophetic message can be shown to reflect to a very significant extent already-existing literary traditions; and in what follows, I will highlight some examples of creative reuse of imagery that seem to be literary loans.

2. Ezekiel’s Opening Vision (Ezek 1:4–28) The vision narrative in Ezek 1 depicts a process of gradual visualization. The divine glory approaches from afar and then gradually becomes visible to the seer, from whose vantage point everything is viewed and related. There is something almost cinematic about this gradual unfolding of visual images. The account begins with a storm from the north, with phenomena of light and sound, and, increasingly, visual features and forms become clearer and more distinct. The first element of the appearance that stands out is the four living creatures with faces and wings (vv. 5–6). Their function and position is che und allegorische Darstellungsweise vor, die sich nicht auf allgemeine Umrisse und Bilder beschränkt, sondern zu kühnen, die Wirklichkeit vielfach überbietenden Schilderungen ausgeführt ist, welche den Eindruck überschwenglicher Fülle und überwältigender Größe machen.” 5 For a well-argued redaction-critical perspective on the book of Ezekiel, see W. Zimmerli, Ezechiel. 1. Teilband. Ezechiel 1–24 (BKAT XIII /1; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag 1979), 104–114. See also K.-F. Pohlmann, Das Buch des Propheten Hesekiel (Ezechiel). Kapitel 1–19 (ATD 22/1; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht 1996), 22–39.

140

Jesper Høgenhaven

not clear to the seer at this point, and they are not yet identified as cherubs associated with the divine throne. These details only later become explicit, as the reader follows the seer’s gradual recognition of what he is watching, reaching its culmination at the end of the description, in 1:28: “Such was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord” (‫הוא מראה דמות‬ ‫)כבוד יהוה‬. The vision of the divine glory is described as approaching from the north (v. 4). Does the prophet envisage a mythical mountain of the gods located in the far north, or should we think of Yahweh travelling from his sanctuary in Jerusalem, and following a road that leads through northern Syria and reaches Mesopotamia from a northern direction? 6 As I shall argue in what follows, the divine presence seems in Ezekiel’s view not to be locally bound to the temple or the land at any point before the final vision of restoration. The most plausible reason for the storm’s approach from the north, then, is the analogy with the depiction of the forces of judgment in prophetic literature, in particular Jeremiah. 7 Within the framework of these literary traditions, the north is the direction from which danger and judgment would be expected to appear. The description takes place in successive stages: At first, what appears to the seer are the contours of a storm (‫)רוח סערה‬, which is further characterized as a “great cloud” (‫ )ענן גדול‬and “fire flashing forth” (‫אש‬ ‫מתלקחת‬, v. 4). The imagery is clearly related to the description of the glory of Yahweh in Exod 24:16–17, which also has the combination of cloud (‫ענן‬, v. 16) and devouring fire (‫ומראה כבוד יהוה כאש אכלת‬, V. 17). The actual wording in Ezek 1:4 looks like a literary loan from Exod 9:24, which associates the “flashing fire” ( ‫ )אש מתלקחת‬with the seventh plague of Egypt, the “heavy hail” (‫)ברד כבד מאד‬. Out of the vision of cloud and brightly shining fire (‫ )ומתוכה‬an intense gleaming appearance stands out “like gleaming metal” (‫כעין חשמל‬, v. 4). This first glimpse of the divine glory is depicted in terms that emphasize primarily the awesome and terrifying aspects of the Lord’s presence. The destructively expansive character of the fire is the first impression the seer relates. Following this first apprehension of the vision at a distance the four creatures become visible to the seer (v. 5–14). They appear “out of the 6

Zimmerli, Ezechiel. 1. Teilband, 51–52. Cf. Jer 1:13–15; 4:6; 6:22; Ezek 23:22–24; 38:6, 15; cf. Joel 2:20. This understanding was argued by Keil, Biblischer Commentar über den Propheten Ezechiel, 35. Cf. K.-F. Pohlmann, Das Buch des Propheten Hesekiel, 58. 7

Departure and Return of the Divine Glory in Ezekiel?

141

fire” or out of the vision that was initially visible (‫ומתוכה‬, v. 5), a clear indication of how the vision unfolds and approaches the seer (and the reader) step by step or element by element. It is significant for our understanding of the vision account to have this gradual unfolding in mind. What appears to the seer initially as mere forms and shapes only at the end assumes a certain order and meaning. And it is no coincidence that it is not until 10:20 that the seer is able to state that he now knows the creatures of which he has spoken to be the cherubs carrying the divine throne: These were the living creatures that I saw underneath the God of Israel by the Chebar canal; and I knew that they were cherubim. (‫היא החיה אשר ראיתי תחת אלהי ישראל‬ ‫ ;בנהר כבר ואדע כי כרובים המה‬Ezek 10:20)

The seer is not yet aware of the proper function of the unnamed creatures in Ezek 1. In this initial description the creatures appear as an external visible element in a context which is still incomprehensible. Then follows the seer’s apprehension and description of the wheels beside them (v. 15–21). The wheels and the creatures are closely linked in the account of the opening vision, and the common aspect which is most emphatically underlined is the nature of their movement. The text states that the creatures went straight forward without turning (‫)איש אל עבר פניו ילכו‬. This is specified twice (vv. 9, 12). The creatures invariably move forward, and since each creature has no less than four faces, “forward” can be any of the four directions. The image, in other words, seems to deliberately defy the logic inherent in the expression. Indeed, this can be said for the whole concept of direction and movement in this vision: it seeks to eliminate logical notions. Similarly, the text states that the wheels do not turn but go in any of the four directions (v. 17). This capacity for movement without turning is associated with the construction of the wheels, each of which looks as though it has a wheel inside the wheel (‫כאשר יהיה האופן בתוך האופן‬, v. 16). The “inside” wheels must be imagined as being inserted into the wheels at a right angle, enabling movement in any of the four directions. The description, in other words, places considerable emphasis on the free and unhindered mobility of the apparition. Furthermore, the text underlines the sovereign control exercised by the “spirit” (‫ )רוח‬over this movement: Wherever the spirit would go, they went. (‫;אל אשר יהיה שמה הרוח ללכת ילכו‬ Ezek 1:12)

142

Jesper Høgenhaven

Wherever the spirit wanted to go, they went. (‫על אשר יהיה שם הרוח ללכת ילכו שמה‬ ‫ ;הרוח ללכת‬Ezek 1:20)

It is not particularly easy to perceive precisely the range of connotations indicated by these descriptive features. There is something immediately and immensely impressive about the appearance, but also something nightmarishly frightening: The presence of this awesome apparition can be everywhere and anywhere at any moment, and there is no way of escaping it. 8 The eyes that cover the rings of the wheels (‫וגבתם מלאת‬ ‫עינים סביב‬, v. 18) serve to emphasize this impression of inescapability as the dominant feature. 9 The description of the “expanse” (‫ )רקיע‬above the creatures (vv. 22–23) is reminiscent of the theophany narrative in Exodus 24. 10 Let us imagine how the absence of sound has governed the scene so far: Now suddenly when the description adds the element of sound to the visual aspect the impression is forceful and overwhelming: The sound of the wings is like the sound of many waters, the sound of Shaddai and the sound made by an army (v. 24). The word ‫ המלה‬here possibly connotes the screaming of an attacking army, 11 and the general impression certainly adds to the notion of something threatening and dangerous. The concluding part of the account describes the likeness of the deity on his throne of glory: And seated above the likeness of a throne was a likeness of a human appearance. (‫ועל‬ ‫ ;דמות הכסא דמות כמראה אדם עליו מלמעלה‬Ezek 1:26)

The indirect and deliberately evasive character of the description is very carefully observed here by means of the terms ‫“( דמות‬likeness”) and ‫מראה‬ (“appearance”) in combination with the preposition ‫“( כ‬as”, “like”). These terms (‫ דמות‬and ‫ )כמראה‬are used repeatedly throughout the description (vv. 26, 27, 28).

8

The inescapability of God’s presence is emphasized with particular strength in Ps 139. The rings of the wheels are described as “high and dreadful” (literally as having “height” and “dread,” ‫וגבה להם וירא להם‬, v. 18). 10 The term ‫ רקיע‬recalls the creation story in Gen 1, and the description of the expanse “shining like awe-inspiring crystal” (‫כעין הקרח הנורא‬, Ezek 1:22) seems to echo the description in Exod 24:10 of the pavement beneath the feet of the Lord “like the very heaven for clearness” (‫וכעצם השמים לטהר‬, Exod 24:10) 11 In the only other occurrence, Jer 11:16, however, ‫ המלה‬describes the sound of roaring fire in a burning tree. 9

Departure and Return of the Divine Glory in Ezekiel?

143

We have already signalled the references in the passage to the narrative material in Exodus. 12 Apart from this textual connection, the most obvious literary tradition to be traced behind this text is the vision of Yahweh’s throne in Isaiah 6. 13 It was suggested long ago that Ezekiel combined the image of God on his throne with the ancient idea of Yahweh as a storm god. 14 The cherubs have their origin in this motif complex. Ezekiel, however, seems to have revised the image of cherubs to make them more similar to the seraphs of Isa 6:2. 15 It is remarkable, at least, that in the vision account in Isaiah 6 we also find a reference to the glory (‫ )כבוד‬of the Lord (Isa 6:4) and to a burning coal (Isa 6:6), which appears conspicuously in the second great vision of the divine glory in Ezek 8–11 (Ezek 10:2). 16 It has also been suggested that the image of the divine glory on wheels could be inspired by the description in 1 Kgs 7:27–39 of the ten water basins and their bronze stands, since these are described as having four bronze wheels each. Furthermore, the stands have panels set in frames, and on the panels there are depictions of lions, oxen, and cherubs. 17 What is important, in any case, is the extreme degree of mobility assigned to the apparition here. The image of the divine glory, therefore, is above all frightening, incomprehensible, and overwhelming, defying any sense of logic or predictability. The movements of the glory do not follow any discernible pattern. The vision leads into an instruction delivered by God to the seer and centring on the theme of judgment on God’s rebellious and disobedient people.

12 The description in V. 26 of the “throne-like apparition” (‫ )כמראה אבן ספיר‬seems to reflect the description of a pavement of sapphire stone (‫ )כמעשה לבנת הספיר‬in Exod 24:10. 13 The relation between Ezek 1 and Isa 6 could merit its own investigation. The theme of the divine glory (‫ )כבוד‬manifesting itself in the context of judgment and destruction is common to both texts. The notion of ‫ כבוד‬in Ezekiel could also be seen as echoing Isa 40:5, which speaks of a universal revelation of the divine glory in a context of salvation (‫ונגלה‬ ‫)כבוד יהוה‬. 14 A. Bertholet, Das Buch Hesekiel (Kurzer Hand-Commentar zum Alten Testament XII; Freiburg i.B., Leipzig und Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1897), 12. 15 The notion of four cherubs seems to be aligned with a handful of references in Ezekiel to the number four as an expression of totality, or of the entire world. Cf. the expressions “four corners of the land /earth” (‫ארבעת כנפות הארץ‬, Ezek 7:2) and “four winds” (‫ארבע רוחות‬, Ezek 37:9). In Ezek 14:21 God speaks of his “four sore judgments” (‫)ארבעת שפטי הרעים‬: sword, famine, beasts, and pestilence. 16 The term used in Isa 6:6 is ‫רצפה‬, while Ezek 10:2 speaks of ‫גחלי אש‬. 17 Bertholet, Das Buch Hesekiel, 12–13. See, however, Zimmerli, Ezechiel. 1. Teilband, 64.

144

Jesper Høgenhaven

3. The Appearance of the Glory outside the Jerusalem Temple (Ezek 8–9) The account of the departure of the divine glory from Jerusalem and the temple, as the narrative is often termed, is embedded in a longer vision sequence which centres on the sinfulness and doom of Jerusalem. This sequence begins at the opening of chapter 8 where the seer is first approached by a vision – a figure resembling God as he is described enthroned in Ezek 1:27 – and then transferred by the spirit to Jerusalem, more precisely to the north gate of the inner court of the sanctuary. There at the edge of the sacred precinct the divine glory reappears: And behold, the glory of the God of Israel was there, like the vision that I saw in the valley. (‫ ;והנה שם כבוד אלהי ישראל כמראה אשר ראיתי בבקעה‬Ezek 8:4)

The location of the apparition is significant for understanding the meaning of the entire narrative sequence. The glory of the Lord appears to the seer not inside the sanctuary but outside or at the gate of the inner court (v. 3). Furthermore, the glory is described as being in motion, leading the seer on the tour that reveals the abominations being perpetrated in the temple area by the elders of Israel (8:7–18). The divine glory, in other words, is envisaged not as being at home in the sanctuary but as coming to the sanctuary for this special occasion. 18 The subsequent narrative makes it absolutely clear that the occasion is that of executing a comprehensive act of divine punishment. The city is facing a destruction to be carried out by the executioners of the Lord. The divine glory is not conceived of here as being present in the temple or in the city – the glory of the Lord makes its appearance here in order to carry out a death sentence over both temple and city. God, in other words, does not inhabit Jerusalem; rather, he has come to Jerusalem to judge and execute the city and its inhabitants. 19 The reason for the divine judgment is made apparent to the seer, and the readers, in the form of a guided tour through the temple area revealing one abominable act of idolatry and illegitimate cultic practice after another: the “image of jealousy” north of the altar gate (‫סמל הקנאה‬, v. 3, 5); the worshipping of idols in the shape of abominable animals (vv. 10–11); 18 Cf. Zimmerli, Ezechiel. 1. Teilband, 239. Zimmerli regards this feature as the work of a post-Ezekielic redaction. 19 This notion differs from the idea that God “dwells” on Mount Zion (Isa 8:18). In Isa 6 the divine glory fills the temple and the earth (Isa 6:1–3). The fullness of the glory stands in contrast to the idea that the land will be emptied (Isa 6:12).

Departure and Return of the Divine Glory in Ezekiel?

145

women weeping for Tammuz (v. 14); and priests worshipping the sun (v. 16). In a subtle way the narrative plays with the motifs of exile, and of the absence and presence of God. Thus, it is the idolatrous Israelites and Judaeans who claim that the Lord has abandoned the land and thus does not see what is going on there: For they say, ‘The Lord does not see us, the Lord has forsaken the land.’ (‫כי אמרים‬ ‫ ;אין יהוה ראה אתנו עזב יהוה את הארץ‬Ezek 8:12)

This statement is repeated almost verbatim in Ezek 9: For they say, ‘The Lord has forsaken the land, and the Lord does not see.’ (‫כי אמרו‬ ‫ ;עזב יהוה את הארץ ואין יהוה ראה‬Ezek 9:9)

There is a strong sense of irony connected to this utterance placed in the mouth of the guilty people. They claim that God is no longer present, that he has abandoned the sanctuary and Jerusalem and departed to dwell with the ‫גולה‬. They also maintain that God is unaware of their action and condition. However, the narrative shows that this is not the case. There is no place where he does not see, or where he is not ultimately present. In this stricter – and more accurate – sense the Lord never leaves. This is the perspective which the vision of Ezekiel articulates by depicting the divine glory as returning to Jerusalem to take revenge on the idolatrous city and its inhabitants. The movements of the glory do not signify a displacement or a relocation in physical or geographical terms. Ezekiel’s chariot visions turn the divine throne into something mobile with wings and wheels. This transformation has often been described as polemically directed against what is conveniently termed Zion theology. Zion theology is construed as the position that the Lord will protect Zion in any given situation, and could never conceivably abandon his sanctuary, the temple guaranteeing the enduring presence of God in the midst of Jerusalem. 20 In light of this interpretation, it is noteworthy that the stance of the opponents explicitly signalled here in Ezek 8–9 is not that the Lord will always be present in Jerusalem but that he is absent: Son of man, your brothers, even your brothers, your kinsmen, the whole house of Israel, all of them, are those of whom the inhabitants of Jerusalem have said: ‘Go 20 Cf. Zimmerli’s (Ezechiel. 1. Teilband, 236) formulation: “Es ist das große Mißverständnis, wenn die am Ort der göttlichen Nähe wohnende Gemeinde sich hier an einem Orte besonderer Bergung wähnt. Nirgends wird die Sünde so scharf als Sünde offenbar, wie gerade in dieser Nähe.” On the Zion motif in Ezekiel, see also F. Poulsen, Representing Zion: Judgement and Salvation in the Old Testament (CIS; London and New York: Routledge, 2015), 44–51.

146

Jesper Høgenhaven

far from the Lord; to us this land is given for a possession’ (‫רחקו מעל יהוה לנו היא‬ ‫)נתנה הארץ למורשה‬. Therefore say, ‘Thus says the Lord God: Though I removed them far off among the nations and though I scattered them among the countries (‫)כי הרחקתים בגוים וכי הפיצותים בארצות‬, yet I have been a sanctuary to them for a while in the countries where they have gone.’ (Ezek 11:15–16)

The text contrasts the claim made by the remaining people of Jerusalem that those who have been deported, the brothers or kinsmen of the seer, are to be considered to have gone far away from the divine presence, with the reality proclaimed by God: He did indeed remove them among the nations. The hiphil perfect ‫“( הרחקתים‬I removed them”) is played elegantly against the qal imperative ‫“( רחקו‬Go far!”): God is the agent who removed the house of Israel far off, out among the nations, and scattered them (‫ )הפיצותם‬through the countries. Those who were removed, however, bear the name of the house of Israel. And they were not in fact removed from the divine presence – quite to the contrary, God became a sanctuary for them for a while in the countries where they went. 21 The divine presence, in other words, is his gift to the dispersed nation of Israel. In all the countries where his people dwells he is present to them as a sanctuary, replacing temporarily – and for as long a time as necessary – the temple which has been defiled by the sins of the inhabitants of Jerusalem.

4. Judgement and Departure of the Glory (Ezek 10–11) The vision in Ezek 10–11 is narrated in great visual detail. Two highly destructive actions of judgment precede the closing departure – or redeparture – of the divine glory from the temple and the city of Jerusalem: The “executioners of the city” (‫ )פקדות העיר‬are sent out in the city to kill everyone who has not received the protecting mark. And the figure in linen is commanded to pick up burning coals from between the cherubs and scatter them over the city. The apparition of the chariot of the divine glory is turned into a terrifying doomsday machine, delivering burning coals and fire with which the city is to be bombarded from above. This destructive aspect of the divine presence is the occasion for a renewed description of the wheels and the cherubs in Ezek 10:9–22. This description largely mirrors the description in Ezek 1. Now, however, with 21

Isa 6:12 uses the piel to express God’s removal of the people from the land (‫ורחק יהוה‬ ‫)את האדם‬. Cf. Jer 27:10; Joel 4:6.

Departure and Return of the Divine Glory in Ezekiel?

147

the added specification that the four creatures associated with the chariot are cherubs, an important one at that we understand at a deeper level the frightening connotation of the apparition. The divine glory has indeed come to enact the punishment of the doomed city. Again, we note the pattern of movement of the glory. Ezekiel 9:3 relates how the glory rises up from the cherub (singular) and rests on the threshold of the temple. The divine glory is depicted as approaching the temple from the outside. God has come to pass judgment against his disobedient people who – ironically – claim that he has forsaken the land and no longer pays attention to what is going on in the sanctuary and the city of Jerusalem. This pattern is repeated in Ezek 10:4: The glory leaves its spot above the cherubs and positions itself at the threshold of the temple (Ezek 10:4). In the meantime, we gain the impression that the Lord has seated himself on his throne again, and now removes himself for the second time, to allow for the destructive act of judgment by divine fire. The removal of the glory takes place even as the seer is transported once more by the spirit back to the ‫גולה‬, whence he came (Ezek 11:24).

5. The Glory Returns (Ezek 43:1–9) The return of the divine glory to the temple of Jerusalem is narrated more briefly in Ezek 43:1–9. The passage explicitly identifies this appearance of the glory with the earlier appearance associated with the destruction of the city; and the vision is furthermore described as the same vision the prophet saw at the Chebar canal in the opening scene of the book (v. 3): And the vision I saw was just like the vision that I had seen when he came to destroy the city and just like the vision that I had seen by the Chebar canal (‫וכמראה המראה‬ ‫אשר ראיתי כמראה אשר ראיתי בבאי לשחת את העיר ומראות כמראה אשר ראיתי אל‬ ‫ ;נהר כבר‬Ezek 43:3). 22

The glory is said to come into the sanctuary through the eastern gate, and to fill the temple: As the glory of the Lord entered the temple by the gate facing east, the Spirit lifted me up and brought me into the inner court; and behold, the glory of the Lord filled the temple (‫)והנה מלא כבוד יהוה הבית‬. (Ezek 43:5)

22

‫“( בבאי‬when I came”) should, according to most interpreters, be emended to ‫בבאו‬ (“when he came”).

148

Jesper Høgenhaven

This formulation echoes a number of texts. The Priestly narrative in Exodus 40 states that when the tabernacle was finished, it was filled with the divine glory: And the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle. (‫;וכבוד יהוה מלא את המשכן‬ Exod 40:34)

Similarly, in the account of the inauguration of Solomon’s temple in 1 Kings 8, the motif of the glory filling the sanctuary reappears: For the glory of the Lord filled the house of the Lord. (‫כי מלא כבוד יהוה את בית‬ ‫ ;יהוה‬1 Kgs 8:11 = 2 Chron 5:14).

The phrase in Ezek 43:5 is particularly close to that found towards the end of the temple inauguration account in 2 Chron 7: And the glory of the Lord filled the temple. (‫ ;וכבוד יהוה מלא את הבית‬2 Chron 7:1)

There is also an echo of the praise of the seraphs in Isa 6:3 (‫מלא כל‬ ‫)הארץ כבודו‬. These allusions corroborate the impression of the literary character of the vision accounts in Ezekiel. The vision leads over to an auditory experience, as the prophet hears the utterance of the divine voice (Ezek 43:6). The message is a statement concerning the endurance and stability of Yahweh’s relation to the place for all future time. At the beginning of the divine address to the seer in v. 7 it would seem that we logically need to supply an imperative ‫ראה‬ (“see!”) or possibly a question ‫“( הראת‬do you see?”) after the initial words ‫בן אדם‬. 23 The language of v. 7 is replete with temple theology: And he said to me, ‘Son of man, this is the place of my throne and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the people of Israel forever.’ (‫ויאמר‬ ‫אלי בן אדם את מקום כסאי ואת מקום כפות רגלי אשר אשכן שם בתוך בני ישראל‬ ‫ ;לעולם‬Ezek 43:7)

The sanctuary is characterized as “the place of my throne” and as “the place of the soles of my feet.” The expression looks like an echo of Isa 60:13 (‫ומקום רגלי אכבד‬, “and I will make the place of my feet glorious”). There is also an interesting contrast to Isa 66:1, where the heavens are Yahweh’s throne and the earth his “footstool” (‫)השמים כסאי והארץ הדם רגלי‬. The divine promise of eternal dwelling is linked first to the location that the Lord has designated for his presence and secondly to the location among the Israelites (‫)בתוך בני ישראל‬. The time horizon is enduring and everlasting (‫)לעולם‬, followed immediately by the necessary condition 23

In fact, part of the LXX tradition supplies the “missing” word ἑόρακας.

Departure and Return of the Divine Glory in Ezekiel?

149

that the Israelites no longer defile his holy name. Such defilement is very expressly exemplified in the numerous impurities mentioned here which the Israelites are said to have introduced into the divine presence in the past, and which they must be sure from now on to remove. The divine presence in the midst of his people, then, is the primary scope of the passage, rather than an emphasis on the specific place. In so far as we can speak of a return of the Lord to Zion in Ezek 43:1–6, this return takes place as a sovereign divine act of solidarity with the Israelites. God chooses to manifest his glorious presence here and not elsewhere.

6. The Glory in Exile in Ezekiel? Does the divine glory go into exile according to the visions of Ezekiel? In my view, the short answer is no. God in the visions of the book of Ezekiel is never bound to any geographical location, neither in Jerusalem nor in Mesopotamia, nor any other specific place among the nations and countries into which he has scattered his disobedient people. God is present everywhere and at all times; thus he never goes into exile. The enduring presence of God among his people seems to be the dominant theme in the book of Ezekiel, and the divine presence entails judgment as well as ultimate salvation. The point the texts want to make concerns not so much the transcendence of the deity but rather the inescapability of judgment. To the mind of the authors or redactors of Ezekiel, the inevitable judgment forms a necessary background for predicting a better future for the remnant of Israel. 24 In order to understand the motif of the apparitions of the divine glory and the chariot it is important to be aware of the features characteristic of the vision accounts. The descriptions make great efforts to guard themselves and the readers against the notion that they describe what God or the divine glory “look like.” They consistently make use of evasive or deliberately vague expressions, referring to the elements of the vision as “like,” “the appearance of,” or “the likeness of.” The apparition of the divine glory experienced by the seer is a manifestation through which God chooses to reveal himself. 24 In other words, I cannot agree with Robert Carroll’s statement (“Deportation and Diasporic Discourses”, 80): “The opening chapters [of Ezekiel] represent the removal of the divine presence from Jerusalem, and the closing chapters reflect plans for the rebuilding of Jerusalem, especially the temple.”

150

Jesper Høgenhaven

Ezekiel has sometimes been called the father of apocalypticism. 25 I do not want to enter here the debate on how to define apocalyptic writings over against prophetic writings or possibly in continuity with the prophetic tradition. In any case a feature commonly held to be characteristic of apocalyptic literature is the use of imagery that combines a high degree of visual vividness and plasticity with a significant element of deliberate vagueness. Another feature is the frequent use of literary loans from earlier texts and traditions. 26 Both features play a very important part in the vision narratives of the book of Ezekiel. The apparitions of the divine glory in or at Jerusalem and in the land of exiles are vehicles for conveying a message regarding the enduring presence and power of the deity and the inevitability that his people will encounter his majesty. In brief, the Lord is always present, and he is present at any place – indeed he is present and watching even when his people wish that he was not, but then again, he also remains present with his people in the time of their deepest troubles.

25

See the classic formulation by B. Duhm, Israels Propheten (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1916), 233: “Unsers Wissens ist Hesekiel der erste Vertreter dieser heiliger Mantik gewesen, jedenfalls wurde er der erste erfolgreiche Schriftsteller dieser Art und damit der Vater der Apokalyptik.” 26 I discuss the distinction between prophetic and apocalyptic literature in J. Høgenhaven, “Something Borrowed, Something New? Reflections on Apocalypticism and Prophecy in the Old Testament,” SJOT 31 (2017): 1–25.

“You Shall Never Be Clean Again Until I Have Satisfied My Fury Upon You” (Ezek 23:13) Exile, Impurity, and Purification in Ezekiel Søren Holst

The Book of Ezekiel is evidently about exile from beginning to end; even the Temple vision in the final nine chapters, where exile or return are barely mentioned, except by implication, is of course very much about the solution to the problem which, from a priestly point of view, would be the very worst aspect of exile, namely, the lack of a temple, or the impossibility of accessing the temple in Jerusalem. That the priestly point of view is indeed highly relevant when discussing Ezekiel almost goes without saying. What I want to investigate in the present study is Ezekiel’s use of a central priestly category, namely purity and impurity, in his approach to the topic of exile. I hope to be able to show that the way in which the book intertwines the topics of exile and purity /impurity is nuanced and fascinating – and perhaps even casts new light on Ezekiel’s understanding of the exile. 1 A famous article by Bernhard Lang refers to the notorious public acts accompanying Ezekiel’s preaching as “street theatre”. 2 One of these incidents, early on in the book, makes very direct use of the purity /impurity motif.

1 I thank my colleagues Frederik Poulsen and Jesper Høgenhaven for inviting me to contribute to this project in which I find myself, at the very best, at the fringes of my areas of expertise. Also, I am grateful for the insightful comments from the conference participants, not least the justifiably critical ones from professor Elie Assis and others which forced me to rethink the presentation of my ideas in the original paper. 2 B. Lang, “Street Theater, Raising the Dead, and the Zoroastrian Connection in Ezekiel’s Prophecy,” in Ezekiel and his Book: Textual and Literary Criticism and their Interrelation (ed. J. Lust; BETL 74; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1986), 297–316, 307–314.

152

Søren Holst

1. Exile as Impurity (Ezek 4:13–14) After his initial vision and the accompanying call for him to be a prophet, Ezekiel engages in a number of symbolic acts illustrating the approaching judgement: he ties himself up (3:25), builds a sort of toy model of Jerusalem under siege (4:1–3), lies upon the ground for a total of 430 days, turning from his left to his right side after the first 390 (4:4–8), and is instructed on how, in the process of carrying out this feat, he is to bake his own bread, made from a selection of cereals, lentils, and so on, using human excrement as fuel for the actual baking process. And he is to eat this bread – and drink water with it – in carefully measured daily rations (4:9–13). While seemingly quite content to lie on the ground for fourteen months, Ezekiel reacts strongly to the idea of baking his bread on dung from humans, pointing out that he has never before eaten anything unfit for consumption according to the dietary laws of the Torah. It is not selfevident why the sort of bread described should necessarily render the person eating it cultically impure. According to Deut 23:13–14, defecation must take place at an appointed spot outside the camp, but the explicit reason according to the following verse is that the Lord should be spared the sight of ‫( ֶע ְרוַת ָדּ ָבר‬v. 15), which seems most obviously to refer to the nakedness involved in the process rather than the excrement itself (cf. Exod 20:26; 28:42–43); also, the instructions in vv. 13–14 most obviously come under the rubric of v. 10, specifying that this applies in conditions of a military campaign. Ezekiel’s reaction, however, is perfectly appropriate for the point being made by the strange commandment, as the Lord explicitly points out before the prophet even gets around to protesting: ‫שׁם‬ ָ ‫יחם‬ ֵ ‫שׁר ַא ִדּ‬ ֶ ‫ַח ָמם ָט ֵמא ַבּגּוֹיִם ֲא‬ ְ ‫ִשָׂר ֵאל ֶאת־ל‬ ְ ‫אמר יְהוָה ָכָּכה יֹאְכלוּ ְבנֵי־י‬ ֶ ‫וַֹיּ‬ “So,” said the LORD, “shall the people of Israel eat their bread, unclean, among the nations to which I will banish them.” (Ezek 4:13) 3

The point made by the commandment, regardless of the application of purity rules in general, is clearly that Ezekiel’s unusual diet symbolically identifies exile as associated with impurity. 4 And although the prophet 3 Translations are largely taken from the NJPS version, available at www.taggedtanakh.org, occasionally modified to reflect my understanding of the Hebrew. 4 Interestingly, Moshe Greenberg – a scholar not unfamiliar with the technicalities of the priestly purity laws – points exclusively to exile as the source of impurity in this passage: “Lands outside the land of Israel were ‘unclean’ ..., probably on account of the idolatrous

“You Shall Never Be Clean Again Until I Have Satisfied My Fury Upon You”

153

is spared the defilement abhorrent to him, since the Lord promises to supply him with cow-dung on which to bake the bread, the symbolism stands. Ezekiel’s “street theatre” involves lying on the ground as a symbol of punishment, presumably in the form both of banishment from the land (cf. the fact that Ezekiel is lying outside the city walls), and of servitude to foreigners, as shown by the fact that he is to be tied up by the Lord himself while lying there; it involves rationed bread as a symbol of the worry about, and scarcity of, food accompanying a time of crisis; and finally, it involves a demonstration that exile is associated with impurity. This makes excellent sense from a priestly perspective. If the temple at the very centre of the universe of Priestly theology is characterised, as long as it is properly maintained, by purity; and if the land of Israel around the temple is characterised by that necessary admixture of purity and impurity which must accompany daily life, with its manifold activities from births to burials (both generating impurity – as do many good and necessary human activities in between), as described in the purity regulations of the Torah; then it stands to reason that the foreign lands furthest away from the temple are a zone of impurity. This is so not only because they are spatially farthest removed from the one point were permanent purity is mandatory, namely the temple, but more pertinently also for the practical reason that the instructions of the Torah on matters of purity will likely be unknown there. Exile is characterised by impurity.

2. Pollution of the Sanctuary (Ezek 5:9–12) While in the context just described exile is associated with impure food, and – at least by implication and ideally speaking – the land with purity, it is a different matter if we look at the present situation in which Ezekiel performs his “theatre” and speaks his message. Impurity is not only the punishment that is to be executed at a distance from Jerusalem, in the exile. It is very much the crime itself, perpetrated at home in the land, which necessitates the punishment. A central passage in the chapter immediately following specifies that exile will be the fate of the people (or, more specifically, of the surviving third of the people, the rest being doomed to death by plague, starvation, and war) because they have rendered the sanctuary impure: practices that when on in them”; M. Greenberg, Ezekiel 1–20 (AB 22; New York: Doubleday, 1983), 107.

154

Søren Holst

‫כל־רוּח‬ ַ ָ ‫יתְך ְל‬ ֵ ‫ל־שׁ ֵא ִר‬ ְ ‫ת־כּ‬ ָ ‫יתי ֶא‬ ִ ‫ֵר‬ ִ ‫ְוז‬ ְ ְ ... ‫ֹת ִיך‬ ָ ‫כל־תּוֹעב‬ ֲ ָ ‫וּב‬ ְ ‫קּוּצ ִיך‬ ַ ‫כל־שׁ‬ ִ ָ ‫שׁי ִט ֵמּאת ְבּ‬ ִ ‫ת־מ ְקָדּ‬ ִ ‫ַען ֶא‬ ַ ‫ְאם ֲא ֹדָני יְהוִה ִאם־לֹא י‬ ֻ ‫י־אנִי נ‬ ָ ‫ָכן ַח‬ ֵ‫ל‬ ‫יהם‬ ֶ ‫חֵר‬ ֲ ‫ְחֶרב ָא ִריק ַא‬ ֶ ‫ָרה ו‬ ֶ‫כל־רוּח ֱאז‬ ַ ָ ‫ִישׁית ְל‬ ִ ‫שּׁל‬ ְ ‫ְה‬ ַ ‫ ו‬... I will scatter all your survivors in every direction. Assuredly, as I live – said the Lord GOD – because you defiled My Sanctuary with all your detestable things and all your abominations ... I will scatter one-third in every direction. (Ezek 5:10–12)

Here, in other words, impurity is what characterises the people even before they are driven away (and is what causes them to be driven away), rather than a feature of the conditions under which they will live in exile. Or – to put it differently, if we read the two passages in tandem – the sentence is made to fit the crime: The people are accused of having created in the very temple conditions incompatible with the presence of the Deity, that is (paradoxically speaking), conditions of exile – so into exile let them go! A further – and possibly ironic – aspect of the multifaceted nature of Ezekiel’s use of the motif of impurity is the fact that, as chapters 8–11 vividly describe, this defilement of the temple has as its necessary consequence the exile of the divine Glory. That is to say: God himself, rather than the people, is driven into exile by impurity. 5

3. Dispersion as Purification (Ezek 22:15–16) So far, the connotations of exile, when expressed in terms of purity language, are unambiguously negative: exile is caused by impurity or brings you to a sphere of impurity. The latter, exile as an impure place, however, raises the question: To which less impure location is it that the divine Glory departs in chapter 11? Thinking in exclusively Priestly categories, and having in mind how the divine presence within the sanctuary was made possible in the first place in the second half of the book of Exodus, one might expect that, with this continued presence made impossible, the Glory of the Lord would have no other option upon departing from the temple than to return to heaven whence it came to begin with. However, it seems rather to have gone east, revealed itself to the prophet on the River Chebar, and – although in a somewhat obscure passage – to have established itself 5

Cf. J. Høgenhaven’s contribution to the present volume.

“You Shall Never Be Clean Again Until I Have Satisfied My Fury Upon You”

155

as a sanctuary of sorts among the exiles, thus 11:16: ‫ְמ ְקָדּשׁ‬ ִ ‫ָהם ל‬ ֶ ‫ָא ִהי ל‬ ֱ‫ו‬ ‫שׁם‬ ָ ‫ר־בּאוּ‬ ָ ‫שׁ‬ ֶ ‫מ ַעט ָבּ ֲאָרצוֹת ֲא‬, ְ “I have become a minor [or: ‘temporary’ 6] sanctuary for them in the lands to which they have gone away”. Does this imply that there is a place not defiled by cultic impurity to be found out there in the exile? The book may not answer this question in the affirmative (or at all), but it does go on to employ the concept of exile in ways that may seem to ascribe it positive connotations, also within the realm of purity /impurity. In chapter 22, in the middle of what is unequivocally a speech of judgement upon Jerusalem, ‫עיר ַהָדּ ִמים‬, ִ “The city of blood”, in which copious and varied expressions relating to impurity are used to depict the unabated transgression of the people, the Lord suddenly says: ‫ט ְמ ָא ֵתְך ִמ ֵמְּך‬ ֻ ‫ֹתי‬ ִ ‫ַה ִתמּ‬ ֲ ‫יתיְך ָבּ ֲאָרצוֹת ו‬ ִ ‫ֵר‬ ִ ‫אוֹתְך ַבּגּוֹיִם ְוז‬ ָ ‫יצוֹתי‬ ִ ‫ַה ִפ‬ ֲ‫ו‬ I will scatter you among the nations and disperse you through the lands; I will consume the uncleanness out of you. (Ezek 22:15)

The scattering and dispersing on the one hand, and the putting an end to uncleanness on the other are apparently two sides of the same coin. The context by no means implies that this process is to be a pleasant one (there is no “Comfort ye my people” here), and since the context all the way up to the immediately preceding verse speaks uniformly of approaching judgement and punishment, the exegete feels compelled to consider whether “I will put an end to your impurity” simply means “I will put an end to you (and thus to all acts of yours, including those that produce impurity)”, which would really fit the context excellently. But this does not seem to be what the verse says: the hiphil of ‫ תמם‬frequently means to bring an activity to an end, or bring it “to completion”, but never to put a stop to the existence of something or somebody (see further below); and the prepositional phrase with the partitive ‫ ִמן‬which ends the verse seems to state quite explicitly that the uncleanness is to be removed from Israel, as the wording of the NJPS translation unequivocally implies. In other words, we seem to be dealing with an idea of exile as purification. Interestingly, the immediately following passage talks of a different sort of purification. It employs the metaphor of refining metal ore by means of separating dross and impurities from the metal itself in a smelting oven. (A comparable description of punishment, described as the violent 6

W. H. Brownlee, Ezekiel 1–19 (WBC 28; Waco: Word Books, 1986), 164.

156

Søren Holst

removal of impurities from metal, designated by the same word, ‫סיג‬, ִ as a process leading to restoration, is found in Isa 1:24–26.) Precisely this process is what Israel is to be subjected to. It is – as noted – not likely to be pleasant, but the intended result is purity. The exile, if this passage is here presented correctly, thus seems not only to be the punishment for transgressions described in terms of impurity, but also the cure for the problem.

4. Homecoming and Purification (Ezek 36:24–28, 33, 36–38) In chapter 36, we find a description of the homecoming following the exile. A number of divine acts are listed, either to be understood as consecutive stages in the process, or as simultaneous aspects of it. God will gather (‫ָקח‬ ַ ‫ ל‬+ ‫)ק ֵבּץ‬ ִ the Israelites from all foreign countries to bring them back, and sprinkle them (‫ָרק‬ ַ‫ )ז‬with pure water in order that they may become clean (‫ט ֵהר‬, ָ qal) of their impurities (‫יכם‬ ֶ ‫אוֹת‬ ֵ ‫)ט ְמ‬ ֻ and that he may declare them cleansed (‫ט ַהר‬, ִ piel) from their fetishes, or “filthy gods” (‫ֵיכם‬ ֶ ‫)גִּלּוּל‬: ‫ל־א ְד ַמ ְת ֶכם‬ ַ ‫אתי ֶא ְת ֶכם ֶא‬ ִ ‫ְה ֵב‬ ֵ ‫ל־ה ֲאָרצוֹת ו‬ ָ ‫ְק ַבּ ְצ ִתּי ֶא ְת ֶכם ִמ ָכּ‬ ִ ‫ן־הגּוֹיִם ו‬ ַ ‫ָק ְח ִתּי ֶא ְת ֶכם ִמ‬ ַ ‫ְול‬ ‫ֵיכם ֲא ַט ֵהר ֶא ְת ֶכם‬ ֶ ‫וּמ ָכּל־גִּלּוּל‬ ִ ‫יכם‬ ֶ ‫אוֹת‬ ֵ ‫ט ְמ‬ ֻ ‫וּט ַה ְר ֶתּם ִמ ֹכּל‬ ְ ‫הוֹרים‬ ִ ‫ֵיכם ַמיִם ְט‬ ֶ ‫ָר ְק ִתּי ֲעל‬ ַ‫ְוז‬ I will take you from among the nations and gather you from all the countries, and I will bring you back to your own land. I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean: I will cleanse you from all your uncleanness and from all your fetishes. (Ezek 36:24–25)

This is immediately followed by the famous passage promising a new heart and a new spirit, the previous heart of stone being replaced by one made of flesh, enabling the Israelites to observe the ordinances of the Lord – and culminating in their renewed settlement in the land, with the added information, seemingly a sort of afterthought, that “when I have delivered you from all your uncleanness (‫יכם‬ ֶ ‫אוֹת‬ ֵ ‫”)ט ְמ‬, ֻ the Lord will cause grain, fruit, and crops in general (‫שֶּׂדה‬ ָ ‫נוּבת ַה‬ ַ ‫)ת‬ ְ to be abundant in the land. In other words, purity means the return of fertility and blessing, the features that characterize the land they were exiled from. If chapters 5 and 22 turned our expectations upside down, so to speak, defining the land as having been made impure and exile as the place of purification, then this presentation – in which ingathering and homecoming on the one hand, and, on the other, cleansing and removal of impurities (as well as renewal of the heart and the spirit, even to the point of surgical

“You Shall Never Be Clean Again Until I Have Satisfied My Fury Upon You”

157

transplantation) are part and parcel of the same divine action – puts the theological universe back on its feet again. It re-establishes the land as the place of purity and thus as the place where the Lord can dwell and where, consequently, blessing can be enjoyed.

5. The Plot of Ezekiel These individual images of purity vs. impurity and exile vs. homecoming, however, are not independent of each other. They may reasonably be said to constitute stages in a dramatic plot, since the book of Ezekiel, while not an actual narrative text from beginning to end, surely describes a process connected to those narrative elements and passages that do occur in the book. Based on the overview given above of central points in Ezekiel where the themes of (im)purity and exile intersect, how can we describe the process that the inhabitants of Judah go through in the book? Here it is useful to employ the well-known theoretical approach to meaning developed by A. J. Greimas. 7 Greimas’ semiotic theory describes how any given feature of meaning is perceived in relation to its opposite: The meaning of the word “wet” is unthinkable except by virtue of being the opposite of “dry”; consider the well-known joke that the word “wet” would presumably not mean anything to a fish. If we designate two opposites as A and B, this implies, according to the Greimasian theory, two further features, non-A and non-B, which would cause the transition from A to B and from B to A respectively; in the arbitrary example just given, if A is “dry” and B is “wet”, then non-A and non-B could be the addition and the removal of moisture (e. g., in the form of rain and drought respectively). The relations are traditionally visualized in the form of the so-called semiotic square (see fig. 1). The figure describes meaning as such and was not invented as a tool for analysing narrative. This, however, is one use to which it may profitably be put, since the states and processes that make up the elements of the model may together constitute a sequential course of events. In relation to literary analysis, the figure above is sometimes referred to as the “butterfly model”, because of the fact that an outline of a literary plot will often take 7

D. Patte, The Religious Dimensions of Biblical Texts (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990), 14–16 and 73–102.

158

Søren Holst

Fig. 1

the form of a full cycle going from an initial state of harmony or stability (A) being disrupted by an incident (non-A) which leads to the opposite state (B), from which, subsequently, the incident non-B may recreate the state of A. If we were to apply this to what we have seen in Ezekiel, what structure would emerge? Firstly, we saw impurity, and more specifically the eating of impure foods, set alongside life in exile among the nations in chapter 4. By contrast, although it was not specifically stated in the context, it presupposed that existence in the land was (or should be) identical to purity. And Ezekiel’s urgent declaration that he had never before eaten anything impure seemed to bear this out. Next, in chapter 5, in a passage comparing Israel unfavourably to its gentile neighbours, the prophet described how, as a direct consequence of the defilement of the temple, two thirds of the people would be exterminated and the surviving remnant sent into exile. The place that should be pure had ceased to be different from the surrounding countries, which chapter 4 associated with impurity. Further, when bringing about the judgement on Jerusalem, chapter 22 seemed to present Ezekiel as saying that God would put an end to the impurities of Israel precisely by sending them into exile. The similarity to a purging or refining process was brought out by the immediate juxtaposition of this statement to a passage describing how Israel is melted down like ore from a mine that is cleaned of dross. And lastly, in chapter 36, God was presented as restoring Israel to its land, ritually cleansing it with water, and renewing its heart and spirit, thus enabling it to keep the commandments and restoring its relation to the land and to God. While 22:15 seemed to say that exile is a remedy for impurity, chapter 36 presents purification as a remedy for exile. Applying the Greimasian model to these passages from Ezekiel, we might have expected – and some of the passages considered above would indeed suggest – that the plot of the prophetic book could be set out like this:

“You Shall Never Be Clean Again Until I Have Satisfied My Fury Upon You”

159

Fig. 2

The stable situation of purity at home is here brought to an end by the sin of idolatry, resulting in a state of exile in an impure world. And human repentance and /or divine grace may once again reverse the situation, leading back to a state where Israel is home, and purity re-established. But as we have seen above, the exile seems to be described not only as banishment to a place of impurity, but equally as a process caused by defilement (chapter 5), and the mirror image of this is the description of restoration to the land which is brought to completion, for example, in chapter 36 and which consists of purification and sprinkling with water. It might then be a more precise representation of Ezekiel’s thinking concerning the relation between exile and impurity to depict it this way:

Fig. 3

This would fit most of the passages we have been discussing. Chapter 5 appears to be saying that defilement of the temple precedes and causes the banishment into exile, so we can hardly equate the land with purity and define the exile as the exclusive place of impurity. Rather, defilement causes exile, and purification is a prerequisite for homecoming. But what, then, are we to make of 22:15 which seems to describe exile not only as banishment to a place of impurity, but equally as a process of purging that puts an end to the impurity of the Israelites, so that exile itself appears as part of that process of restoration to the land which is brought to completion, for example, in chapter 36? This seems to imply an understanding of exile not as a state but as a transitory process, that is, as belonging in the bottom half of the Greimasian model:

160

Søren Holst

Fig. 4

This model does justice to the apparent claim of 22:15 that exile is the Lord’s chosen means of purifying the Israelites. Home and exile are not identified with purity and impurity respectively as in fig. 2, nor is there a direct causal relation between the two sets of concepts, in that purity and impurity are the preconditions of home and exile, as in fig. 3. Rather, being at home or being in exile are incidental to the more fundamental opposition of the people being subject to the divine blessing or the divine curse; both may be the case while they are in their homeland. But purification from the sin that brought on the divine curse happens to take the form of exile, which involves (22:15) or concludes with (36:24–38) purification.

6. What Happens in Ezek 22:15? A more precise understanding of what is going on in 22:15 and in the context of that verse seems to be a prerequisite for solving the conundrum outlined above. There is general agreement that the book of Ezekiel is clearly structured. This structure may be described in different ways, however. Most scholars see the book as consisting of three main blocks of material: chapters 1–24 give oracles against Judah and Jerusalem and reflect on the fall of the city; 24–32 contain oracles against the nations; and 33–48 describe the restoration of the exiled Judaeans and the reestablishment of Jerusalem and its temple. 8 A different reading, focusing on rhetoric rather than theme, would subsume the oracles against the nations under the first of a total of two parts, 1–33 concerning judgement and 34–48 concerning 8

M. A. Lyons, An Introduction to the Study of Ezekiel (London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2015), 20–22.

“You Shall Never Be Clean Again Until I Have Satisfied My Fury Upon You”

161

hope. 9 In this understanding, the oracles against the nations are sandwiched between a description of the siege of Jerusalem in chapter 24 and the report of its eventual fall in chapter 33. Other analyses are possible, but all such descriptions agree in regarding the major part of the first half of the book (be it 1–24 or 4–24) as addressing the impending doom of Jerusalem. Chapter 22 thus makes up a part of the ending of this section. The chapter’s immediate context may be defined as chapters 20–24, introduced in 20:1 by one of the fourteen chronological formulas found in the book, 10 or as chapters 17–22, delimited by the two extended allegories of sexual unfaithfulness in chapters 16 and 23. 11 If the three words for “south” in 21:2 are correctly understood as meaning Jerusalem – as v. 7 seems to make explicit – then we might see chapters 21–22 together as focusing the camera lens on Jerusalem, so to speak, after the repeated nationwide address to Israel in 20:27, 30, 39, 44 in which the actual city has gone unmentioned. The unifying theme of chapter 21 is God’s sword come to punish Jerusalem. 12 Purity language is absent from it (as it was from chapter 20, except for the use of ‫ ִח ֵלּל‬in the sense of breaking the Sabbath in 20:21), but returns with full force in chapter 22. This chapter may be divided into three parts, vv. 1–16, 17–22, and 23–31, each clearly marked by an introductory formula. The first is an extended accusation of crimes including idolatry, injustice to parents, resident foreigners, and orphans and widows, sexual transgressions and bribe-taking, but first and foremost, bloodshed (mentioned seven times if we include the designation of the city as ‫ ִעיר ַהָדּ ִמים‬in v. 2). It concludes with the verses we are interested in, threatening that the guilty party will be scattered among the nations and dishonoured in their sight. The second part of the chapter introduces the theme of Israel as metal ore being smelted in a crucible by the heat of the fury of God. And the final part, vv. 23–31, chastises the prophets, priests, and “officials”, ‫שׂ ִרים‬, ָ of the

9 M. J. de Jong, “Ezekiel as a Literary Figure and the Quest for the Historical Prophet,” in The Book of Ezekiel and its Influence (ed. H. J. de Jonge and J. Tromp; Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007), 1–16, 3–4. 10 L. C. Allen, Ezekiel 1–19 (WBC 28; Waco: Word Books, 1994), xxvii, and Ezekiel 20–48 (WBC 29; Waco: Word Books, 1990), xxiii; R. E. Clements, Ezekiel (Westminster Bible Companion; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1996), 86. 11 D. I. Block, By the River Chebar: Historical, Literary and Theological Studies in the Book of Ezekiel (Eugene: Cascade, 2013), 28. 12 M. Greenberg, Ezekiel 21–37 (AB 22A; New York: Doubleday, 1997), 438–46; note the table on pp. 442–43.

162

Søren Holst

city, but adds for good measure that while the leaders are bad, a good man cannot be found to protect the city among the ‫ ַעם ָה ָאֶרץ‬either. In the section 22:1–16, the guilt of Jerusalem is repeatedly associated with impurity: The deeds that the city is guilty of are summed up from the beginning as ‫תּוֹעבוֹת‬ ֲ (v. 2). 13 Its ‫גִלּוּלִים‬-gods have caused the city to become impure (‫טמא‬, vv. 3–4), and the mockery of the nations referred to in v. 4b is likewise described in purity categories: The city is addressed as “impure of name” (v. 5). Furthermore, in vv. 10–11, sexual transgressions in the city are summed up under the keywords “menstrual impurity” (‫ִדּה‬ ָ‫)ט ֵמ ַאת ַהנּ‬ ְ and “defiling” (‫)ט ֵמּא‬. ִ And lastly, central to the interest of the present context, the consequence of these things is described in v. 15, on the one hand as exile and on the other hand in the phrase ‫ֹתי‬ ִ ‫ַה ִתמּ‬ ֲ‫ו‬ ְ‫ט ְמ ָא ֵתְך ִמ ֵמּך‬, ֻ “I will consume the uncleanness out of you”. The precise meaning of this phrase must depend on who the addressee is. Verse 3 explicitly addresses the city, and the verbs in the 3 per. sg. in vv. 4–5 make it clear, that the “you” spoken to is still the city, just as the recurring reference to sinful actions taking place “within you” or “in your midst” (vv. 6–12) does, as do the verbs and prepositional pronouns in vv. 13–14. The last verse of the passage, v. 16, also explicitly addresses the city by speaking of what happens “within you”, ‫בְּך‬. ָ The phrasing is unusual, almost surrealistic, since the 2 fem. sg. addressee is also the subject of the niphal verb, resulting in the sentence “Within you(rself), you will be desecrated in the eyes of nations”, ‫ְעינֵי גוֹיִם‬ ֵ ‫ְתּ ָבְּך ל‬ ְ ‫ִחל‬ ַ ‫ ְונ‬. 14 13 While this word is not part of the purity vocabulary of the Priestly Code sensu stricto, its use in the Holiness Code lends the word’s sense of abhorrence an affinity to the idea of impurity, and in an Ezekielian context, the two are explicitly connected, as when 5:11 talks of the Israelites rendering the temple impure by their ‫קּוּצים‬ ִ ‫שׁ‬ ִ and ‫תּוֹעבוֹת‬, ֲ cf. H. D. Preuß, “‫תּוֹע ָבה‬, ֵ tôʿeba¯ h,” in Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Alten Testament VIII (ed. H.-J. Fabry ¯ and H. Ringgren; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1995), 580–592, 586, 590–91. 14 Many translations leave out the “within you”, and Moshe Greenberg describes the construction as “intolerable in any other context”, but points out that here it creates a connection, and indeed a climax, to the list of crimes perpetrated “in you(r midst)” in verses 6–12 (Greenberg, Ezekiel 21–37, 457). Zimmerli (and the BHS apparatus) reads the verb as 1 person, “I will be dishonoured within you”: W. Zimmerli, Ezechiel 1–24 (BKAT XIII /1; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1979), 502–504, 512, followed by Allen, Ezekiel 20–48, 30–32. But as Greenberg points out, this would be out of place as the last item in a list of judgements, and would fit the following “recognition clause”, “And you shall know that I am the LORD”, less well than the actual Masoretic text (Greenberg, Ezekiel 21–37, 458); cf. D. I. Block, Ezekiel: Chapters 1–24 (NICOT; Grand Rapids and Cambridge: William B. Eerdmans, 1997), 712. Others interpret the sense of ‫ ָבְּך‬as causative rather than locative, translating, e. g., “because of yourself, you will be desecrated in the eyes of the nations”, E. Jenni, Die hebräischen Präpositionen. Band 1: Die Präposition Beth (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1992), 115. Textual criticism hardly solves the problem. Both the Septuagint, Peshitta and Vulgate have

“You Shall Never Be Clean Again Until I Have Satisfied My Fury Upon You”

163

If, therefore, the entire passage vv. 3–16 is addressed to the personified city, does this imply that the sentence “I will consume the uncleanness out of you” quite simply predicts the exile? The “you” is the city, the uncleanness is its inhabitants, and the purification involved is not a step towards re-establishing a state of blessing in which the people have again become pure, but simply a part of the punishment: When the people are sent into exile, that which rendered the city impure is removed from it, but this in itself is hardly good news for the former inhabitants of the now empty city! In terms of our problem with outlining the plot of Ezekiel above, this would mean that 22:15 does not equate exile with purification of the people. In rhetorically identifying the people with the actual impurity, the verse is simply applying the concepts of pure and impure in yet another way, putting a dramatic touch on the statement of judgement: The people, in being scattered and dispersed, are removed – and, by implication, destroyed, one would assume – just as impurity is removed from a person or item that undergoes the relevant purification process. (This would correspond more closely to fig. 3 above, whereas the reading I have attempted would be in line with fig. 4). It hardly makes sense, though, to maintain that the personified city is the addressee in the preceding half-verse, v. 15a. How could one say of the city as such that it is being scattered and dispersed, especially in a context which, if we are to read v. 15b as talking about the removal of the people, explicitly distinguishes between city and inhabitants? 15 Taking this into account, Moshe Greenberg points out that, in v. 15a, the reference has shifted, so that ‘you’ must be the inhabitants rather than the city, and he describes the two options for understanding 15b, which leaves us with these alternatives: Either we have an inconsistency within v. 15 (the reference shifts back from inhabitants to city in v. 15b), or we

a 1 per. verb, but interpret the niphal of ‫ חלל‬as a form of ‫נחל‬, “to inherit”, which is a foreign concept to Ezekiel, cf. Zimmerli, Ezechiel 1–24, 504; Greenberg, Ezekiel 21–37, 458. 15 Cf. the slightly expanded commentary in the German version of Greenberg, Ezekiel 21–37: “In diesem Vers ist durchweg ein feminines ‘du’ angeredet, was sich formal auf die Stadt Jersualem bezieht; ‘zerstreuen’ passt semantisch allerdings besser zu deren Einwohnerschaft, erst das Wegnehmen der Unreinheit wieder zur Stadt”, M. Greenberg, Ezechiel 21–37 (HTKAT; Freiburg: Herder, 2005), 90. However, this does not trouble K.-F. Pohlmann, Das Buch des Prophet Hesekiel (Ezechiel) Kapitel 20–48 (ATD 22/2; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2001), 334, who speaks simply of “die Zerstreuung der Stadt in alle Welt”.

164

Søren Holst

have an inconsistency between vv. 15 and 16, since the reference in v. 16, as we noted above, is clearly again the city. 16 In the former case, v. 15b refers (as do v. 14 and 16) to the city, which will be purged of its impurity when its idolatrous and sinful inhabitants are exiled. In the latter, all of v. 15 (in contradistinction to 14 and 16) refers to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, which will be exiled and, in the process, purged of their impurity. Greenberg is practically alone among commentators in explicitly identifying in this matter an exegetical difficulty. 17 Most commentaries clearly assume one solution or the other, but do not display any consciousness that two understanding are possible. In favour of the first reading (the city being purged of its impure inhabitants), scholars refer to the parable of the boiling cauldron in 24:3–14, in which the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem is likened to a violent fire consuming the impurities in the cauldron, and the same verbal root, ‫תמם‬, as in 22:15, is used to express the process by which the impurity and rust, ‫ְאה‬ ָ ‫חל‬, ֶ in the kettle is consumed. 18 We need to distinguish between the qal and hiphil of the root ‫תמם‬, however. In the Hebrew Bible, the latter never means to consume or destroy the grammatical object, although this usage seems to have developed in the Dead Sea Scrolls. 19 The need for consistency with verse 16 is also counted as a reason for this understanding. 20 16 Greenberg, Ezekiel 21–37, 457. Of the textual witnesses, the Peshitta avoids the problem by omitting 15b (Zimmerli, Ezechiel 1–24, 504). While this might conceivably indicate an awareness of the difficulty, it hardly presents us with a solution. 17 But see also the monograph of K. L. Wong, The Idea of Retribution in the Book of Ezekiel (VTSup 87; Leiden: Brill, 2001), 184–185. 18 Zimmerli, Ezekiel, 512; Allen, Ezekiel 20–48, 37; Block, Ezekiel 1–24, 713; Wong, Retribution, 184. 19 The money is obviously not destroyed in 2 Kgs 22:4, nor the meat in Ezek 24:10 (the “rust” is consumed in the following verse, but there the verb is qal). In 2 Sam 20:18 there is no object, and the sense seems to be something like “and that was all there was to it”. In all other cases the object is something abstract, the verb meaning either to bring an activity “to full measure”, and thereby bring it to its conclusion (Isa 33:1; Dan 8:23; cf. Sir 38:17), or to make something complete or perfect (Job 22:3; cf. Sir 49:3). The closest the Hebrew Bible gets to the meaning often suggested for Ezek 22:15 is the qere in Dan 9:24 which may be an example of the development also in evidence in Qumran, although only three of the five examples given by DCH, vol. 8, 647, actually testify to this sense without the need for substantial emendation. 20 Wong, Retribution, 184, with reference to Greenberg, Ezekiel 21–37, 457, but without mention of Greenberg’s observation that this consistency is achieved at the price of inconsistency between 15a and 15b. Further commentators who favour this reading include A. Bertholet and K. Galling, Hesekiel (HAT 13; Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1936), 78; G. Fohrer, Ezechiel (HAT 13; Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1955), 128; W. Eichrodt, Der Prophet Hesekiel. Kapitel 19–48 (ATD 22/2; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966), 206; J. W. Wevers,

“You Shall Never Be Clean Again Until I Have Satisfied My Fury Upon You”

165

The second reading (the inhabitants are purified by means of exile) is favoured by scholars who see a parallel between verses 15–16, on the one hand, and the immediately following description (17–22) of Israel as metal ore being refined by means of separating dross and impurities from the metal itself in a smelting oven, on the other 21 – or even a direct parallel between the “destruction” of uncleanness in 22:15 and the “cleansing” and “saving” from uncleanness in 36:25, 29, 33. 22 It additionally seems a weak point in the first reading to assume that the city must of necessity be the addressee in all of vv. 3–14 plus 16. When the city is not just described as the place where evil deeds are carried out by an unnamed 3 per. pl. agent, but as the subject itself (v. 4 and 12b–13), it may be argued that the “you” is a metonymical designation for the inhabitants; to say of an actual city that it has literally “defrauded its countrymen” (‫ַתּ ַב ְצּ ִעי ֵר ַע ִיְך‬ ְ ‫ו‬, 12b), is after all no more usual a turn of phrase than saying that the city as such will be scattered and dispersed. To sum up this part of my investigation, it hardly seems possible to demonstrate that one of the two readings of 22:15b outlined by Moshe Greenberg must of necessity be the correct one. Grammatical and exegetical details, as well as attempts at subsuming the plot structure of the entire Ezekiel (NCB; London: T. Nelson, 1969), 174 (cf. extensive bibliography in Wong, Retribution). 21 P. M. Joyce, Ezekiel: A Commentary (LHBOTS 482; New York and London: T & T Clark, 2007), 159. It must be noted, however, that some scholars regard 17–22, too, as focussing on destruction rather than purification, and therefore see this quite obvious parallel as pointing to the first reading; Wong, Retribution. Cf. J. Blenkinsopp, Ezekiel (IBC; Louisville: John Knox, 1990), 97–98 and T. Renz, The Rhetorical Function of the Book of Ezekiel (VTSup 76; Leiden: Brill, 1999), 87–90 and 195–196, who both explicitly contrast the Ezekiel passage, which in their reading is about the total worthlessness of Jerusalem, with the metaphor of ore refining in Isa 1:22 and 48:10 where the possibility of resulting silver is presupposed. 22 Lyons, Introduction, 19–20. Other supporters of this reading include C. F. Keil, Biblischer Commentar über den Propheten Ezechiel (Leipzig: Dörfling und Franke, 1882), 216, who speaks (with reference to Isa 4:4) of the dirt of sin being annihilated through the purging of the people in exile; P. Heinisch, Das Buch Ezechiel (Die Heilige Schrift des Alten Testaments 8:1; Bonn: P. Hanstein, 1923), 111. Cf. again the further bibliography in Wong, Retribution. Greenberg (Ezekiel 21–37, 457) also notes that some medieval rabbinic authorities support this reading: Éliézer de Beaugency explains the words “I will put an end to your impurity” thus: ‫על ידי צירוף ובירור וליבון שאצרפך בגוים‬, that is, an end will be put to the impurity by means of a process of refining, clearing and purification, when God lets Israel be smelted (as in a crucible) among the nations, É. de Beaugency, Kommentar zu Ezechiel und den XII Kleinen Propheten (Schriften des Vereins Mekize Nirdamim 3.4; Warsaw: H. Eppelberg, 1906), 36. And according to David Kimh.i, exile would purify the people, because in the exile they would not worship the ‫גִלּוּלִים‬, which, according to his commentary on 22:3 represent the worst kind of impurity, that of the soul: M. Cohen, Mikra’ot Gedolot ‘Haketer’: A Revised and Augmented Scientific Edition of ‘Mikra’ot Gedolot’; Based on the Aleppo Codex and Early Medieval MSS: Ezekiel (Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan University Press, 2000; Hebrew), 145, cf. 143.

166

Søren Holst

book under a single model, may accommodate either reading. And in addition to the portrayal of defilement and impurity as an exilic condition (chapter 4), as the crime necessitating exile (chapter 5), and as that which needs to be removed make homecoming possible (chapter 36), Ezekiel’s rhetorical repertoire may furthermore contain either the idea of exile as a cure for defilement and its consequences, or the idea of purification as complete destruction, which would logically presuppose a resurrection in order for homecoming to take place. But this, too, is of course part of the book (chapter 37). One is tempted to resort to the desperate conclusion that, with so many variations on the themes of exile and purity already demonstrably present in the book, Ezekiel might have been aware of both possible readings of 22:15b, and perhaps even intended both of them to be there. But to try to demonstrate this would take another and more complicated article.

7. Conclusion We have seen how exile in Ezekiel is described not only as banishment to a place of impurity, but equally as banishment from the place which should have been clean but has become impure. In a parallel movement, the Lord himself is driven into exile by this very impurity. 23 Furthermore, as impurity may be seen as part of the problem with exile, it follows that purification may be part of the process of homecoming, or of the process preceding homecoming and making it possible. In addition to this, according to two different readings of a critical passage, exile may itself be interpreted as a process of purging that puts an end to the impurity of the Israelites; or the Israelites going into exile may be metaphorically likened to the impurity itself, so that what is made pure by exile is the city, now empty of its impurity-generating inhabitants. The repertoire of rhetorical usages employed in interpreting exile by means of impurity – or vice versa – is broad. But the prophet’s command of language in this regard is consistently guided by a characteristic that almost all scholarly introductions ascribe to his message: its consistently theocentric nature. In his various combinations of concepts of exile and (im)purity, Ezekiel presents all aspects of the process, however seemingly contradictory with each other, as parts of the divine plan.

23

See J. Høgenhaven’s contribution to the present volume.

Uncovering the Nymphomaniac The Verb ‫ גלה‬and Exile as Sexual Violence in Ezekiel 16 and 23 Anja Klein 1. Images of Exile in Ezekiel In 1968, Peter Ackroyd, the late Samuel Davidson Professor of Old Testament Studies at King’s College, London, published his influential monograph “Exile and Restoration”. 1 In this study, Ackroyd differentiates between exile as events, referring to the historical events, and exile as thought, the literary interpretation of the events. 2 While the Babylonian exile following the fall of Jerusalem in 587 BCE – and to a lesser extent the Assyrian exile after 722 BCE – was a common, small-scale military measure to assure compliance of a conquered nation, the event had a major impact on the literary activity that contributed to the Hebrew Bible and led to the composition and formation of large parts of the biblical books. In these the elaboration of the exile motif “should not only be viewed as an echo of traumatic historical events, but also as a literary theme that is taken up and reworked in a variety of ways by the biblical authors in order to rebuild specific identities and to express ideology.” 3 The book of Ezekiel is a model example for the variety of images of exile that exist in biblical literature. First of all, the book is shaped by a framing narrative that introduces the Babylonian exile as a hermeneutical key for the prophetic message. The biblical prophet is presented as a member of the so-called first golah, the group of Israelites that went into Babylonian exile together with King Jehoiachin in 597 BCE (Ezek 1:1–3; 3:10–15). Ezekiel predicts the imminent fall of Jerusalem in 587 BCE, which entails judgement on the remaining inhabitants, King Zedekiah, 1 P. Ackroyd, Exile and Restoration: A Study of Hebrew Thought of the Sixth Century BC (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1968). 2 See Ackroyd, Exile, 14. 3 A. K. d. H. Gudme and I. Hjelm, “Introduction,” in Myths of Exile: History and Metaphor in the Hebrew Bible (ed. A. K. d. H. Gudme and I. Hjelm; CIS; London and New York: Routledge, 2015), 1–10, 3–4.

168

Anja Klein

and the land (Ezek 4–24). When finally, in 33:21, news about the fall of Jerusalem reaches the exiles in Babylon, Ezekiel starts to prophesy salvation (Ezek 34–39), culminating in the final vision of the New Jerusalem (Ezek 40–48). Further images of exile in the book are closely linked with this framework narrative such as the idea of exile as a separation from the homeland that requires gathering and return (34:11–15; 36:23bβ–32; 37:11–14, 20–23; 39:23–29), exile symbolized as a valley full of dry bones (37:1–10), or the correlation of Jerusalem’s fall and its final rebuilding and glory (Ezek 33:21; 40–48). In this contribution, I would like to focus on a literary theme that has been rather neglected in discussions of exile, namely exile in the image of sexual violence in Ezek 16 and 23. While these two chapters are usually understood as allegories of biblical history, and while their use of the so-called “marriage metaphor” 4 for the relationship between Yhwh and a female figure has attracted much attention, 5 they have not yet been examined for their specific view on exile. By deciphering the allegory, it can be shown that the exile is illustrated through sexual violence in Ezek 16 and 23, which describe how the female figure is stripped naked, humiliated and raped (16:37; 23:10, 29). The imagery becomes even more gruesome, as Yhwh himself takes the role of the vengeful husband, who uses violence (16:37), or who exposes his wife to violence at the hands of her former lovers (23:10, 29). In what follows, I shall demonstrate that this specific image of exile can be traced back to the two meanings of the Hebrew verb ‫גלה‬, which denotes both “to uncover” and “to go away”, the latter with the specific connotation “to go into exile”. While the first part of my argument will 4 On this term and concept see especially the monograph by G. Baumann, Love and Violence: Marriage as Metaphor for the Relationship between Yhwh and Israel in the Prophetic Books (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 2003). 5 Feminist scholarship especially has contributed greatly to how we understand this imagery and deal with these texts; see e. g. M. E. Shields, “Multiple Exposures: Body Rhetoric and Gender Characterization in Ezekiel 16,” JFSR 14 (1998): 5–18; J. Galambush, Jerusalem in the Book of Ezekiel: The City as Yahweh’s Wife (SBLDS 130; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992); F. v. Dijk-Hemmes, “The Metaphorization of Woman in Prophetic Speech: An Analysis of Ezekiel XXIII,” VT 43 (1993): 162–170; C. Maier, “Jerusalem als Ehebrecherin in Ezechiel 16: Zur Verwendung und Funktion einer biblischen Metapher,” in Feministische Hermeneutik und Erstes Testament: Analysen und Interpretationen (ed. H. Jahnow et al.; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1994), 85–105; R. Weems, Battered Love: Marriage, Sex, and Violence in the Hebrew Prophets (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995); L. Day, “Rhetoric and Domestic Violence in Ezekiel 16,” BibInt 8 (2000): 205–230. See also my forthcoming publication on “Clothing, Nudity, and Shame in the Book of Ezekiel and Prophetic Oracles of Judgement,” in Handbook on Clothing and Nudity in the Hebrew Bible (ed. C. Berner, S. Schulz, M. Schott, and M. Weingärtner; London: T&T Clark, 2018), which was written at the same time as the current contribution and contains a significant overlap.

Uncovering the Nymphomaniac

169

focus on the semantic background of the lemma ‫ גלה‬and its use in the book of Ezekiel, the second part offers textual observations on the two chapters Ezek 16 and 23. Both use the metaphor of the unfaithful wife to describe biblical history, and I shall make the case that in both texts, the exile is depicted as sexual violation of the female figure. It is precisely the double meaning of the Hebrew root ‫ גלה‬that offers the key for the link between sexual violence and exile, and the third part of my paper will trace the literary origins of this exegetical transformation. I shall suggest that the growth of the short prophecies in Jer 13:18–27 represents the literary birthplace for the motif that is then followed up in the two allegories in Ezek 16 and 23. Finally, the concluding remarks reflect on the notion of exile in these texts and on some reading strategies for a contemporary understanding.

2. The Lemma ‫ גלה‬and its Use in Ezekiel As already mentioned, the Hebrew verbal root ‫ גלה‬occurs with two main meanings. The first one (‫ גלה‬I) describes the aspect of uncovering (“to uncover”), while the second meaning (‫ גלה‬II) refers to a change of location (“to go away”), which accounts for the specific meaning of “to go into exile”. 6 Nearly all Semitic languages have related roots that feature similar connotations. 7 In Biblical Hebrew, the two basic meanings occur in more than one binyan, even though qal is the only binyan with a considerable number of examples, attesting both meanings as well as the specific exilic connotation of ‫ גלה‬II (“to go into exile”). The understanding of uncovering (‫ גלה‬I) dominates the piel binyan and, with a few exceptions, the niphal. The verb by itself does not carry a sexual connotation, but, chiefly in these two binyanim, the verb can occur in combination with specific markers to denote a sexual understanding. 8 A clear case is found in the combination of ‫ גלה‬piel with the noun ‫ ֶע ְרוָה‬that in priestly texts denotes sexual intercourse (“to sleep with”, see Lev 18:6–19; 20:11, 17–21). 9 6 See in detail J. Kiefer, Exil und Diaspora: Begrifflichkeit und Deutungen im Antiken Judentum und in der Hebräischen Bibel (ABG 19; Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2005), 115–118; further C. Westermann and R. Albertz, “‫גלה‬,” THAT (1984): 418–426, 419; H.-J. Zobel, “‫גלה‬,” TDOT 2 (1975): 476–488, 477; Baumann, Love, 46–52. 7 See Kiefer, Exil, 110–115. 8 See Baumann, Love, 47. 9 The expression occurs further in Ezek 22:10 in the context of an accusation against the ruling class, who are guilty of “uncovering the nakedness of the father” (‫ִלּה־‬ ָ ‫ַת־אב גּ‬ ָ ‫ֶע ְרו‬

170

Anja Klein

While the meanings of the few occurrences in the pual and hithpael binyan are difficult to determine, and can be disregarded, in the remaining causative binyanim, the exilic application of ‫ גלה‬II prevails. Firstly, the hiphil implies, simply by its basic function, the aspect of something implemented from outside, 10 which translates as “to take into exile” or “to deport”, with the few occurrences of the hophal binyan covering the passive aspect (“to be deported”). 11 In the book of Ezekiel, the Hebrew verb occurs fourteen times in four different binyanim. 12 Most occurrences attest the meaning of ‫ גלה‬I (“to uncover”), with a concentration of six cases in the two allegorical chapters Ezek 16 and 23 (16:36, 37, 57; 23:10, 18, 29). With the exception of 16:57, there is sufficient evidence to suggest a sexual understanding here. To start with 16:37 and 23:10, the combination of ‫ גלה‬piel with the object ‫ ֶע ְרוָה‬describes sexual intercourse that is, in both cases, forced upon the female figure. While in 16:37 it is the metaphorical husband Yhwh himself who carries out the rape, in 23:10 Yhwh exposes the female to gang rape at the hands of her former lovers. The piel verbal form in 23:18, however, describes how the wife commits adultery by engaging in sexual intercourse with her lovers. Finally, in 16:36 and 23:29, the syntactic combination of the verb ‫ גלה‬with the noun ‫ ֶע ְרוָה‬also has a sexual connotation, but in these cases the noun ‫ ֶע ְרוָה‬is the subject of the niphal verb in the sense “to be uncovered /to be exposed”. 13 While 16:36 contains a charge of promiscuity against the female figure, the context in 23:29 suggests another instance of gang rape. Finally, 16:57 attests a figurative use, describing the offences of the woman in terms of her wickedness being uncovered (‫)תּ ָגּלֶה ָר ָע ֵתְך‬. ִ 14 To sum up, five out of the six occurrences of the verb ‫ גלה‬in Ezek 16 and ‫)בְך‬. ָ This accusation refers to the sexual taboo of engaging in sexual intercourse with one’s own mother, thus violating the nakedness reserved for one’s father (see D. I. Block, The Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 1–24 [NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997], 710; further W. Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1: A Commentary on the Prophet Ezekiel: Chapters 1–24 [Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979], 453, 458). M. Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988), 293, has shown that the accusation in Ezek 22:10 is formulated with reference to the priestly laws found in Lev 20:10–18. 10 See in detail Kiefer, Exil, 124–125. 11 See the dictionary entries in HALOT, 192; D. J. A. Clines, The Dictionary of Classical Hebrew: Vol. 2: ‫( ב – ו‬Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995), 351–352; Gesenius18, 216–217. 12 Qal: 12:3 (twice); 39:23; niphal: 13:14; 16:36, 57; 21:29; 23:29; piel: 16:37; 22:10; 23:10, 18 (twice); hiphil: 39:28. 13 On the passive sense of the verb ‫ גלה‬in the niphal binyan see Baumann, Love, 46–52. 14 In 16:57, a few Hebrew manuscripts attest to a variant reading of ‫ ערותך‬instead of ‫רעתך‬. However, this can be explained as lectio facilior, as it assimilates the expression in 16:57 to the previous use of the verb ‫ גלה‬in the chapter (see 16:36, 37); on the superiority of the MT reading see also Block, Ezekiel 1–24, 511; L. C. Allen, Ezekiel 1–19 (WBC 28; Dallas: Word

Uncovering the Nymphomaniac

171

23 refer to sexual intercourse, with 16:37; 23:10 and 23:29 suggesting an act of sexual violence against the female figure. With regard to ‫ גלה‬II, there are only four references in the book, all of which attest the specific exilic connotation of the verb: In Ezek 12:3, an imperative qal, followed by a consecutive perfect is used to command the prophet to symbolize the deportation into exile (‫ִית‬ ָ ‫ ְו ָגל‬... ‫ )וּ ְגלֵה‬by preparing his baggage, while in 39:23 the nations will come to know that it is due to the house of Israel’s own iniquities that they had to go into exile (‫ִשָׂר ֵאל‬ ְ ‫)כּי ַב ֲעוָֹנם גָּלוּ ֵבית־י‬. ִ Finally, the recognition formula in 39:28 is directed at Yhwh’s own people, who will recognize him as their god who led them into exile (‫ל־הגּוֹיִם‬ ַ ‫ֹתם ֶא‬ ָ ‫ְלוֹתי א‬ ִ ‫)בּ ַהג‬ ְ and who will gather them into their own land. Furthermore, some nominal derivations of the root ‫ גלה‬should be considered, which in the prophetic book refer exclusively to the deportation into exile. Firstly, the noun ‫ גָּלוּת‬describes the implementation of the verb, which translates as “exile /exiles”. 15 The lemma is used most notably in the framework narrative in Ezek 1:2; 33:21, and 40:1, which date the events in the text in relation to the deportation of the first golah under King Jehoiachin. Secondly, the noun ‫גּוֹלָה‬, which goes back to a feminine participle, denotes the corresponding collective group (“the exiles”) and has led to the abstraction “the deportation, exile / the deported, exiles”. 16 This noun occurs exclusively in the first parts of the book (Ezek 1:1; 3:11, 15; 11:24, 25; 12:3, 4, 7, 11; 25:3). This overview has demonstrated that the verb ‫ גלה‬is used with both its basic meanings in the book, while its derivatives have adopted the particular function as technical terms for the deportation of the first golah. However, our focus will be on the use of ‫ גלה‬I in Ezek 16 and 23, and especially its understanding in terms of sexual violence, where it connotes that a female figure is exposed to sexual violation. I shall argue that the use of ‫ גלה‬in both chapters is a conscious play on the two meanings of the root to deploy sexual violence as an image of exile.

Books, 1994), 226; K.-F. Pohlmann, Der Prophet Hesekiel /Ezechiel: Kapitel 1–19 (ATD 22,1; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1996), 219. In contrast, Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1, 332, argues that 16:57 should be read in conjunction with 16:36, 37. 15 See Kiefer, Exil, 145. 16 See Kiefer, Exil, 126–133.

172

Anja Klein

3. Textual Observations 3.1. From Abandoned Child to Nymphomaniac Woman: Ezek 16 Ezekiel 16 puts forward an “extended metaphor” 17 of Yhwh as husband and personified Jerusalem as his female partner, who is unfaithful to him. At the beginning, Jerusalem is introduced as an abandoned baby girl, whom Yhwh cares for and later marries, once the girl has come of age. Even though the wife is richly maintained by her husband, she develops a nymphomaniac attraction to other lovers and is punished severely for her misbehaviour. The whole chapter is shaped as a continuous address to the female figure by Yhwh, recalling the context of a judicial speech, 18 in which the husband accuses his wife of adultery and gives judgement. As the female’s fate in the narrative represents biblical history, explaining the fall of Jerusalem and the ensuing exile as punishment for the unfaithfulness of the people, the genre of the chapter is generally understood as an allegory. 19 Ezekiel 16 shares the opposition between initial fairytale election and later downfall with the allegories in Ezek 19* and 31*, which are usually counted among the oldest texts in the book. 20 However, the high level of theological reflection in Ezek 16 rather speaks for a later origin in comparison with these texts. 21 The present chapter can be divided into three parts. Following the word introduction formula in 16:1, the first part in vv. 2–43 contains a metaphorical review of biblical history, symbolized by the fate of the adulterous woman Jerusalem; it was later supplemented with the fate of her sisters Sodom and Samaria in 16:44–58, and a prospect of salvation in 16:59–63. 22 17 Shields, “Multiple Exposures,” 5; on this genre classification see further Allen, Ezekiel 1–19, 233; Galambush, Jerusalem, 11, and Day, “Violence,” 205. 18 On these characteristics in Ezek 16 see Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1, 333, 335. 19 It is usually acknowledged that Ezek 16 assembles different form elements, yet in a manner whereby the “extended” use of the marriage metaphor and the overall form of an allegory stand out; see in detail Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1, 333–336; Allen, Ezekiel 1–19, 232–235; Pohlmann, Ezechiel 1–19, 221; H. Lipka, Sexual Transgression in the Hebrew Bible (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2006), 223, and, with special emphasis on the allegorical character, T. Krüger, Geschichtskonzepte im Ezechielbuch (BZAW 180; Berlin and New York: de Gruyter, 1989), 139–198. 20 Thus Pohlmann, Ezechiel 1–19, 292–297. 21 On the possibilities of relating these three chapters, see Pohlmann, Ezechiel 1–19, 220–221; after the analysis of Ezek 16*, he comes to the conclusion that Ezek 16* most likely originated in the context of his so-called “older prophetic book” (“älteres Prophetenbuch”; see Pohlmann, Ezechiel 1–19, 230), or represents an even later addition, which suggests that Ezek 16* dates to later than both Ezek 19* and 31*. 22 See Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1, 333–334; Krüger, Geschichtskonzepte, 325–332; Pohlmann, Ezekiel 1–19, 221. However, there is also evidence to suggest that the basic oracle in 16:1–43

Uncovering the Nymphomaniac

173

The original oracle starts with a description of the woman’s childhood years in 16:2–14, when Yhwh finds the helpless and naked baby girl “flailing about in your blood” (16:6:‫בּוֹס ֶסת ְבָּד ָמ ִיְך‬ ֶ ‫)מ ְת‬. ִ Yhwh takes pity upon the girl and commands her to live (16:6), and under his protection and care the child grows up, until her time has come for “love” (16:8: ‫ְהנֵּה‬ ִ‫ו‬ ‫)ע ֵתְּך ֵעת ֹדּ ִדים‬. ִ Here, the Hebrew text provides us with sufficient evidence to assume that Yhwh takes her to be his wife and – staying with the imagery – most likely consummates the marriage. 23 However, the picture of marital bliss changes to that of a broken marriage in the following section 16:15–34. Instead of being faithful to her husband Yhwh, who fulfils his marital commitments and lavishly provides his wife with expensive garments and jewellery (16:9–14), the wife bestows her promiscuous favours on everyone who passes by (16:15). Her sexual desire even leads to a perverted practice of prostitution, when she pays her lovers instead of accepting payment in exchange for sexual intercourse (16:33–34). Further to the accusations of adulterous behaviour, the woman is also accused of cultic offences: she sacrifices her children (16:20–21), builds herself high places for worship (16:16, 24–25) and worships idols made from the provisions given to her by her husband (16:15–19). 24 The announcement of judgement in 16:35–43 is from the start formulated with specific reference to the alleged ‘crimes’ of the female figure, employing her nakedness as an image of judgement. Thus, the pronouncement starts with an allusion in 16:36 that makes her sexual involvement with her lovers the cause of her being sexually violated by her husband: “Because ... your nakedness was uncovered (16:36: ‫ָתְך‬ ֵ ‫ַתּ ָגּלֶה ֶע ְרו‬ ִ ‫ ו‬... ‫ַען‬ ַ ‫ )י‬..., therefore ... I will uncover your nakedness to them (16:37: ‫ָתְך‬ ֵ ‫יתי ֶע ְרו‬ ִ ‫ִלּ‬ ֵ ‫ְוג‬ ‫ֵהם‬ ֶ ‫)אל‬.” ֲ Both the specific use of the verb ‫ גלה‬piel in 16:37 and the literary context are evidence that the punishment goes beyond simply stripping the woman naked. First, the act of stripping is mentioned separately in contains later additions; in particular, it is the question of what the female figure is originally accused of that has given rise to literary-critical analysis. Both Zimmerli and Pohlmann reconstruct an original text in which the accusations against the female figure remain general (harlotry and unfaithfulness), while both deem the specific charges of cultic (16:16–21) and political infidelity (16:26, 28–29) to be later supplements (see Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1, 333–353, and Pohlmann, Ezechiel 1–19, 216–234). 23 On the presence of marriage imagery in Ezek 16:8 see Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1, 229; Allen, Ezekiel 1–19, 238; Block, Ezekiel 1–24, 482–483. Day, “Violence,” 208, is clear about the consummation of the marriage in Ezek 16:8: “Sexual activity seems to be clearly suggested by these actions.” 24 There is some evidence to suggest that the cultic accusations are later additions, on which see footnote 22.

174

Anja Klein

16:37b and 16:39, where the woman is undressed with the intention of exposing her nakedness and thus humiliating her. 25 Secondly, as discussed above, the combination of ‫ גלה‬piel with the noun ‫ ֶע ְרוָה‬clearly denotes sexual intercourse, and if this understanding is applied to Ezek 16:37, then the imagery describes sexual intercourse that is forced upon the female figure. 26 From a contemporary perspective, this constitutes an act of rape, which is – in the imagery of the metaphor – carried out by the divine husband himself. 27 Further analogies between the punitive sanctions and previous actions on the part of the metaphorical wife serve to paint the picture of a deserved punishment, which is reinforced by the husband’s statement that his judgement follows a standard set of rules, the “laws for female adulterers and murderers” (16:38: ‫ְשׁ ְפכֹת ָדּם‬ ֹ ‫שׁ ְפּ ֵטי ֹנ ֲאפוֹת ו‬ ְ ‫)מ‬. ִ The first major continuation in 16:44–58 starts with the proverb “like mother, like daughter” (16:44: ‫)כּ ִא ָמּה ִבּ ָתּהּ‬ ְ and introduces the personified cities Samaria and Sodom as sisters of the main female protagonist Jerusalem. Even though Samaria and Sodom are shown to be equally guilty of committing abominations, the comparison aims at demonstrating that Jerusalem’s offences easily surpass those of her ‘sisters in crime’ (16:47). 28 It is in this continuation that the verb ‫ גלה‬occurs for the third time, in the context of a reproachful reminder to the female figure that she considered herself superior to her sister Sodom (16:56), before her own wickedness was uncovered (16:57: ‫)בּ ֶטֶרם ִתּ ָגּלֶה ָר ָע ֵתך‬. ְ 29 The expression appears to recall the sexual nature of Jerusalem’s own transgressions and punishment in the first part, but entails a wider moral judgement. Finally, the latest continuation of the chapter in 16:59–63 contains a prospect of salvation and introduces a conciliatory note, when Yhwh promises that 25

On this argument see also Baumann, Love, 155. On this understanding see Shields, “Multiple Exposures,” 15–16; Baumann, Love, 154–155; more tentatively, Lipka, Sexual Transgression, 152. Even though the terminological parallels between Ezek 16:37 and the texts in Leviticus are widely recognized, most exegetes interpret the scene in Ezek 16:37 as an act of exposure for the purpose of humiliation rather than an act of bodily violation; see e. g. Allen, Ezekiel 1–19, 242 (“The public exposure of the naked body was a symbolic act of legal punishment for adulterers ...”); Greenberg, Ezekiel 1–20, 286 (“public degradation of a harlot”), and Block, Ezekiel 1–24, 501–502 (“recalls a divorce ritual”). 27 On the question of whether we can assume an understanding of ‘rape’ in the Ancient Near East see F. R. Magdalene, “Ancient Near Eastern Treaty-Curses and the Ultimate Texts of Terror: A Study of the Language of Divine Sexual Abuse in the Prophetic Corpus,” in The Feminist Companion to the Latter Prophets (ed. A. Brenner; The Feminist Companion to the Bible 8; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995), 326–352, 328–341. 28 Thus Maier, “Jerusalem,” 100: “Der Vergleich mit Sodom und Samaria zielt auf die Schuld Jerusalems als einer Steigerung der Vergehen.” 29 On the reading see footnote 14 above. 26

Uncovering the Nymphomaniac

175

he will establish an everlasting covenant with Jerusalem (16:60, 62). However, the last verse of the chapter “emphasizes a sober concern for Israel’s continued repentance”, 30 as the covenant promise is supplemented with the admonition that the woman should feel shame and be silent because of her disgrace (16:63: ‫ִמּ ֵתְך‬ ָ ‫ ִמ ְפּנֵי ְכּל‬... ‫ֹשׁ ְתּ‬ ְ ‫)ָוב‬. 31 In summary, the review of biblical history, especially in the first part 16:1–43, goes far beyond a simple metaphor with one comparison point. Rather, the metaphorical imagery has an allegorical dimension in using the fate of the female figure to depict biblical history. In this, the female figure can be understood in a narrow sense as symbolizing the city Jerusalem, which nevertheless bears a relation to the people and the nation as a whole. 32 Thus, the rescue of the abandoned child clearly recalls the election of Israel in its beginnings, while the act of marriage and the ensuing provision for the wife are images for the prosperity during nationhood. Consequently, the descriptions of adultery in its various forms represent the infidelity of Israel, who is accused of both political and cultic defection from Yhwh. In the imagery of Ezek 16, the sexual violation of the unfaithful wife symbolizes the destruction of Jerusalem and the ensuing exile of the people, interpreted as a rightful punishment for Israel’s iniquities. In a linguistic perversion of the woman’s offences, the divine husband rapes her in front of her lovers (16:37).

3.2. Sisters in Adultery: Oholah and Oholibah in Ezek 23 The topic of sexual violence as an image of exile recurs in Ezek 23, the second chapter of the book that employs the prophetic marriage metaphor for an allegorical review of biblical history. This time, however, we are dealing with two women, namely the sisters Oholah and Oholibah, who represent the two capital cities of the Northern and Southern Kingdoms, Samaria and Jerusalem. The whole chapter can be divided into three parts, starting with the sisters’ time of harlotry in Egypt (23:1–4), while 30

Allen, Ezekiel 1–19, 233. The fact that Jerusalem feels shame only after Yhwh has forgiven her and provided a new beginning, suggests that shame together with being silenced denotes the culmination of the divine punishment, leaving the woman humbled and voiceless (see J. Stiebert, The Construction of Shame in the Hebrew Bible: The Prophetic Contribution [JSOTSup 346; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002], 159). 32 On the specific relation between the personification of Zion /Jerusalem and the people see O. H. Steck, “Zion als Gelände und Gestalt: Überlegungen zur Wahrnehmung Jerusalems als Stadt und Frau im Alten Testament,” in Gottesknecht und Zion: Gesammelte Aufsätze zu Deuterojesaja (O. H. Steck, FAT 4; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1992), 126–145, 133–134. 31

176

Anja Klein

the second and third parts deal with the sisters in turn, starting with the infidelity of Oholah in 23:5–10, and then focusing on Oholibah in 23:11–49. However, there is some agreement that the original oracle is confined to 23:1–27, while the further speech units in 23:28–49 represent later additions. 33 Unlike the account in Ezek 16, the storyline skips the womens childhood and starts with their time of harlotry in Egypt (23:3: ‫ַתּ ְזנֶיָנה‬ ִ‫ו‬ ‫)ב ִמ ְצַריִם‬, ְ before both of them become Yhwh’s wives (23:1–4). The following part deals with the infidelity of Oholah, describing her acting promiscuously with both the Assyrians (23:5–7) and the Egyptians (23:8), for which the husband punishes her by delivering her into the hands of her lovers. Not only do the Assyrians take away her children and finally kill her, they also assault the woman sexually by uncovering her nakedness (23:10: ‫ָתהּ‬ ָ ‫)גִּלּוּ ֶע ְרו‬. Again, the specific use of the verb ‫ גלה‬piel in the context of punishment suggests that the text describes how Oholah is exposed to gang rape at the hands of her former lovers. Yet Ezek 23:10 differs from the account in Ezek 16 in the role that Yhwh himself plays: In Ezek 23, he is not “the one who directly performs the rape, but ‘only’ the judge who passes sentence on the ‘woman’ Jerusalem and leaves the carrying out of the punishment to the ex-lovers”. 34 However, the main focus of the chapter is on the second sister, Oholibah, whose fate is described at length in the second half, 23:11–49. Oholibah has been witness to her sister’s fate (23:11), but she follows the same path and even surpasses Samaria in her “chronic nymphomania” 35 (23:11–21). She engages in relations with different groups of male figures, symbolizing the successive involvements with foreign nations in biblical history. First, Oholibah is filled with desire for the handsome young Assyrians, to whom she is drawn because of their magnificent clothing (23:12: ‫שׁי ִמְכלוֹל‬ ֵ ‫ְב‬ ֻ ‫)ל‬. Later, however, she is attracted to the Babylonians after seeing them in wall paintings (23:15–18), before she resumes the love affair of her youth with the Egyptians, whose bodily attractions are described in sexually unambiguous terms (23:19–21). The expression that she uncovered her nakedness (23:18: ‫ָתהּ‬ ָ ‫ת־ע ְרו‬ ֶ ‫ַתּגַל ֶא‬ ְ ‫ )ו‬in her dealings with 33

See Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1, 480–481; L. C. Allen, Ezekiel 20–48 (WBC 29; Dallas: Word Books, 1990), 45–48, and K.-F. Pohlmann, Der Prophet Hesekiel /Ezechiel: Kapitel 20–48 (ATD 22,2; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 2001), 336–340; similarly Krüger, Geschichtskonzepte, 143, who, however, assumes an original core in verses 23:1–30. 34 Baumann, Love, 159. 35 Allen, Ezekiel 20–48, 41, who uses the expression as the heading for the commentary on chapter Ezek 23 as a whole.

Uncovering the Nymphomaniac

177

the Babylonians, which uses ‫ גלה‬piel in combination with the noun ‫ע ְרוָה‬, ֶ leaves no doubt that her adultery is consummated in sexual intercourse. This is depicted as the final reason for her husband’s turning from her, as he turned from her sister Oholah before (23:18: ‫ֶיה‬ ָ ‫מ ָעל‬ fֵ ‫שׁי‬ ִ ‫ַפ‬ ְ ‫ַתּ ַקע נ‬ ֵ ‫)ו‬. The husband’s punitive measures in 23:22–34 roughly represent a reversal of the woman’s promiscuous activities and are divided into three parts, of which, however, only the punishment outlined in the first oracle 23:22–27 constitutes the original continuation. 36 Here, the divine husband announces that he will send the former lovers against his wife, whom he will empower as instruments of his indignation (23:15) to judge the woman “according to their laws” (23:24: ‫יהם‬ ֶ ‫שׁ ְפּ ֵט‬ ְ ‫)וּשׁ ָפטוְּך ְבּ ִמ‬. ְ The judgement involves humiliation, as the former lovers will facially mutilate the female (23:25), and strip off her clothes and jewellery (23:26). The later addition of a second judgement oracle in 23:28–30 extends the original punitive action and adds a description of sexual abuse: The divine husband first repeats the sentence that the woman’s former lovers will seize all her property and possessions, so that she will be left bare and naked (23:29: ‫ְע ְריָה‬ ֶ ‫ָבוְּך ֵעירֹם ו‬ F ‫ַעז‬ ֲ ‫)ו‬. Yet this punitive act is followed by with the announcement that the woman’s whorish shame will be uncovered (23:29: ‫ ֶע ְרוַת זְנוּ ַנ ִיְך‬37 ‫ְתה‬ ָ ‫) ְו ִנ ְגל‬. As a passive, the niphal verbal form of ‫ גלה‬in this verse does not indicate by itself who is to carry out the act of punishment, but the context strongly suggests that the female figure is to be violated by her ex-lovers, on the command of the divine husband. Unlike the parallel occurrences in 16:36–37 and 23:10, however, the noun ‫ ֶע ְרוָה‬occurs as a construct together with the noun ‫“( זְנוּנִים‬fornication”). 38 It has been suggested that the Hebrew expression ‫ גלה ֶע ְרוָה‬in this case refers to the

36

On the secondary character of 23:28–30 and 23:31–34 see Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1, 490; similarly Pohlmann, Ezechiel 20–48, 339–340. 37 Following most commentators, the consecutive perfect masculine singular (‫ ) ְו ִנ ְגלָה‬should be emendated to a feminine singular (‫ְתה‬ ָ ‫) ְו ִנ ְגל‬, assuming a scribal omission, even though we do not have material evidence for this reading (see Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1, 476; M. Greenberg, Ezekiel 21–37: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary [AB 22; Garden City: Doubleday, 1997], 483; Pohlmann, Ezechiel 20–48, 337). 38 The noun ‫ זנונים‬is a derivative of the root ‫זנה‬, which is a broad term for sexual misconduct, including adultery. It has two related, but distinct meanings: to fornicate or have illicit sex, and to practice prostitution (see G. H. Hall, “‫זנה‬,” NIDOTTE 1 [1996]: 1122–1125, 1123; for further references see S. Erlandsson, “‫זנה‬,” TDOT 4 [1980], 99–104). The noun occurs mainly in the context of the marriage metaphor, where the distinction between illicit sex and sex for hire is not always clear (Hos 1:2; 2:4, 6; 4:12; 5:4; Ezek 23:11, 29; Nah 3:4; with reference to Tamar, Gen 28:24, and to Jezebel, 2 Kgs 9:22).

178

Anja Klein

genitals as the seat of shame, 39 rather than being a euphemism for sexual intercourse. To my mind, however, the parallel use of the verb ‫ גלה‬niphal in 16:36 can be used as evidence to suggest a similar understanding in 23:29. Thus, the formulation indicates that – in a perversion of Oholibah’s previous sexual promiscuity – the female figure will be gang-raped by her former lovers, whom the husband has gathered around her. 40 This understanding can be supported further by the argument that it fulfils the (implicit) expectation that Oholibah will suffer the same punishment as her sister (see the violation of Oholah in 23:10). This expectation is further confirmed in the later addition of the Song of the Cup in 23:31–34, which states that, as Oholibah followed the path of her sister, she will have to endure the same punishment (23:31). To sum up, the metaphorical speech in Ezek 23 shares major characteristics with chapter 16 such as employing the marriage metaphor for an allegorical review of biblical history and referring to a model of retributive judgement, in which the sexual humiliation and violation of the female figure is directly linked to her previous adulterous behaviour. However, there are some differences. First, the allegorical dimension is much more elaborated, allowing for a clear interpretation of the adulterous acts of the personified cities as metaphors for the events that – in the eyes of the biblical authors – led to the demise of the two kingdoms of Israel (722 BCE) and Judah (587 BCE). 41 In addition, Ezek 23 represents the more highly systematized account: while in Ezek 16 accusations of cultic and political infidelity are combined, the depiction in Ezek 23 focuses on political transgressions, emphasizing the allegorical function of the chapter. Thus, the fate of the two sisters stands transparently for the demise of the two kingdoms, explained by their folly in relying on political alliances with foreign nations instead of trusting in the relationship with Yhwh. With these political moves portrayed as adultery, both the Assyrian and the Babylonian exiles are described in terms of sexual violence that the divine husband exposes his wives to. The marriage metaphor in Ezek 23 is, however, less detailed, skipping the initial care and provision of the 39 Baumann, Love, 159, on Ezek 23:29: “Here, unlike 16:36 and 23:10, ‫ ערוה‬probably refers to the genitals. The word is more specifically qualified by the substantives for ‘whoredom’ (‫זנות‬, ‫זמה‬, and ‫ )תזנות‬so frequently used by Ezekiel, and indeed is more or less saddled with being the organ in which everything shameful is gathered together and can be looked upon.” 40 See Lipka, Sexual Transgressions, 234. 41 See Krüger, Geschichtskonzepte, 139–195; Allen, Ezekiel 1–19, 234–244; Allen, Ezekiel 20–48, 48–52; Pohlmann, Ezechiel 20–48, 339–340, and G. Baumann, Gottesbilder der Gewalt im Alten Testament verstehen (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2006), 115–117.

Uncovering the Nymphomaniac

179

husband and focusing on the transgression of the female figure(s) instead. 42 Apparently, the reader is supposed to fill these gaps by assuming the marriage relations in Ezek 16, which together with the higher systematization suggests that Ezek 23 is in its basic form a later continuation of the extended metaphor in Ezek 16.

4. The Verb ‫ גלה‬and Sexual Violence in the Prophets Further to the two allegories in Ezek 16 and 23, there are four other occurrences in the biblical Prophets where the Hebrew verb ‫ גלה‬is used in a metaphorical description of sexual violence against a female figure, namely Hos 2:12; Nah 3:5; Isa 47:3; and Jer 13:22. 43 Among these, Jer 13:22 is of special importance, as I want to demonstrate that the motif in 13:22 attests to a redactional reinterpretation of the preceding announcement of exile in Jer 13:19. Jer 13:22 is part of a collection of prophetic oracles in Jer 13:18–27 that is divided into four parts, 13:18–19, 20–22, 23–24, and 25–27. The shared imagery of the shamed woman in 13:20–22 and 13:25–27 suggests an original connection between these two parts, which further share the address to a female figure (13:20–27*). 44 With regard to the other units, however, there is some evidence for a process of literary continuation: The prophecy in Jer 13:18–19 clearly forms the basic oracle that first announces the demise of the king and the queen mother (13:18), which in what follows is related to the end of the Southern Kingdom of Judah. Here, the author states in 13:19 that the whole of Judah has been led into exile, employing twice the hophal binyan of the verb ‫ גלה‬as a terminus technicus (13:19: ‫לוֹמים‬ ִ ‫שׁ‬ ְ ‫ְהוּדה ֻכּ ָלּהּ ָה ְגלָת‬ ָ ‫)ה ְגלָת י‬. ָ 45 In the continuation 13:20–27* 42

For a comprehensive comparison of the uses of the marriage metaphor in Ezek 16 and 23 see N. Stienstra, YHWH is the Husband of His People: Analysis of a Biblical Metaphor with Special Reference to Translation (Kampen: Kok Pharos Publishing House, 1993), 155–161. 43 For a detailed analysis and comparison of these verses as part of the prophetic texts in Hos 2:4–17; Nah 3:1–7; Isa 47:1–4 and Jer 13:18–27 see my forthcoming publication Klein, “Clothing.” 44 On the connection between 13:20–22 and 13:25–27 see – however, with different arguments, – W. Rudolph, Jeremia (HAT I /12; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1947), 82–83, and W. McKane, Jeremiah: Vol I: Introduction and Commentary on Jeremiah I–XXV (ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1986), 307. 45 While the verb ‫ ָה ְגלָת‬is a feminine singular, the noun ‫לוֹמים‬ ִ ‫שׁ‬ ְ is masculine plural, explained by P. Joüon and T. Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (SubBi 27; Rome: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2006) § 150e, with the people being regarded as a collection.

180

Anja Klein

the address changes to a 2 person feminine, who can be identified with personified Zion /Jerusalem. 46 The female figure is first called to lift up her eyes (13:20: ‫וּר ִאי‬ ְ ‫ֵיכם‬ ֶ ‫)שׂ ִאי ֵעינ‬ ְ 47 and witness the arrival of a group from the north, which recalls the advance of the foe from the north (Jer 4–6). She is then mocked for the loss of her flock (13:20) and blamed for having forged her own destiny, as she herself instructed ‘confidants’ (13:21: ‫)א ֻלּ ִפים‬ ַ that will now rule over her. Her punishment is described in 13:22 in no uncertain terms: “And when you say in your heart: Why have these things happened to me? Because of the abundance of your iniquity your skirt hems have been uncovered, and your heels have been violated (‫ֶח ְמסוּ ֲע ֵק ָב ִיְך‬ ְ ‫) ִנגְלוּ שׁוּ ַל ִיְך נ‬.” 48 The undressing of the female figure (‫ גלה‬niphal) serves as a prelude to sexual abuse, which is described as a

46

K. Schmid, Buchgestalten des Jeremiabuches: Untersuchungen zur Redaktions- und Rezeptionsgeschichte von Jer 30–33 im Kontext des Buches (WMANT 72; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1996), 330–340, has furnished further proof of the assumption that 13:20 ff. represents a later continuation of 13:18–19 by classifying 13:20–22 with a number of similar examples in which the earlier prophecies in the book are later supplemented with theological commentaries, making the continuation in Jer 13:20 ff. part of wider, conceptually-linked redactional activity in the book. 47 This reading prefers the 2 person feminine singular imperatives of the Ketiv, while the e Q re (‫וּראוּ‬ ְ ... ‫)שׂאוּ‬ ְ can be explained as an assimilation to the foregoing context, assuming a masculine plural subject (see L. C. Allen, Jeremiah: A Commentary [OTL; Westminster: John Knox, 2008], 162, and W. L. Holladay, Jeremiah 1: A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Jeremiah Chapters 1–25 [Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986], 411). There remains, however, the incongruence of the initial 2 feminine singular imperative ‫ שאי‬with the object ‫( עיניכם‬bearing a 2 masculine plural suffix), which then requires an emendation (see already Rudolph, Jeremia, 80; McKane, Jeremiah, 307, and P. C. Craigie, P. H. Kelley and J. F. Drinkard Jr., Jeremiah 1–25 [WBC 26; Dallas: Word Books, 1991]). 48 The understanding of the expression ‫ ִנגְלוּ שׁוּ ַל ִיְך‬requires some discussion. As the noun ‫ שׁוּל‬generally describes something that is hanging down, it has the two basic meanings ‘seams’ and ‘pubic region of a woman’ (see HALOT; Gesenius18). The eleven occurrences in the Hebrew Bible appear both in cultic contexts (see Exod 28:33[twice], 34; 39:24, 25, 26: Isa 6:1) and in the context of sexual violence (Jer 13:22; 26; Lam 1:9; Nah 3:5). While in a cultic context, the term refers clearly to the lower edge of a garment, the ‘hem’, there is some discussion about its understanding in the context of sexual violence, where it can stand both for the (female) genitalia and the garment that covers them (see the overview by Baumann, Love, 52–55). As the verb ‫ גלה‬can denote both a direct object (that what is ‘uncovered’) and an indirect object (that what is ‘taken away’), Jer 13:22 could be understood either way: “your skirt hems /genitals have been uncovered” (see Baumann, Love, 52, 118). However, as the close parallel in Nah 3:5 (‫ל־פָּנ ִיְך‬ ָ ‫יתי שׁוּ ַל ִיְך ַע‬ ִ ‫ִלּ‬ ֵ ‫ ) ְוג‬seems to suggest that a garment is lifted up by its hem to expose the female’s body up to her face, I have opted for a similar translation in Jer 13:22; similarly Rudolph, Jeremia, 80 (“ist deine Schleppe aufgedeckt”); Carroll, Jeremiah, 302 (“that your skirts are lifted up”); McKane, Jeremiah, 306 (“your skirts are lifted”); differently G. Fischer, Jeremia 1–25 (HThK.AT; Freiburg i.Br: Herder, 2005), 447, who opts for a translation that refers to a metaphorical uncovering of the female’s shame (“wurde aufgedeckt deine Scham”).

Uncovering the Nymphomaniac

181

violation of the female’s heels – a clear euphemism for sexual violence. 49 Due to the passive verb forms, it is unclear who is the perpetrator of the violation in 13:22, yet the key is in the previous verse 13:21, which indicates that the woman got involved with ‘confidants’ that she herself taught (13:21: ‫ֹתם‬ ָ ‫ִמּ ְד ְתּ א‬ ַ ‫ְא ְתּ ל‬ ַ ‫)ו‬. Firstly, the verb ‫“( למד‬to teach”) is used in Jeremiah to describe how the people have forgotten Yhwh and have become accustomed to the transgressions and idolatries of the nations; 50 in particular, in Jer 2:33 Zion /Jerusalem is accused of having habitually looked for love (‫)למדתי‬. 51 Secondly, the noun ‫‘( ַאלּוּף‬confidant’) serves in Jer 3:4 as an honorary title, with which the adulterous female addresses Yhwh when she ruefully returns to him. This suggests that the noun in 13:21 denotes the woman’s lovers, whom she had initially left the divine husband for. Hence the imagery in 13:22 should be interpreted against the background of the prophetic marriage metaphor, implying that Yhwh will expose Zion /Jerusalem to sexual violence at the hands of her former lovers, whom she foolishly mistook for confidants. 52 That the marriage metaphor stands in the background of the oracle is even more prominent in its continuation 13:25–27, where Yhwh accuses the woman of adultery, ‘neighing,’ and whoring (13:27: ‫ְנוּתְך‬ ֵ ‫ת ז‬Sַ ‫לוֹת ִיְך זִמּ‬ ַ ‫וּמ ְצ ֲה‬ ִ ‫א ַפ ִיְך‬f ֻ ‫)נ‬, ִ drawing on central accusations brought against the female in previous chapters of the book (Jer 2–3) and attributing to her alleged crimes explicit sexual connotations. 53 Furthermore, the punishment of the female figure through sexual violence continues in the motif that Yhwh himself will expose her to sexual humiliation (13:26). 54 To sum up, what is remarkable about the prophecy in Jer 13:18–27 is that the different use of the verbal root ‫ גלה‬in the productive growth of the oracle demonstrates the reinterpretation of exile in terms of sexual 49 On the “heels” (‫)ע ֵקב‬ ָ as a euphemism for the (female) genitals see the corresponding entries in Gesenius17/Gesenius18 and HALOT; further, H.-J. Zobel, “‫עקב‬,” TDOT XI (2001): 315–320, 316–317; Baumann, Love, 119–120. Similarly, P. Gordon and H. C. Washington, “Rape as a Military Metaphor,” in A Feminist Companion to the Latter Prophets (ed. A. Brenner; The Feminist Companion to the Bible 8; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995), 316, argue for an understanding in terms of sexual violence: “Jer 13.20–27 describe the attack of Jerusalem as a rape.” 50 See Jer 9:4, 13; 10:2; 12:16. 51 On this reading and interpretation, see Holladay, Jeremiah 1, 56, 109–110. 52 In contrast, Baumann, Love, 120, interprets Jer 13:22 with reference to the following verse (13:26), assuming that Yhwh himself is the perpetrator of sexual violence and not simply the one who initiates it. 53 See Baumann, Love, 121–122. 54 See on this Klein, “Clothing;” further Holladay, Jeremiah 1, 416; R. P. Carroll, Jeremiah: A Commentary (OTL; London: SCM Press, 1986), 303.

182

Anja Klein

violence. While in the original oracle 13:18–19 ‫ גלה‬hophal denotes how Judah was led into the Babylonian exile, the author of the continuation in 13:20–27* employs the niphal binyan to describe sexual violence against personified Zion /Jerusalem. This prophecy is the only text in the Hebrew Bible in which the exilic connotation of ‫ גלה‬II occurs next to ‫גלה‬ I with a sexual connotation. This suggests that the author of the later continuation in 13:20–27* is deliberately playing with the two meanings of the same root when he interprets the Babylonian exile using the idea of sexual violence against a female figure. 55 Thus, the productive growth of Jer 13:18–19, 20–27* can be understood as the literary origin of the interpretation of exile through the image of sexual violence. The key for this exegesis lies in the double meaning of the Hebrew root ‫ גלה‬as “to go into exile” and “to uncover”, together with the prophetic marriage metaphor. Apparently, the deportation of the people from their land has been connected with the uncovering of personified Zion /Jerusalem, 56 which qualifies the motif of sexual violence against a female figure as an image of exile in prophetic literature.

5. Exile as Sexual Violence: Some Hermeneutical Observations So far I have demonstrated that it is most likely the two different meanings of the Hebrew root ‫ גלה‬that first led to the image of exile as sexual violence in the productive growth of Jer 13:18–27. This image of exile was later reworked in the comprehensive allegories of biblical history in Ezek 16 and 23, where the punishment of the adulterous wives culminates in their rape and sexual humiliation. The question remains of how to deal with these texts, which, I am convinced, Phyllis Trible would happily class with her Texts of Terror, “from whose bourn no traveller returns unscarred”. 57 Let me sketch out three hermeneutical notions that I find essential when reading Ezek 16 and 23. Firstly, the texts operate within the scheme of cause and effect, drawing 55

Similarly, Fischer, Jeremia, 462, sees the connection between the double use of the verb ‫ גלה‬in Jer 13:19, 22 and comments on Jer 13:22: “Dabei entsteht über das Verb ‫ גלה‬eine Beziehung mit V 19 (...). Erinnerung und Entblößung werden so miteinander verbunden.” 56 On this connection see already H.-J. Zobel, “‫ ָגּלָה‬,” TDOT II (1975): 476–488, 478: “Emigration or exile can be understood as an uncovering of the land”, and Baumann, “Gott,” 114: “Im Wort ‫ גלה‬verbindet sich die Entblößung einer Frau mit der Deportation einer Bevölkerung.” 57 P. Trible, Texts of Terror: Literary-Feminist Readings of Biblical Narratives (Overtures to Biblical Theology; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984), 2.

Uncovering the Nymphomaniac

183

on the anthropological codes of honour and shame. Ancient Israel was a largely group-oriented society, which shared in the conventions of honour and shame that prevailed in Mediterranean society. Even though honour / shame vocabulary is mostly absent in Ezek 16 and 23, it can be shown that the texts draw on these anthropological codes, which have proved to be a useful model for assessing social relationships in the Hebrew Bible. 58 As the anthropological codes of honour and shame are closely linked with sexual relations and gender roles, the marriage metaphor allowed the biblical authors to transfer existing cultural preconceptions about what constitutes appropriate male and female behaviour onto the relationship between Yhwh and the female figure, and thus to reflect on biblical history. 59 In the same way that a wife who commits adultery damages the honour of her husband by impugning his masculinity, 60 Israel has shamed Yhwh by worshipping other gods and entering into political alliances with foreign nations. And in the same way that a shamed husband has certain powers of control over his wife to re-establish his honour, the divine husband exposes his metaphorical wife to shame as a punishment for the people’s idolatries and their political follies. Since the female figures in Ezek 16 and 23 are guilty of adultery, amplified to a nymphomaniac frenzy, according to the logic of the texts they have brought the violent punishment on their own heads. In particular, the mention of laws in both Ezek 16:38 and 23:45 shows that the biblical authors have tried to paint the picture of a retributive judgement. 61 However, while punitive 58 See S. A. Brayford, “To Shame or not to Shame: Sexuality in the Mediterranean Diaspora,” Semeia 68 (1996): 163–176, 163; further L. M. Bechtel, “Shame as Sanction of Social Control in Biblical Israel: Judicial, Political and Social Shaming,” JSOT 49 (1991): 47–76; Stiebert, Construction, 25–86; S. Hadijev, “Honor and Shame” in Dictionary of the Old Testament: Prophets (ed. M. Boda and J. G. McConville; Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2012), 333–338, and with specific regard to the book of Ezekiel, D. Y. Wu, Honor, Shame, and Guilt: Social-Scientific Approaches to the Book of Ezekiel (BBR Supplements 14; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2016), 5–56. See also Klein, “Clothing.” 59 See Hadijev, “Honor,” 337. 60 See C. Delaney, “Seeds of Honor, Fields of Shame,” in Honor and Shame and the Unity of the Mediterranean (ed. D. D. Gilmore; A Special Publication of the American Anthropological Association 22; Washington, DC: American Anthropological Association, 1987), 35–48, 40–43; M. J. Giovannini, “Female Chastity Codes in the Circum-Mediterranean: Comparative Perspective,” in Honor and Shame and the Unity of the Mediterranean (ed. D. D. Gilmore; A Special Publication of the American Anthropological Association 22; Washington, DC: American Anthropological Association, 1987), 61–74, 68; K. Stone, Sex, Honor, and Power in the Deuteronomistic History (JSOTSup 234; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996), 44, 142–144. 61 This has frequently been pointed out; see e. g. Krüger, Geschichtskonzepte, 188–192; Baumann, Love, 143; Stiebert, Construction, 146; Lipka, Sexual Transgression, 153.

184

Anja Klein

acts such as facial mutilation (cf. Ezek 23:25) or stoning (23:47) are occasionally documented as punishments for adultery, 62 the excessive sexual humiliation and attack, culminating in the act of rape (Ezek 16:37; 23:10, 29), is without parallel. This leads to my second point, the use of rhetorical devices in these texts. Even though the violent punishment seems excessive and stretches the conventions and laws about marriage relations, it can be explained as part of the underlying metaphor. 63 Ezekiel 16 and 23 in their literary form are indeed scenes from a marriage, but they have to be understood as allegorical compositions that are devised to reflect on biblical history. It is especially the historical trauma of the capture of Jerusalem in 587 BCE and the ensuing exile that occasioned wide parts of the prophetic literature, and that lie at the core of the marriage metaphor in Ezek 16 and 23. 64 To demonstrate the devastating impact of these historical events, the ancient authors supplemented the marriage metaphor with further motifs and imagery. First of all, the idea of undressing also has a background in military warfare, where it was common practice to strip captives of their protective clothing, and to expose them to shame in order to gain control over them. 65 Thus, exposing the nakedness of the female figures in Ezek 16 and 23 functions as an image for the shame of military defeat and in particular the fall of Jerusalem. 66 Furthermore, the violence against the female figure goes back to the fact that cities in the West-Semitic region were regarded as female and could be personified; thus, the Mesopotamian genre of city lament especially employed violence against the city and city goddess as a way to depict military action and destruction. 67 Thus, to a certain degree, the violence against the woman in the prophetic marriage metaphor can be 62

See Baumann, Gottesbilder, 118. Similarly Lipka, Transgression, 153, on the motifs of rape and sexual violation in the Prophets: “However, as part of a metaphor, these punishments, representative of the invasion and pillaging of Judah and Israel and the conquest and exile of their people, makes (sic) perfect sense.” 64 See Baumann, Love, 226–228, and Baumann, Gottesbilder, 123. 65 See Bechtel, “Shame,” 62–67; Baumann, Gottesbilder, 117–120. 66 Similarly Stiebert, Construction, 101–102. 67 On the religious-historical background see A. Fitzgerald, “The Mythological Background for the Presentation of Jerusalem as a Queen and False Worship as Adultery in the OT,” CBQ 34 (1972): 403–416; M. Biddle, “The Figure of Lady Jerusalem: Identification, Deification, and Personification of Cities in the Ancient Near East,” in The Biblical Canon in Comparative Perspective (ed. K. Lawson et al.; Lewiston: E. Mellen Press, 1991), 173–194; Steck, “Zion,” 47–59; Maier, “Jerusalem,” 87–88; M. Wischnowsky, Tochter Zion: Aufnahme und Überwindung der Stadtklage in den Prophetenschriften des Alten Testaments (WMANT 63

Uncovering the Nymphomaniac

185

understood as a transformation of the figure of the violated female in the Mesopotamian city laments. The specific quality of the personification allowed the audience of the prophetic texts to empathize with the female, and to identify with the judgement against her. 68 It is because the audience understood that such acts of violence were devastating for the female victim that the depiction is powerful and can demonstrate the traumatic effect of the events of 587 BCE and the ensuing exile which – in the eyes of the biblical authors – destroyed the core of city, land, and nation. Finally, it is easy to understand why texts such as Ezek 16 and 23 have engendered various criticisms pertaining to the problematic nature of the depiction of violence, or to their use of fixed gender roles that differ decidedly from our present understanding. 69 However, it should be stressed that these texts are not intended to comment on or give guidance on gender or marriage relations; 70 rather their authors employ the motifs of marriage and sexual violence as literary devices to process the traumatic events in the history of Israel. It is finally noteworthy that the use of the marriage metaphor in these texts pertains to the people of Israel as a whole, and – considering that the political and religious leadership was predominantly male – one can even suggest that they were written for a male readership. These men were called to experience in their relationship to their God a type of shame that on a purely social level is appropriate only for females. 71 It has, however, rightly been pointed out that the inclusive nature of the imagery is “easily lost”, 72 and from a reader’s perspective, the metaphors in Ezek 16 and 23 remain uncomfortable, if not repulsive, texts. The chapters can thus be appreciated as theological coping strategies for their times, but only after deconstructing 89; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2001), 13–45, 266, and Baumann, Gottesbilder, 117–121. 68 See Steck, “Zion,” 133, who describes this relationship between the personified city and the people as not one of identity, but one of relation (“nicht als symbolische Identität, sondern als Relation”); see further the concluding remarks by Wischnowsky, Tochter Zion, 166–272, 272–274. 69 See the exemplary review of scholarship in Baumann, Love, 7–26; with regard to the imagery in Ezekiel see further van Dijk-Hemmes, “Metaphorization,”, 162–170; K. P. Darr, “Ezekiel’s Justifications of God: Teaching Troubling Texts,” JSOT 55 (1992): 97–117, and Magdalene, “Treaty Curses,” esp. 349–352. 70 It is thus a misreading of these texts when the author of the late supplement in Ezek 23:46–48 turns the imagery into an admonition of “all the women” (23:48: ‫ָשׁים‬ ִ ‫ל־הנּ‬ ַ ‫)כּ‬ ָ in the land, who are advised to take the fate of Oholah and Oholibah as a warning; see also Darr, “Ezekiel’s Justification,” 115. 71 See Hadijev, “Honor,” 337. 72 Darr, “Ezekiel’s Justification,” 115.

186

Anja Klein

their imagery and the anthropological codes that they draw on. Only then can the metaphor of sexual violence been interpreted as an image of exile. In summary, sexual violence in Ezek 16 and 23 serves to depict exile as the ultimate repudiation and violent exposure of Israel by their God Yhwh. In this way, the texts are striking witnesses to the significant impact of the exile on the literary production of the Hebrew Bible, and to how biblical authors transformed language and traditions in order to come to terms with this traumatic event and its aftermath.

Part III Various Themes

Nature Imagery within Images of Exile General Survey and Metaphoric Functions 1 Dalit Rom-Shiloni 1. Introduction Only five prophetic books do not present nature images of exile: Joel, Jonah, Habakkuk, Haggai, and Malachi. All others use different nature images in different ways to portray events of deportation and restoration of Israel, Judah, and the nations. In tracing thematic aspects of exile that are highlighted by nature images, I listed nine characteristics of dislocation based on pentateuchal sources, historiography, and prophecy, as well as some extrabiblical sources. 2 These nine characteristics reveal different aspects of exile, and they acted as guides for me as I traced the functions nature images are enlisted to convey. Six of them relate to deportation: First, exile is the last step of war (see 2 Kgs 17:5–6; 25:11–12, etc.). 3 In this study, I distinguish between metaphors of destruction (involving casualties of both war and ecological 1 This study is sponsored by the Israel Science Foundation and is part of the DNI Bible Project (ISF 462/15). I want to thank the organizers, Jesper Høgenhaven and Frederik Poulsen, for the invitation to discuss images of exile in prophetic literature and for being such superb hosts in Copenhagen. The invitation led me to conduct a wide survey of the prophetic literature, and the preliminary results are divided between two articles, this one and one currently in preparation, titled, “Nature Imagery within Images of Exile: On Form and Style.” 2 The list is based on both biblical and extrabiblical data we have on exile, known mostly from Assyrian deportation policy and recorded in royal inscriptions, economic documents, and letters, together with the information in the Hebrew Bible. See B. Oded, Mass Deportations and Deportees in the Neo-Assyrian Empire (Wiesbaden: Reichert, 1979); idem, Peace, War and Empire: Justification for War in Assyrian Royal Inscriptions (Wiesbaden: Reichert, 1992), 1–8, 177–190; idem, The Early History of the Babylonian Exile: 8th – 6th Centuries B. C. E. (Haifa: Pardes, 2010), 27–83 (Hebrew). 3 For exile as the last step of war, see H. Tadmor, “The Campaigns of Sargon II of Assur: A Chronological-Historical Study,” JCS 12 (1958): 22–40; idem, “Philistia under Assyrian Rule,” BA 29, no. 3 (1966): 86–102. Examples in the Assyrian royal inscriptions are plentiful; see, e. g., Sargon II’s annals on the capture of Yamani, King of Ashdod, Gimtu (‫)גת‬, and Ashdudimmu (‫ים‬-‫ )אשדוד‬ending with a vast deportation before transforming the area into an Assyrian province, A. Fuchs, Die Inschriften Sargon II. aus Khorsabad (Göttingen:

190

Dalit Rom-Shiloni

destruction) and metaphors that add the final phase of war, the deportation in the aftermath of destruction; only the latter are dealt with here. Second, the agent of exile is therefore an enemy king (e. g., 2 Kgs 17:5–6; 24:8–17; 25:11–12). Yet the most prevalent depiction of exile in biblical literature involves the theme of divine judgment, and these passages situate exile within a theological rather than a military context, with God as the agent of exile (see Deut 4:27; 28:36; 2 Kgs 17:18, 23; 24:3, 20; Jer 16:10–13). A third characteristic of exile is that it is portrayed as total. As consequence, the homeland is left empty – or almost so (see 2 Kgs 17:6, 23, 27–28; 25:21, 26; and often in prophecy, e. g., Jer 33:10). 4 Yet explicit and implicit references in the Hebrew Bible, as well as extrabiblical evidence, indicate that waves of deportation always left a remnant in the land, and this is the fourth characteristic of texts about exile: they occasionally accentuate the downtrodden social status of this remnant (e. g., 2 Kgs 19:30–31; 24:14b; 25:12; 2 Chr 30:5–6, 10; 35:17–18). 5 A fifth characteristic of exile relates to the destination: Deportees are either sent to specific places (as in 2 Kgs 17:6) or scattered “to the wind” – namely, to many different places (e. g., Jer 49:32, 36). 6 And, sixth, biblical references to exile question whether exile is a fate to be hopeful about: Does life continue in exile (e. g., Jer 29:1–7)? Or will exile mean further calamity (e. g., Lev 26:33, 36–39; Ezek 5:2, 10, 12; and Deut 4:27–28)? 7 Cuvillier, 1994), 326; the account of Sargon II’s capture of Samaria in Nimrud Prism D, J. C. Gadd, “Inscribed Prisms of Sargon II from Nimrud,” Iraq 16 (1954): 173–201, esp. 179, col. iv, ll. 25–41; and the third campaign of Sennacherib to the west in the Rassam Cylinder, A. K. Grayson and J. Novotny, The Royal Inscriptions of Sennacherib, King of Assyria (704 – 681 BC), Part 1 (RINAP 3/1; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2012), 63–66. 4 Oded (Mass Deportations, 18–32, esp. 22–25) cites some of the major phraseology that uses inclusive categories to present events of exile as total, e. g., niš¯e s.eher rabi zikar u sinniš, “people, great and small, male and female.” See also Gadd, “Inscribed ˘Prisms,” 186–187, col vi, ll. 60–62. 5 For other examples of this phenomenon of a remnant left in the land, see Oded, Early History, 42–50, 103–108. I have devoted a monograph to the internal conflicts of prestige and rank among Judaean communities: D. Rom-Shiloni, Exclusive Inclusivity: Identity Conflicts between the Exiles and the People Who Remained (6th–5th Centuries BCE) (LHBOTS 543; New York: T & T Clark, 2013). 6 Oded, Mass Deportations, 27–32, 59–74. 7 For the reconstruction of life in exile, see Oded, Mass Deportations, 75–115. Both biblical and extrabiblical sources contain only minor references to an organized resettlement of deportees from Israel and Judah in their exilic destinations and to the ecological conditions they faced there; see I. Eph’al, “The Western Minorities in Babylonia in the 6th–5th Centuries B.C,” Or 47 (1978): 74–90; idem, “On the Political and Social Organization of the Jews in Babylonian Exile,” in Deutscher Orientalistentag: vom 24. bis 29. März 1980 in Berlin, Vorträge (ed. F. Steppart; ZDMG 21/5; Wiesbaden: Steiner, 1983), 106–112; and note the remark by I. Eph’al (“Jews in the Babylonian Exile during the Biblical Era: Cultural

Nature Imagery within Images of Exile

191

The final three of the nine characteristics of exile relate to restoration. Seventh, prophecies on exile debate the question of whether deportation is final, or whether restoration is at all a viable option (e. g., Jer 22:24–30 versus Ezek 17:22–24). Eighth, in any event, the agent of restoration is God (e.g., Deut 30:3). 8 And, finally, ninth, restoration is portrayed in diverse ways depending on one’s perspective or focus, whether one is looking at gathering the dispersed, at the journey, or at resettlement back in the land. This article is based on a broad survey of the diverse nature imagery within the prophetic books designed to facilitate closer examination of images of exile, which I take to encompass both deportation away from and restoration back to the land. In conducting this survey, I have asked myself three main research questions: What nature images are used to portray exile? Where are they used within prophetic literature? and, In what ways do nature images serve to portray both deportation and restoration? The first two questions involve issues of data and distribution within this corpus, while the third sheds light on function, or the different purposes nature images serve in their contexts. This article is a work in progress. The interest in nature imagery is part of my research project, Dictionary of Nature Imagery of the Bible (DNI Bible) Project (dni.tau.ac.il). The goals of the present study are (1) to look at the general picture of nature imagery of exile in prophecy, (2) to study a few representative examples that may illustrate the roles nature imagery plays in the nine characteristics of exile listed above, and (3) to decipher what specifically the nature images of exile add to the texts in which they are used. Hence, the function of nature imagery is at the core of my interest here. The study ends with several broader concluding comments that may help to reveal ancient conceptions of nature in prophecy, looking Influences and Characteristics,” in Acculturation and Assimilation: Continuity and Change in the Culture of the Nations and in Israel [ed. Y. Kaplan and M. Stern; Jerusalem: Shazar, 1989; Hebrew], 29–39, esp. 33), that for four to five generations following the return, a culturalsocial elite was maintained in Babylon. Valuable, although sporadic, information on the relocation of exiles in Babylonia over the Neo-Babylonian and the Persian periods has been learned from various archives – famous among which are the Murashu archive and, more recently, the Al-Yahudu documents – that shed important light on some of those aspects, showing that deportees were working in different agricultural occupations fairly soon after their arrival in Babylonia; see L. E. Pearce and C. Wunsch, Documents of Judean Exiles and West Semites in Babylonia in the Collection of David Sofer (CUSAS 28; Bethesda: CDL Press, 2014), and D. Rom-Shiloni, “The Untold Stories: Al-Yahudu and or versus Hebrew Bible Babylonian Compositions,” WdO 47 (2017): 124–134. 8 The Edict of Cyrus (Ezra 1:1–4, 5) does not make Cyrus the agent of restoration, and this is also clear in Isa 45:1–8.

192

Dalit Rom-Shiloni

at the dichotomy of deportation and restoration through the tensions and interactions between portrayals of domestic animals and plants and wildlife in prophetic literature.

2. Data: Five Biological-Ecological Fields Express Exile (Deportation and Restoration) Uses of nature imagery in texts about the exile are best understood if we break them down into the five biological-ecological fields of nature: fauna, flora, water sources, landscape characteristics, and climate systems. The following list identifies each of these five fields with the specific species or items within them that are mentioned in references to exile (deportation and restoration) within the entire corpus of prophetic literature. 9 Each of these nature images serves as a picture, and the saying “a picture is worth a thousand words” seems very true in the case of nature images of exile. The list does not include all the nature imagery in the prophetic literature in general but is limited to those species that occur in images of exile specifically. 1. Fauna subdivides into: (1) Domestic animals, including ‫ אילים‬,‫ כרים ועתודים‬,‫ עלות‬,‫ טאלים‬,‫ מקנה‬,‫צאן‬, and those “that till the soil” ‫( עבדי האדמה‬Isa 30:24), thus ‫ פרים‬,‫ עירים‬,‫אלפים‬, or those used for transportation: ‫ גמל‬,‫ אתון‬,‫חמור‬. These domesticated animals occur mainly in shepherd metaphors, referring to the work (and the failure) of human /divine shepherd(s) (in which several verbs recur: ‫ קבץ‬/ ‫ הדיח‬/ ‫הפיץ‬, etc.). (2) Wild animals, termed generally ‫חית השדה‬, including wild mammals (‫צבי‬, ‫איל‬, ‫זאב ;פרא‬, ‫שעירים‬, ‫תנים‬, ‫אריה‬, ‫)לביאה וכפירים‬, birds (‫יונה ;נשר‬, ‫בנות ;צפור‬ ‫)יענה‬, reptiles (‫)נחש‬, and insects (‫)ארבה‬. 2. Flora subdivides into: (1) Plants used in agriculture ‫חטה‬, ‫גפן‬, ‫זית‬, ‫תאנה‬, that are often mentioned by their products in the triad ‫דגן תירוש ויצהר‬. Grains and pulse are listed as components of loaves of bread (‫)חטין ושערים ופול ועדשים ודחן וכסמים‬, or termed ‫לחם תבואת האדמה‬. Special attention is given to agricultural tasks, such as the production of wine (‫ שמרים‬,‫ ;)תירוש‬planting and uprooting (‫ נתש‬/ ‫;)נטע‬ actions of dispersion that combine fauna and flora (‫ זרה‬/ ‫ הפיץ‬and (‫הפיץ )העדר‬ ‫ ;)כקש עובר לרוח המדבר‬and ‫נוע בכברה‬. Resembling restoration, there are four professions and professionals relating to those same plants: ‫נגש חורש בקצר‬ ‫ודרך ענבים במשך הזרע‬. 9

So as not to overburden this list and allow the reader to get a general overview, I have not given the references, trusting that readers can locate these with a concordance.

Nature Imagery within Images of Exile

193

(2) Wild plants of different phytogeographic regions are intentionally brought together and even placed in the desert, as restoration rejuvenates the trees of the forest (‫)יער וכל עץ בו‬. The high trees of Lebanon (‫ ;)ארז ברוש תדהר ותאשור‬the blossom of the ‫ חבצלת‬of the Carmel and the Sharon; trees of the Mediterranean regions (‫הדס ועץ שמן‬, ‫נעצוץ‬, ‫ )סרפד‬and of desert/aravah areas (‫ ;)שטה‬aquatic plants (‫צפצפה‬-‫קח‬, ‫ ;)ערבים‬poisonous plants ( ‫ראש‬, ‫ ;)לענה‬thorns (‫סירים‬, ‫קמוש‬, ‫חוח‬, ‫ )קוץ ודרדר‬that signify the profound destruction of human settlements that turn into desolate or uncultivated fields once those residing there have been deported. 3. Water Sources refers to bodies of water (‫ים‬, [‫צולה‬, ‫]גלים‬, ‫)אגם‬, springs (‫)מעין‬, and watercourses (‫אפיק‬, ‫יארים‬, ‫יובל‬, ‫נחל‬, ‫נהר‬, ‫)נהרות‬. 4. Landscape Characteristics involves portrayals of various geographical regions within the land of Israel or the Levant (‫לבנון‬, ‫כרמל‬, ‫השרון‬, ‫המדבר‬, ‫)הערבה‬. Prophecies against the nations occasionally refer to geographical conditions in more distant areas such as Cisjordan, or even further afield within Babylon and Egypt. Special attention is given to landscapes created by humans, to cultivated areas in the mountains of Israel in comparison with regions of desert and desert border, which are reflected in phrases like ‫לשממה‬/ ‫שממה וחרבה ;היה לשמה‬, ‫שממה מאין‬ ‫אדם ובהמה‬, ‫ציה‬. Finally in this category belong references to the cosmic order of creation, thus portraying de-creation and re-creation in contexts of exile (‫תהו ובהו‬, ‫שמים וארץ‬, ‫יום ולילה‬, ‫)שמש ירח וכוכבים‬. 5. Climate Systems includes various winds (‫רוח קדים‬, ‫לכל רוח‬, ‫)לרוח המדבר‬, storms (‫)סערה‬, and precipitation (‫טל‬, ‫רביבים‬, ‫גשם‬, ‫)שלג‬.

Tables 1 and 2 in the appendix to this paper give the distribution of nature images of exile in prophetic literature divided into those five biological fields in the dichotomy of deportation and restoration. A special category is included for mixed metaphors – namely, combinations of two or more of the five diverse biological fields in the same passage, which seems to be a special tendency in the prophetic writings and will be discussed at length below.

194

Dalit Rom-Shiloni

3. Function of Nature Imagery in Portrayals of Exile 3.1. Deportation Isa 10:12–15 seems to use the first three characteristics of exile: 10 12 But when my Lord has carried out all his purpose on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, He will punish the majestic pride and overbearing arrogance of the king of Assyria. 13 For he thought, “By the might of my hand have I wrought it, by my skill, for I am clever: I have erased the borders of peoples; I have plundered their treasures, and like a bull I will bring down rulers. 11 14 I was able to seize, like a nest, the wealth of peoples; as one gathers abandoned eggs, so I gathered all the earth: nothing so much as flapped a wing or opened a mouth to peep.” 15 Does an ax boast over him who hews with it, or a saw magnify itself above him who wields it? as though the rod raised him who lifts it, as though the staff lifted the man!

‫ והיה כי יבצע אדני את כל מעשהו בהר ציון‬12 ‫ובירושלים אפקד על פרי גדל לבב מלך אשור‬ ‫ועל‬ ‫תפארת רום עיניו‬ ‫ כי אמר‬13 ‫בכח ידי עשיתי‬ ‫ובחכמתי כי נבנותי‬ ‫ואסיר גבולת עמים‬ ‫ ועתודותיהם[ שושתי‬qere] ‫ועתידתהם‬ ‫ואוריד כאביר יושבים‬ ‫ ותמצא כקן ידי‬14 ‫לחיל העמים‬ ‫וכאסף ביצים עזבות‬ ‫כל הארץ אני אספתי‬ ‫ואל היה נדד כנף‬ ‫ופצה פה ומצפצף‬ ‫ היתפאר הגרזן על החצב בו‬15 ‫אם יתגדל המשור על מניפו‬ ‫כהניף שבט ואת מרימיו‬ ‫כהרים מטה אל עץ‬

As the last step of war (characteristic 1), verses 13–14 quote the king of Assyria when he boasts of being the agent of massive deportation (characteristic 2), that affects “all the earth.” In other words, exile is total (characteristic 3). The image of collecting abandoned eggs from the wealth of the nations (‫ לחיל העמים‬in v. 14a) may indeed refer (“only”) to plunder, as Hans Wildberger and Joseph Blenkinsopp, among others, have suggested. 12 However, I join Peter Machinist and Shawn Z. Aster in arguing that verses 13–14 reflect the Assyrian policy of conquest and 10 English translations of the Hebrew Bible follow the NJPS, unless otherwise specified. Note that in translating ‫אפקד‬, NJPS followed LXX’s third singular verb. 11 This translation to ‫ ואוריד כאביר יושבים‬follows Shawn Z. Aster, Reflections on Empire in Isaiah 1–39: Responses to Assyrian Ideology (ANEM 19; Atlanta: SBL, 2017), 190–204, esp. 197–198; and see his discussion of this unique simile of the bull in both the Hebrew Bible and in the context of Sargon’s letter to the gods. Compare “Like a bull I have laid low their inhabitants” in J. Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 1–39 (AB 19; New York: Doubleday, 2000), 252. Blenkinsopp did not see reference to exile in these verses at all, only plunder of the riches of various conquered nations. Compare also to the NJPS translation: “and exiled their vast populations.” 12 Compare to H. Wildberger, Isaiah 1–12 (trans. T. H. Trapp; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991), 421–422, and Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 1–39, 252; as well as B. S. Childs, Isaiah (OTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001), 92–93.

Nature Imagery within Images of Exile

195

deportation more broadly. 13 Following the boast in verses 9–11 of capturing different cities west of the Euphrates (that historically were captured by both Tiglath-pileser III and Sargon II), the additional boast in verses 13–14 proceeds in two directions. 14 Politically, by eliminating borders between nations (‫)ואסיר גבולות עמים‬, the Assyrian king eliminated national independence within those territories and added them to the larger Assyrian empire. Economically, he acted against their residences (possibly the wealthy ones, ‫ועתודתיהם שושתי‬, and perhaps also in ‫ואוריד כאביר‬ ‫)יושבים‬. 15 The simile of collecting deserted eggs (v. 14) further paints a powerful picture of exile, of taking away potentially living creatures, as it illustrates the capture of the living citizens of those nations. 16 The ornithological background of this metaphor might be of nests set on shallow craters on the ground, where they are easy for predators to reach (v. 14a). Birds such as the chukar partridge (Alectoris chukar; ‫ )חגלת סלעים‬lay their eggs on such nests, which they dig in the ground and cover with leaves. The number of eggs is relatively large due to the danger to the eggs (and then to the chicks) posed by humans, foxes, and other mammals, snakes, and birds of 13

See Peter Machinist, “Ah Assyria ... (Isaiah 10:5 ff.): Isaiah’s Assyrian Polemic Revisited,” in Not Only History: Proceedings of the Conference Held in Honor of Mario Liverani, Sapienza, Universita di Roma, Dipartimento di Scienze dell’Antichità, 20–21 April 2009 (ed. G. Bartoloni and M. Giovanna Biga in collaboration with A. Bramanti; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2016), 183–218; Aster, Reflections on Empire, 190–205. Aster concluded his detailed discussion of vv. 13–14 arguing: “It is difficult to imagine that Isa 10:13–14 were composed without reference to Sargon’s letter to the gods describing his eighth campaign” (p. 201) against Urartu, 714 BCE. He aptly leaves the option for influence on the level of oral propaganda, and thus indirect. As presented below, the prophecy also contributes original motifs, see the discussion on the bird imagery in v. 14 below. 14 M. A. Sweeney, Isaiah 1–39 FOTL 16; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 205–206. For the so-called original unity of vv. 8–9 and 13–14, see Childs, Isaiah, 92. 15 Tiglath-pileser III boasts in one of his inscriptions (Stele no. 35): “I increased the territory of Assyria by taking hold of (foreign) lands (and) added countless people to its population”; see H. Tadmor and S. Yamada, The Royal Inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser III (744–727 BC), and Shalmaneser V (726–722 BC), Kings of Assyria (RINAP 1; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2011), 86. 16 The Targum to vv. 13–14 presents this option without having either the ornithological background or the historical information concerning the Assyrian deportation policy. In translating ‫( ואסיר גבולת עמים‬v. 13), the Targum suggests ‫ואגליתי עממיא מן מדינא למדינא‬, “and I have exiled the peoples from province to province”; see B. D. Chilton, The Isaiah Targum (The Aramaic Targum; Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1987), 24; and for v. 14: ‫אשכחת‬ ‫כקינא ידי נכסי עממיא וכמכנש ביעין שביקן כל דיירי ארעא אנא כנשית‬, “And my hand has found like a nest the possessions of the people (Hebrew: ‫ )לחיל העמים‬and as men gather eggs that have been forsaken so I have gathered all the residents of the earth (Hebrew: ‫”)כל הארץ‬ (ibid., 25). Hence, the Targum saw the two different aspects of subjugation: the economic plunder and the image of exile; along these lines, see also Rashi and Qimhi.

196

Dalit Rom-Shiloni

prey. While passers-by count the eggs deserted, on most occasions this is not the case. For the sake of protecting the eggs, brooding is usually done by the mother and /or the father (themselves often very well camouflaged) during night hours; during daytime, the parents stay at a distance yet definitely watching over the eggs. If a predator approaches the nest, the first protective step would be loud peeps to scare the predator away; as a second strategy, and only in case of immediate danger to the eggs (or chicks), the parents would perform “the trick of the wounded bird,” flipping down their wings and limping, pretending to be badly injured, unable to fly, and thus very vulnerable. The parents in this case fight the predator and risk their own lives in an effort to protect their eggs (or chicks). Therefore, ‫ולא היה נדד כנף ופצה פה ומצפצף‬, “nothing so much as flapped a wing or opened a mouth to peep” (v. 14b), continues this imagery of taking eggs away from a nest. While ‫ נדד כנף‬remains difficult, the metaphor is built on these two documented parental reactions of protection over a nest on the ground. 17 But the prophecy in Isa 10:14 negates those two actions, and the imagery, therefore, features the lack of any fight over the eggs, which, in normal circumstances, would definitely have been expected. The prophetic imagery thus reverses the ornithological phenomenon and expresses criticism of parental abandonment. 18

17 ‫ ולא היה נדד כנף‬is difficult and was not handled literally by the versions. LXX reads καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ὃς διαφεύξεταί µε, “there was no one who escaped me”; the Peshitta reads ݁ ‫ܘ ܗܘ ܕ‬, “there was no one who raised a wing”; and the Targum: ‫ולא הוה נטיל‬ ݂ ‫מיכא‬, “and there was none that moved from there” (and see note 14 above). 18 I thank the ornithologist, Dr. Haim Moyal, for the information. Among the potential birds that lay eggs on the ground are also Coturnix (‫)שליו‬, which lives in dry places and in the desert; Burhinus oedicnemus (‫)כרוון‬, which resides in areas of sand, savannah, or close to the sea; or Ammoperdix (‫)קורא‬, which might be found in the desert (both the Judaean Desert and the Negev near Eilat); as well as birds of the Charadriiformes (‫)חופמאים‬, like Vanellus spinosus (‫ )סיקסק‬and others, which reside on river banks and seashores. From this long list, I have mentioned above only the chukar, because it is among the more common birds within the Jerusalem mountains, so one may assume that the eighth-century prophet Isaiah (or his Judaean followers) could have known of it. That said, there is, of course, no way and no need to argue for this or that specific bird behind this imagery; the only important thing is the phenomenon, which is used and even reversed in this prophetic context. This ornithological background has been overlooked by biblical scholars, who in most cases have not attempted to explain the metaphor. Exceptions, although still not aware of the specific ornithological phenomenon described above, are A. Hakham, Isaiah 1–35 (Daat Mikra; Jerusalem: Mosad HaRav Kook, 1984), 114–115 (Hebrew); and Aster, Reflections on Empire, 199–200. Other scholars tend to mention here interesting references to bird images in the Assyrian royal inscriptions, famous among them the Rassam Prism of Sennacherib that boasts about besieging Hezekiah “like a bird in a cage,” etc.; see, e. g., Wildberger, Isaiah 1–12, 422. But note the unique picture in Isa 10:14, as presented here.

Nature Imagery within Images of Exile

197

Taking this ornithological background into consideration, we see that the king of Assyria boasts that deporting people was as easy as gathering “deserted” eggs. Those words put in the mouth of the king mock the lack of response, the lack of resistance among, or the impotence of leaders of all the nations subjugated by the Assyrian Empire, who could not effectively confront the tremendous powers of the empire and its policy of dislocating large populations from their homelands. 19 Isaiah’s oracle against Babylon in Isa 13:13–16 is another passage that illustrates the horrors of exile as the last step of war (characteristic 1). Furthermore, it does not see any hope in the lives of the deportees even when the empire collapses (characteristics 3 and 6): 9

13

14

15 16

Lo! The day of the LORD is coming with pitiless fury and wrath, to make the earth a desolation, to wipe out the sinners upon it .... Therefore shall heaven be shaken, and earth leap out of its place, at the fury of the LORD of Hosts on the day of His burning wrath. Then like gazelles that are chased, and like sheep that no man gathers, each man shall turn back to his people, they shall flee every one to his land. All who remain shall be pierced through, all who are caught shall fall by the sword. And their babes shall be dashed to pieces in their sight, their homes shall be plundered, and their wives shall be raped.

‫ הנה יום יהוה בא אכזרי ועברה וחרון אף‬9 ‫לשום הארץ לשמה וחטאיה ישמיד ממנה‬ ... ‫ על כן שמים ארגיז ותרעש הארץ ממקומה‬13 ‫בעברת יהוה צבאות וביום חרון אפו‬ ‫ והיה כצבי מדח וכצאן ואין מקבץ‬14 ‫איש אל עמו יפנו‬ ‫ואיש אל ארצו ינוסו‬ ‫ כל הנמצא ידקר‬15 ‫וכל הנספה יפול בחרב‬ ‫ ועלליהם ירטשו לעיניהם‬16 ‫ישסו בתיהם‬ (Qere: ‫ונשיהם תשגלנה )תשכבנה‬

Describing the day of YHWH, the day of his wrath on men (vv. 9–16; note the repetition of ‫ עברה וחרון אף‬in vv. 9 and 13b), verses 14–16 focus on the effects of suffering caused by God on that day. 20 The flight 19 With this bird imagery, this prophecy then takes a unique direction in comparison to Sargon’s letter presented by Aster (Reflections on Empire, 199–201) as its implicit source. This imagery seems to further accentuate the ideological themes presented by Aster concerning the reversal accusations laid against Sargon, as the target of YHWH’s punishment (pp. 201–205). 20 For the massa’ genre as combining the day of YHWH with a “taunt song over the king of Babylon,” see Sweeney (Isaiah 1–39, 228–229), who suggested that the basic setting of Isa 13:1–22 is the Median invasion of Babylon, which is mentioned in v. 17, following the tense relations between Babylon and Media-Persia as of the early sixth century, and taking the day of YHWH to represent divine punishment of the entire earth. Sweeney (ibid., 231) therefore dated 13:2–22 to after Cyrus’s invasion of Babylonia in 545 BCE and prior to his peaceful invasion of the city of Babylon in 539. Cf. R. E. Clements (Isaiah 1–39 [New Century Bible Commentary; Grand Rapids, 1980], 135–136), who suggested a post-587

198

Dalit Rom-Shiloni

of deportees from Babylon, each toward his homeland (Isa 27:12–13; Jer 51:6, 9, 45) promises not salvation in this case but further calamity (Isa 13:15–16, characteristic 6). The reference to an entire society in these verses – including men, children, houses, and women – suggests that the objects of this suffering are the peoples subjugated by Babylon who, at its demise, return to their homelands (Jer 46:16) yet still find no security there. 21 In this context, verse 14 introduces an image that brings a wild animal, the gazelle, and the domestic sheep together in an exceptional combination. Several options come to mind concerning the message behind this imagery: (1) Is it meant to highlight the difference between the gazelle and the sheep? Does it contrast the free gazelle that never had a human shepherd with the sheep supposedly led and protected by humans though now deprived of that care? Is it the very fast speed of the gazelle when chased, over against the relatively slow motion of herds of sheep? Is it their very different behaviour when chased? A group of gazelles spreads out in pairs or individually far away from the group, while sheep keep closer to each other in the herd. 22 Or (2): Is it the similar fact that both the gazelle and the sheep are chased, hunted, eaten – that, being low on the food chain, they suffer the violence of strong predators (i. e., empires)? The one other thing this exceptional combination does is bring the wild animal and the domestic one together to illustrate the suffering of all subjugated communities (note the repetition of ‫ כל‬in verse 5, thus characteristic 3 of exile). Different nature images are used to portray exile as total (characteristic 3) and the land as empty, or almost so, and they are often used in

date (“no earlier than the fourth century”) for those reflections on suffering that form “an eschatological reinterpretation of the prophetic theme of the Day of the Lord.” And note the interesting perspective and criticism of H. Wildberger (Isaiah 13–27 [trans. T. H. Trapp; Continental Commentaries; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1997], 13, 16–18 [esp. 17]), aimed at these post-Isaianic suggestions as well as Sennacherib’s invasion of Babylon in 689 BCE. 21 ‫ והיה‬is read in 1QIsaa in the plural (‫)והיו‬, in accordance with the other verb forms in 14b. It is more difficult, though, to determine the agent behind this verb. For the suggestion that the agent(s) are the subjugated peoples, see J. J. M. Roberts (First Isaiah [Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2015], 198), who mentions Isa 27:12–13; Jer 51:6, 9, 45, all referring to Judaeans leaving in Babylon. Wildberger (Isaiah 13–27, 27) regarded the agents as both the Babylonian soldiers as also multinational population of Babylon, as mentioned in Jer 46:16. Compare to Hakham (Isaiah 1–35, 145), who thought that the verses focus on the Babylonian army. It seems Hakham went with Rashi on this. 22 I thank Dr. Haim Moyal for the zoological information.

Nature Imagery within Images of Exile

199

mixed metaphors. 23 Looking further at the field of fauna, and specifically at shepherd imagery, exile is repeatedly compared to the dispersing of a flock, as in Jer 10:19–21: 24 19 Woe unto me for my hurt, my wound is severe! I thought, “This is but a sickness and I must bear it.” 20 My tents are ravaged, all my tent cords are broken. My children have gone forth from me and are no more; no one is left to stretch out my tents and hang my tent cloths. 21 For the shepherds are dull and did not seek the LORD; therefore they have not prospered and all their flock is scattered.

‫ אוי לי על שברי נחלה מכתי‬19 ‫ואני אמרתי אך זה חלי ואשאנו‬ ‫ אהלי שדד וכל מיתרי נתקו‬20 ‫בני יצאני ואינם‬ ‫אין נטה עוד אהלי ומקים יריעותי‬ ‫ כי נבערו הרעים ואת יהוה אל דרשו‬21 ‫על כן לא השכילו‬ ‫וכל מרעיתם נפוצה‬

The prophecy agonizes over distress (vv. 19–20, characteristic 1) and simultaneously suggests an explanation or a justification for the divine judgment (v. 21). 25 Neglect and misconduct by the human shepherds, the people’s leaders, who did not seek YHWH, have brought disaster upon their flock (v. 21a). Hence, God is in the background of this catastrophe (characteristic 2). The results are total dispersion, a complete ruin of the tents and scattering of the entire flock (vv. 20, 21b, characteristic 3). This image of loss is a repeated theme in other shepherd images in Jeremiah as well, such as 23:1–4, and in the mixed metaphors in Jer 13:20–27. The shepherd metaphor may also serve to explicitly illustrate the role of God as the agent of exile (characteristic 2). 26 Jer 25:34–38 carries this notion to an extreme, as it portrays God as the major threat to the shep23 For flora images of characteristic 3, the total deportation that leaves the land empty, see, e. g., Hos 9:5–6. On mixed metaphors, see section 3.2.3. below. 24 J. R. Lundbom (Jeremiah 1–20 [AB 21A; New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999, 2009], 603) presented similarities between Jer 10:19–21 and 4:19–22. Note that the shepherd metaphor is elaborated only in the former. 25 For the debate over the possible speakers behind Jer 10:19–25, and particularly vv. 19–20 – i. e., Jerusalem, the entire community, the prophet serving as intercessor, or the prophet quoting independent individual laments (vv. 19–20 and then vv. 23–24) – see R. P. Carroll, Jeremiah (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986), 261; W. L. Holladay, Jeremiah 1 (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986), 339, 342; W. McKane, Jeremiah I–XXV (ICC; Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1986), 233–35; Lundbom, Jeremiah 1–20, 603–4. 26 For God as the agent of exile, see Jer 6:12; 7:15; 11:14–15, etc.; Ezek 5:5, 10; 11:16, etc. In reference to Jer 25:38, scholars often cite Jer 4:7 as a parallel, but there the agent of destruction is the human king. McKane (Jeremiah I–XXV, 653–54) discussed two other options. The first takes the lion as Nebuchadnezzar, following Jer 4:7; the second takes the lion as the king of Judah expelled from his city (Targum). But see Carroll, Jeremiah, 507–508 and Holladay, Jeremiah 1, 681. J. R. Lundbom (Jeremiah 21–36 [AB 21B; New York: Doubleday, 2004], 280–281) insisted that God was the attacking lion, in continuity with 25:30–31.

200

Dalit Rom-Shiloni

herds and to their flocks, and even presents two quite different images of his actions against his people, each of which presents God as the predator: 34 Howl, you shepherds, and yell, strew [dust] on yourselves, you lords of the flock! For the day of your slaughter draws near. I will break you in pieces, and you shall fall like a precious vessel. 35 Flight shall fail the shepherds, and escape, the lords of the flock. 36 Hark, the outcry of the shepherds, and the howls of the lords of the flock! for the LORD is ravaging their pasture. 37 The peaceful meadows shall be wiped out by the fierce wrath of the LORD. 38 Like a lion, He has gone forth from His lair; the land has become a desolation, because of the oppressive wrath, because of His fierce anger.

‫ הילילו הרעים וזעקו‬34 ‫והתפלשו אדירי הצאן‬ ‫כי מלאו ימיכם לטבוח‬ ‫ותפוצותיכם ונפלתם ככלי חמדה‬ ‫ואבד מנוס מן הרעים‬ ‫ופליטה מאדירי הצאן‬ ‫קול צעקת הרעים‬ ‫ויללת אדירי הצאן‬ ‫כי שדד יהוה את מרעיתם‬ ‫ונדמו נאות השלום‬ ‫מפני חרון אף יהוה‬ ‫עזב ככפיר סכו‬ ‫כי היתה ארצם לשמה‬ ‫מפני חרון היונה‬ ‫ומפני חרון אפו‬

35 36

37 38

The first imagery is unspecified, as it presents God as the one who ravages the flock’s pasture (‫כי שדד יהוה את מרעיתם‬, v. 36b); 27 is the metaphor behind ‫ שדד‬anthropomorphic, or could it refer to an animal? 28 In the following verse, God is presented as the lion that ravages the flock (v. 38). 29 In any case, as is typical, verse 38 here describes exile as total (characteristic 3). No remnant is left in the land, which itself becomes desolate to the point that those “peaceful meadows” become deserted because of God’s wrath (v. 37).

27 God as the explicit and only agent ravaging his people is a rare image that occurs only twice: Jer 25:36, and 51:56. But see his involvement as the one who summons human ravagers in Jer 12:12; 15:8 and ravagers against the nations in Jer 47:4; 48:1, 8; 48:15; 49:28; 51:48, 53 (and Ezek 32:12). 28 ‫ שדד‬in Jeremiah often appears with a human agent, as in Jer 4:13, 20, 30; 6:26; 9:18; 12:12; 15:8, etc. But note the metaphor in Jer 5:6, where the wolf of the desert is the one that ravages. 29 Scholars debate the boundaries of this prophecy: W. Rudolph (Jeremia [HAT 12; 3rd ed. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1968], 167–168) sets v. 38 apart from the previous prophetic unit, while Carroll (Jeremiah, 504–508); McKane (Jeremiah I–XXV, 653–654); and Lundbom (Jeremiah 21–36, 276–281) take the unit to include v. 38.

Nature Imagery within Images of Exile

201

3.2. Restoration (1) Shepherd Metaphors Shepherd metaphors are found in Isaiah 1–39, Isaiah 40–66, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Micah, Nahum, Zephaniah, and Zechariah. In contexts of admonition and judgment prophecies, as we have already seen, the shepherd metaphor reflects the horrors of war and dislocation (e. g., Nah 3:18–19, in a prophecy against the nations). Thematically, the shepherd imagery portrays the people as the flock. The shepherds are either negligent human shepherds, who are doomed to fierce judgment together with their flocks (e. g., Jer 23:1–4 and Ezek 34:1–10), or God, who is depicted as the ideal shepherd (e. g., Ezek 34:11–16, 17–24, 31). But frequently in judgment prophecies against Israel and against the nations, God is the agent of dispersal, and the extent of his actions of dispersing is emphasized by the repeated formula ‫הפיץ בגוים זרה בארצות‬. This formula is applied to Ammon in Jeremiah (49:5), to Egypt in Ezekiel (Ezek 29:12 and 30:26), and to Judah in Jeremiah (Jer 30:10–11; 46:27–28; and elsewhere). 30 However, shepherd imagery is one of the more common images in prospects of deliverance and gathering, and thus in prophecies of consolation (e. g., Jer 31:10–14; 50:8–10). With an emphasis on judgment in Ezekiel, and with a balanced number of passages on the judgment and consolation in Isaiah 1–39 (including 24–27) and in Jeremiah, the relation between passages of deportation and of restoration making use of the shepherd metaphor still shows a preference for this metaphor in prophecies of restoration, mainly in Second Isaiah (and others; see table 3 below). In the contexts of restoration, shepherd metaphors focus on God as an ideal saving shepherd (characteristic 8 of exile, e. g., Jer 23:1–4; Ezek 34). Isaiah 40:9–11 is one example: 9

Ascend a lofty mountain, O herald of joy to Zion; Raise your voice with power, O herald of joy to Jerusalem – Raise it, have no fear; announce to the cities of Judah: Behold your God! ... 11 Like a shepherd He pastures His flock: He gathers the lambs in His arms and carries them in His bosom; gently He drives the mother sheep.

30

‫על הר גבה עלי לך מבשרת ציון‬ ‫הרימי בכח קולך מבשרת ירושלים‬ ‫הרימי אל תיראי‬ ... ‫אמרי לערי יהודה הנה אלהיכם‬

9

‫ כרעה עדרו ירעה‬11 ‫בזרעו יקבץ טלאים‬ ‫ובחיקו ישא עלות ינהל‬

This formula deserves a separate discussion, forthcoming in the second paper I am preparing, which will be titled “Nature Imagery within Images of Exile: On Form and Style.”

202

Dalit Rom-Shiloni

Table 3: Shepherd Imagery of Exile (Deportation and Restoration) in Prophecy Book Isaiah 1–39* Isaiah 24–27 Isaiah 40–66 Jeremiah Ezekiel Amos Micah Nahum Zephaniah Zechariah

Deportation

Restoration

2 1

2 1 10 14 2

14 5 1 1 1

2 1 2

These well-known verses bring the proclamation of God’s return to the cities of Judah (‫ הנה אלהיכם‬in v. 9b). While verse 10 focuses on the image of God as the omnipotent warrior, verse 11 moves to a different simile, presenting God as his people’s protecting shepherd. With great professional care and tenderness, this verse brings a joyful and splendid description of gathering the dispersed and leading them safely. 31 (2) Mixed Metaphors Nature imagery in passages about restoration in Second Isaiah often utilize the three characteristics of restoration listed above, characteristics 7–9, and furthermore involve mixed metaphors drawing on various of the five biological spheres. The tendency to mix metaphors is fairly common in prophetic literature on exile (deportation and restoration alike), so it captured my attention. 32 Prophetic passages in Isaiah (according to the book’s major units: 1–39*, 24–27, 34–35, and 40–66), Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Hosea, Amos, Obadiah, Micah, Nahum, Zephaniah, and Zechariah present a mixture of two, three, four, even all five biological

31 See S. M. Paul (Isaiah 40–66 [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012], 134–138), who emphasizes the intertextual connections mainly to Jeremiah. 32 Mixed metaphors are not at all restricted to prophecies of consolation or to depictions of restoration, as table 4 shows. To mention a few examples of mixed metaphors that refer to deportation and in judgment prophecies, see Isa 17:1–6; 24:1–14; Jer 4:23–29; 22:20–23, etc.

Nature Imagery within Images of Exile

203

fields together in one prophetic proclamation, at times entangled within one verse. 33 I want to focus here on Second Isaiah and present a table of the different biological-ecological fields in passages in Isaiah 34–35 and 40–66 brought together. Well-known for their beautiful portrayals of nature, these prophecies emphasize that God will profoundly transform the biological-ecological conditions in order to allow deliverance. This is achieved by using the fields of water sources, landscape characteristics, and climate systems that effect flora and fauna. Table 4 lists sixteen passages, the great majority of which (and this is unique to Second Isaiah) involve the fields of water sources (9 times) and landscape characteristics (12 times). Here are but two examples. A mixture of biological fields is often brought together within one prophetic passage, as may be seen in Isa 41:17–20, where landscape and flora are brought together. 17 The poor and the needy seek water, and there is none; their tongue is parched with thirst. I the LORD will respond to them. I, the God of Israel, will not forsake them. 18 I will open up streams on the bare hills and fountains amid the valleys; I will turn the desert into ponds, the arid land into springs of water. 19 I will plant cedars in the wilderness, acacias and myrtles and oleasters; I will set cypresses in the desert, box trees and elms as well – 20 That men may see and know, consider and comprehend that the LORD’s hand has done this, that the Holy One of Israel has wrought it.

‫ העניים והאביונים מבקשים מים ואין לשונם‬17 ‫בצמא נשתה‬ ‫אני יהוה אענם‬ ‫אלהים ישראל אל אעזבם‬ ‫ אפתח על שפיים נהרות‬18 ‫ובתוך בקעות מעינות‬ ‫אשים מדבר לאגם מים‬ ‫וארץ ציה למוצאי מים‬ ‫ אתן במדבר ארז שטה והדס ועץ שמן‬19 ‫אשים בערבה ברוש תדהר ותאשור יחדו‬ ‫ למען יראו וידעו וישימו וישכילו יחדו‬20 ‫כי יד יהוה עשתה זאת‬ ‫וקדוש ישראל בראה‬

Four landscape features known for being profoundly dry – ‫שפים‬, ‫בקעות‬, ‫מדבר‬, ‫( – ארץ ציה‬bare hills, valleys, desert, and arid land) – transform into the most abundantly flowing water courses (‫)נהרות‬, reservoirs (‫)אגם מים‬, and springs (‫מעינות‬, ‫)מוצאי מים‬. Note that, except for ‫אגם מים‬, the other water sources all appear in the plural to increase the notion of abundance of water and reverse the lack of water at the beginning of this prophecy (v. 17). What a change! But does this tremendous change have an effect on the flora? At face value, the sequential order suggests, first, a change

33

The relevant biblical citations, and the specific fields used in them, are displayed in tables 1 and 2 in the appendix.

204

Dalit Rom-Shiloni

Table 4: Mixed Metaphors of Exile in Prophecy Deportation Book Isaiah 1–39* Isaiah 24–27 Isaiah 34–35 Isaiah 40–66 Jeremiah Ezekiel Hosea Amos Obadiah Micah Nahum Zephaniah Zechariah

Restoration

One field 4

Mixed 1 1

One field 1

16 4 3 2

12 10 2

12 20 2 1 1

1 1

1

2

1

1 2

Mixed 1 1 1 15 6 4

1

2

Table 5: Mixed Metaphors of Restoration in Isaiah 34–35 and 40–66 Reference

Fauna 1|2

Flora 1|2

Total number of references Isa 35:1–9

6

3

5

Landscape Climate Function of change Theological proclamation

9

12

+

+

+

+ +

+

+ +

+

+

+

+

+

Isa 44:1–5

+

+

Isa 44:21–23 Isa 45:1–8 Isa 49:8–13

+ +

+

Isa 41:14–16 Isa 41:17–20

8

Water

Isa 42:14–17 Isa 43:16–21

+

+

+

Isa 50:1–3 Isa 51:12–16 Isa 55:12–13

+

+ +

+

+

Isa 58: 9–12 Isa 60:5–17 Isa 65:8–10 Isa 65:17–25

+ ++ + ++

+ + +

+ +

+ + + + + +

+ +

3 transformation & journey

+

transformation & journey transformation & journey transformation & journey transformation & journey creation creation transformation & journey creation creation transformation & journey transformation transformation creation

+ + + + + + + + + + +

Nature Imagery within Images of Exile

205

of substance, affecting the phytogeographic conditions of landscape and water, which will eventually enable a change in the flora. But this sequence does not appear in the syntax of verse 19. The two verses, 18 and 19, are joined asyndetically, without any connective particle between the descriptions, as if the change of flora is a parallel, detached process. 34 In terms of the flora, seven barren trees of three different phytogeographic regions are brought together in this verse: the cedar, then ‫ותאשור ברוש תדהר‬ (cypresses in the desert, box trees, and elms) of the high mountains of Lebanon, and the acacia of the desert that grows in the Turanian desert regions of Iran, side by side with trees of the Mediterranean regions (‫הדס‬ ‫)ועץ שמן‬. This magnificent portrayal, which is clearly impossible in real life, designates the divine deeds of restoration and accentuates the real possibility of salvation in verse 17 (characteristic 7). Three (or even four) of the biological fields are brought together in Isa 43:16–21: 16 Thus said the LORD, who made a road through the sea, and a path through mighty waters, 17 Who destroyed chariots and horses, and all the mighty host – they lay down to rise no more, they were extinguished, quenched like a wick: 18 Do not recall what happened of old, or ponder what happened of yore! 19 I am about to do something new; even now it shall come to pass, suddenly you shall perceive it: I will make a road through the wilderness and rivers in the desert. 20 The wild beasts shall honor Me, jackals and ostriches, for I provide water in the wilderness, rivers in the desert, to give drink to My chosen people, 21 The people I formed for Myself that they might declare My praise.

‫כה אמר יהוה הנותן בים דרך‬ ‫ובמים עזים נתיבה‬ ‫המוציא רכב וסוס חיל ועזוז‬ ‫יחדו ישכבו בל יקומו‬ ‫דעכו כפשתה כבו‬ ‫אל תזכרו ראשנות‬ ‫וקדמניות אל תתבננו‬ ‫הנני עשה חדשה‬ ‫עתה תצמח הלוא תדעוה‬ ‫אף אשים במדבר דרך בישמון נהרות‬ [1QIsaa: ‫]נתיבות‬ ‫תכבדני חית השדה תנים ובנות יענה‬ ‫כי נתתי במדבר מים נהרות בישימן‬ ‫להשקות עמי בחירי‬

16 17

18 19

20

‫ עם זו יצרתי לי‬21 ‫תהלתי יספרו‬

Reflecting on past memories, on the “first things” (‫ראשנות‬, ‫)קדמניות‬, it is God who changed the landscape in several dimensions. Just as he created paths on which to walk (‫דרך‬, ‫נתיבה‬, v. 16) in the great body of water (‫)ים‬ or in major water courses (‫מים עזים‬, v. 16), invoking the exodus traditions of crossing the Sea of Reeds (Exodus 14) and the Jordan (Joshua 3), God now promises to create a road in the desert (v. 19b), bringing water to the

34

This asyndeton of vv. 18 and 19 was overestimated by Hakham (Isaiah 1–35, 434); other scholars seem not to have taken notice of this issue.

206

Dalit Rom-Shiloni

dry wilderness (v. 20). 35 Verse 17 refers to the extinction of the Egyptian army (‫)המוציא רכב וסוס חיל ועזוז יחדו‬, whose death is portrayed through a flora simile in verse 17b: 36 ‫דעכו כפשתה כבו‬, “they were extinguished, quenched like a flax wick”. 37 But the prophet calls attention to the new creation (‫)חדשה‬, as verse 19 describes how God is to establish roads as well as rivers in the desert: ‫אף אשים במדבר דרך בישמון נהרות‬, “I will make a road through the wilderness and rivers in the desert.” 38 Interestingly in this passage, it is the wildlife (fauna 2) that is first affected and that first appreciates the ecological change. In verse 20b, ‫חית השדה‬ ‫תנים ובנות יענה‬, whatever these may be, witness the transformation and recognize its aim: ‫להשקות עמי בחירי‬, “to give drink to My chosen people” (v. 20b). Whether these wild animals or the chosen people take action, the aim of all this ecological transformation, articulated in verse 21b, is the praise of God: ‫תהלתי יספרו‬, “that they might declare My praise”. 39 Claus Westermann found this combination of wild creatures and the chosen people to illustrate “the way in which God’s activity in creation and in redemption are one.” 40 As has been well recognized in the scholarship on Second Isaiah, God is said to establish salvation as a second creation and as a second exodus. God is capable, omnipotent, and committed to his chosen people; he will not abandon them. By way of a modest addition to all that has been said on those theological aspects, I find several points to be of interest when looking at the use of the five biological-ecological fields often intertwined in these passages (see table 5, above). First, water sources and landscape characteristics seem to govern prophecies of restoration in Second Isaiah, and they are combined in two 35 See Paul (Isaiah 40–66, 215–218) for the many allusions (mostly reversals) presented in this passage in reference to the exodus traditions and the wandering through the desert. 36 Paul (ibid., 215–16) suggested that ‫ המוציא רכב וסוס‬is a calque of the Aramaic ‫שיציא‬, in the meaning of “annihilate.” 37 My translation. ‫פשתה‬, “flax,” or Linum usitatissimum occurs once in the hail plague (Exod 9:31) and twice in Second Isaiah (Isa 42:3 and 43:17). Although tempting to draw additional connections to the exodus traditions, the two passages in Isaiah seem to work with a different flora metaphor. The production of candle wicks for lighting may be confirmed by the use of the verbs ‫( דעך‬Job 18:6, 17; Prov 13:9; see also Prov 20:20; 24:20) and ‫( כבה‬in 2 Sam 21:17), which are used as metaphors for death, the snuffing out of a dying candle, in reference to the dying Egyptian forces. 38 1QIsaa reads ‫ נתיבות‬instead of ‫נהרות‬, following the common pair: ‫ נתיבות‬/ ‫ דרך‬as in Isa 42:16; 59:8; Jer 6:16; 18:15; Hos 2:8; Prov 3:17, etc. 39 ‫ ספר תהלתו‬otherwise occurs in the Psalms as part of the liturgical praise; see Pss 9:15; 78:4; 79:13; 102:22. 40 C. Westermann, Isaiah 40–66 (trans. D. G. Stalker; OTL; London: SCM, 1969), 128–129.

Nature Imagery within Images of Exile

207

separate patterns. 41 In the first, the substance of landscapes and water sources transforms to enable the journey out of exile (thus transformation & journey in the table). The second pattern is embedded in the theme of creation as a testimony to God’s control over his world, but there is no reflection of a return to the land in those passages. Second, transformation involves water images in Second Isaiah that refer to the journey out of Babylon, out of exile. 42 But it is quite astonishing that those (or other) nature images are hardly ever used to describe arrival in the homeland. Isa 35:10 is an exception. 43 Hence, we may make an observation on characteristic 9 of exile and restoration: restoration may be portrayed only by looking at gathering the dispersed and at the journey, without any explicit reference to the resettlement back in the land. Third, this transformation & journey pattern, combining as it does those different ecological environs, accentuates that restoration is a realistic option, a prospect sure to be fulfilled before long (characteristic 7 of exile), and illustrates the weight given to this divine deliverance: Restoration from the Babylonian exile requires a profound change of entire biological systems, and it is, therefore, a matter for God to take care of and to re-form (characteristic 8). Finally, nature images in these prophecies seem to constitute major theological messages rather than just contributing to their presentation. Eleven of the sixteen passages conclude with an explicit theological statement that proclaims or reflects the recognition of God as the agent of 41 In many cases water images dominate the nature imagery in Second Isaiah (41:17–20; 43:16–21; see also Isa 42:14–17; 44:1–5; 49:8–13; 50:1–3; 58:9–12; see table 5, p. 204, above). Other passages of water imagery in Second Isaiah with no mixed metaphors are Isa 43:1–7; 48:17–19; 48:20–22. To compare, water images of exile occur only once in Jeremiah (31:7–9) and twice in mixed metaphors in Ezekiel (17:1–10; 30:20–26, a prophecy against Egypt). 42 Transformation of biological-ecological conditions is a further common denominator in references to exile (in general) in all five biological-ecological fields. In fact, transformation is a profound characteristic of deportation, not only of restoration. Dislocation of the people away from the land is accompanied by a transformation of the cultivated land into a desert (e. g., Jer 9:9–10; 9:11–15). Restoration is, of course, more joyful, as it transforms the desert into a region in bloom, flowing with waters, growing wild plants, and regaining the forces of agriculture. 43 References to the journey and not to arrival at the destination also occur in prophecies that do not present mixed metaphors, e. g., Isa 48:20–22; 51:3. Another exception is Isa 60:5–17, which suggests a mix of the fields water (‫ המון ים‬,‫)ונהרת‬, fauna (1 and 2), and landscape, namely sources of metal, all of which are combined to describe the consequences of the return. This passage differs from the others discussed here in the fact that the water image does not present a divine transformation of substance, so it avoids any mention of the journey. Could this difference reflect the geographic context of Yehud?

208

Dalit Rom-Shiloni

salvation, such as: ‫למען יראו וידעו וישימו וישכילו יחדו כי יד יהוה עשתה‬ ‫זאת וקדוש ישראל בראה‬, “That men may see and know, consider and comprehend that the LORD’s hand has done this, that the Holy One of Israel has wrought it” (Isa 41:20) and ‫אלה הדברים עשתים ולא עזבתים‬, “All these I will do and not forsake them,” (Isa 42:16). 44 Recognition of God’s role in empowering his people leads individuals to praise: ‫ואתה‬ ‫תגיל ביהוה בקדוש ישראל תתהלל‬, “But you shall rejoice in the LORD, and glory in the Holy One of Israel,” (41:16); the landscape itself attests to God’s glory: ‫המה יראו כבוד יהוה הדר אלהינו‬, “They shall behold the glory of the LORD, the splendor of our God” (Isa 35:2b); and heaven and earth rejoice and praise: ‫כי נחם יהוה עמו ועניו ירחם‬, “For the LORD has comforted His people, and has taken back His afflicted ones in love,” (Isa 49:13). Transforming the flora is the mark of God’s fame and becomes an eternal sign (Isa 55:13b). 45 Another goal of these theological references is for God to proclaim his own abilities to re-create (e. g., 45:8b; 50:2a), or his (re-)commitment to his people (e. g., 44:5; 44:23b; 51:16b). These observations require further investigation, but I thought they were worth noting here as an initial outcome of my project of looking at how and where nature images are used. The transformation & journey passages focus on the exile, inspired by the geographical environs of the great desert and the great waters of Mesopotamia, far away from the homeland and its geography. 46 Furthermore, unlike other prophecies of consolation, Second Isaiah’s landscape and water images do not include transformation of the phytogeographic conditions within the land of Israel in preparation for the repatriates, as they do not reach the phase of resettlement (cf., e. g., Ezekiel 36:8–12).

44 Translation of Isa 42:16 by Paul, Isaiah 40–66, 197; cf. NJPS: “These are the promises – I will keep them without fail.” 45 This means of explicitly presenting the theological message also occurs in a passage without mixed metaphors, e. g., ‫אל תירא כי אתך אני‬, “Fear not, for I am with you” (Isa 43:5). 46 This would then be another argument against suggestions of seeing Second Isaiah as having been among those who remained in Judah and were never exiled; see L.-S. Tiemeyer, For the Comfort of Zion: The Geographical and Theological Location of Isaiah 40–55 (VTSup 139; Leiden: Brill, 2011) and, earlier, H. M. Barstad, The Babylonian Captivity of the Book of Isaiah: “Exilic” Judah and the Provenance of Isaiah 40–55 (Oslo: Novus, 1997).

Nature Imagery within Images of Exile

209

4. Summary and Conclusions One obvious and general impression this study has given is that nature images from the different fields appear to be essential components in portrayals of both deportation and restoration in prophetic literature. I want to draw this preliminary study to a close by making three broad comments on the role of nature images in the dichotomy of deportation and restoration within portrayals of exile, based on tables 1 and 2 in the Appendix. First, the majority of references are to fauna and flora images, and within those to to domestic fauna (subdivision 1) and flora (subdivision 1). This very clear tendency cuts across all prophetic collections and involves domestic animals or major plants grown by humans to produce food. As part of this tendency, in fields of both fauna and flora, agricultural activities and professions are highlighted in reference to human deeds and misdeeds. Deportation is illustrated time and again by the cessation of routine natural cycles and agricultural activities to the point of being expelled from the land. Restoration designates the reversal of that: hope of return in consolation prophecies is expressed as bringing back stable agricultural productivity in the land. Within this framework, the portrayals of God’s actions in both deportation and restoration depict profound changes to the biological-ecological environs in the immediate surroundings of his people and far beyond. God can turn cultivated areas into desolate empty regions (‫)והיה לשמה‬, just as he can turn desolate mountains into fruitful terraces: ‫ואתם הרי ישראל ענפכם תתנו ופריכם תשאו לעמי ישראל כי קרבו‬ ‫“ לבוא‬But you, O mountains of Israel, shall yield your produce and bear your fruit for My people Israel, for their return is near” (Ezek 36:8–9). This accentuation of domestic fauna and flora (and especially the requisite changes of landscape) goes hand in hand with the well-observed anthropocentric or ethnocentric conception of nature that governs judgment prophecies of expulsion, and particularly characterizes consolation prophecies of return. Second, more intriguing are the ways nature images are utilized to upset the routine. There seems to be a very clear-cut distinction between domestic fauna and flora, on the one hand, and all that belongs to wild, or non-cultivated, life, on the other. Wildlife presents great challenges to the domestic arena. In both fauna and flora, the wild threatens and jeopardizes the orderly agricultural routine of humans settled in their territories. Dislocation brings wild animals

210

Dalit Rom-Shiloni

such as predators (mammals and birds), as well as wild plants (mostly thorns), to “conquer” the desolate settlements and inhabit. Wildness may also broaden to include the landscape, as desert overcomes cultivated areas. These real biological-ecological conditions seem to have been used to good effect by prophets. Wildlife figures prominently in imagery for those components of exile that involve destruction and disaster, and that end in dislocation. These pictures of wildlife – mostly fauna and flora – are used to illustrate the agents of dislocation, to vividly express the agony of the victims, and to portray the consequences of deportation on the land. In reference to agents of dislocation, major predators, mammals and birds, represent the human agents of dislocation. Dominant among them is the lion, which represents the empires that consume the sheep and disperse them in Jer 50:17. Particularly powerful are those passages that portray God as a lion who constitutes the great threat to his own people, as in Jer 25:34–38, discussed earlier (see section III.A above). When bird images are considered, the nesher designates the empires, specifically the king of Babylon, who is responsible for the deportation of Jehoiachin, as well as the king of Egypt, the smaller nesher, whom Zedekiah preferred to rely upon in the allegory in Ezek 17:1–10. 47 Wildlife further exemplifies the victims of exile. Among the predators, the lion designates Judaean rulers who are caught and deported, as in Ezek 19:1–9. A unique perspective on the victims of military subjugation and exile is further expressed by images of catching birds in traps, as in the prophecy against Babylon in Jeremiah (50:21–25, esp. 24). 48 Smaller birds, mostly doves, illustrate the victims of exile, their flight, their terror, and their search for a place to hide that accompanies dislocation, as in the prophecy against Moab in Jer 48:28. Finally, an interesting perspective on the harrowed remnant in the aftermath of deportation is given in Mic 1:16, through the bold nesher that represents mourning over the disaster. Fauna, flora, and landscape serve to depict the processes that the land goes though when the enemy invades the land prior to the exile, which is portrayed as invasion by snakes and locusts in the prophecy against Egypt in Jeremiah (46:22, characteristic 2 of exile). The idea of total dispersion (characteristic 3 of exile) is expressed through the wild ass, ‫פרא‬, in Hosea (8:9) and (as discussed in section 3.1. above) through the 47 Nesher as symbol of the enemy invading the land occurs elsewhere in the prophecy; see Jer 4:13; 48:40; 49:22; Hab 1:8. 48 Amos 3:5 uses also this idea of catching birds in traps, although it does not refer to exile.

Nature Imagery within Images of Exile

211

reference to gazelles together with sheep (‫ )צבי וצאן‬in Isaiah (13:14). Finally, the empty settlements in the aftermath of deportation become dens for jackals, along with other predators and nocturnal birds, as in Isaiah (43:16–21) and the prophecy against Qedar in Jeremiah (49:28–33, characteristic 3 of exile). 49 In the field of flora, the homeland is described as deserted, devoid of any agricultural produce, desolate and empty, as in Jer 8:13. The profound destruction is illustrated by the picture of previously settled areas of villages and cities that have now grown various annual thorns that otherwise grow on cultivated fields (Hos 9:5–6; Isa 34:13). Restoration is portrayed in a similar way, addressing at once the agent of restoration, those that benefit from it, and the changed conditions of the land. In reference to the agent of restoration, the image of God as lion may also portray him as his people’s deliverer. God’s roar alerts the people to gather in their homeland once more in Hos 11:10–11: 10 The LORD will roar like a lion, and they shall march behind Him; when He roars, His children shall come fluttering out of the west. 11 They shall flutter from Egypt like sparrows, from the land of Assyria like doves; and I will settle them in their homes – declares the LORD.

‫ אחרי יהוה ילכו כאריה ישאג‬10 ‫כי הוא ישאג ויחרדו בנים מים‬

‫ יחרדו כצפור ממצרים‬11 ‫וכיונה מארץ אשור‬ ‫והושבתים על בתיהם נאם יהוה‬

The phenomenon of the migration of birds further elucidates the return. Those victims of exile, portrayed as smaller birds and as doves are now called back to their own homes in Hos 11:10–11 as well as Isa 60:8: ‫מי‬ ‫אלה כעב תעופינה וכיונים אל ארבתיהם‬, “Who are these that float like a cloud, like doves to their cotes?” A different portrayal concerns the people that remain in the diaspora. In the consolation prophecy in Mic 5:6–8, the exiled remnant regains strength among the nations, imagined to be “like a lion among beasts of the wild [‫]כאריה בבהמות יער‬, like a fierce lion among flocks of sheep [‫]ככפיר בעדרי צאן‬, which tramples wherever it goes, and rends, with none to deliver.” In terms of the land, restoration establishes new rules in nature that allow cultivation and agriculture to return to the land in Jeremiah (31:5, 10–14) and Ezekiel (36:8–12). In addition, as discussed above, Second 49 As mentioned in the introduction and throughout this study, I neither mention nor discuss other portrayals in which predators illustrate destruction itself (e. g., Jer 5:6). The present study has focused on the aftermath of war, including dislocation and, finally, return.

212

Dalit Rom-Shiloni

Isaiah emphasizes changes in the flora of wild plants, as part of the landscape transformation of desolated deserts into well-watered regions, to facilitate the journey (as in Isa 35:1–2 and 41:17–20; 43:16–21; see section 3.2.2. above). A different transformation is exemplified in the upgrading of ‫כל עצי השדה‬, “all the trees of the field,” as the ‫נעצוץ‬, “brier,” turns into one of the high trees of Lebanon, ‫ברוש‬, “cypress” (Isa 55:12–13), just as the low weed ‫סרפד‬, “nettle” transforms into a ‫הדס‬, “myrtle,” a strong bush among Mediterranean plant life. Overall, those portrayals thus transform the wild from a threat to a blessing. Third, and finally, the points where domestic and wild meet are always of special value. From a theological point of view, deportation and restoration suggest significantly different perspectives on the roles of God and the participation of nature – namely, the different biological-ecological fields in the events of exile. On the disastrous side of deportation, wild predatory animals are threats to the domestic ones, or to human life. Human enemies or God himself thus serve as the agent of destruction followed by exile. Various elements from the world of fauna represent active agents of calamity. In restoration, on the other hand, wild plants and animals are great witnesses to the profound transformations of nature that facilitate divine deliverance. Thus they play only the passive roles of witnessing, enjoying, and acting only in praise of God, who is the one and only agent of restoration, as in Isa 35:2b. The three other fields – landscape characteristics, water sources, and climate systems – often join the wildlife in demonstrating with greater force God’s irresistible power to cause the harsh character of calamity when deportation is portrayed. Those three fields in particular celebrate the excitement of restoration, in which they are re-formed and transformed by God for the benefit of his delivered people. This paper offers some preliminary thoughts on the function of nature imagery and the background conceptions of nature, examined through the limited prism of images of exile. All these concluding observations seem to supply a fair amount of evidence to start deciphering ancient conceptions of nature in the Hebrew Bible seen through this prism as through many others.

213

Nature Imagery within Images of Exile

Appendix Table 1: Nature Imagery of Exile in Prophetic Literature: Deportation

Landscape

Climate

Isaiah 24–27 1 mixed

Water Sources

Climate

1

1

1

2

8

5

8

2

7

2

2|2

2|1

1

1

1

1

1

Flora

1|3

Landscape

1|2

Water Sources

1|2

Mixed Metaphors

Fauna

Isaiah 1–39i 4 passages 1 mixed

Flora

Books / total no.

Fauna

Deportation

1|2

1|2

1

1

1

1

9|2

4|3

5|2

Isaiah 34–35 Isaiah 40–66 Jeremiahii 16 passages 12 mixed

7|3

5 [1]

Ezekieliii 4 passages 10 mixed

1

2

Hoseaiv 3 passages 2 mixed

1|2

3

1

1

Amos 2 passages Obadiah 1 passage Micah 1 passage 1 mixed Nahum 1 passage

1

1

[1]

1

1|1

1

1

Zephaniah Zechariah 1 passage

1

1

214

Dalit Rom-Shiloni

Table 2: Nature Imagery of Exile in Prophetic Literature: Restoration

Landscape

1

1

Isaiah 34–35 1 mixed

1

1

1

1

3

6|4

6|7

9

12

3

5

4

3

1

1|2

2|2

2

2

Isaiah 40–66 12 passages 15 mixed

3

2

Jeremiahvi 20 passages 5 mixed

8|1

8|1

Ezekielvii 2 passages 4 mixed

2

Hoseaviii 1 passage

4

Climate

Water Sources

Isaiah 24–27 1 mixed

1

Climate

1

1|2

Landscape

1

1|2

Water Sources

1|2

Isaiah 1–39v 1 passage 1 mixed

Flora

1|2

Books / total no.

Fauna

Flora

Mixed Metaphors

Fauna

Deportation

3

3

2

Amos 1 passage

1

Obadiah Micah 2 passages

2

Nahum Zephaniah 1 passage Zechariah 2 passages 2 mixed

i

ii

1 1

1

2

Four passages in Isaiah 1–39 involve nature imagery of deportation: landscape (Isa 7:16); fauna 2: bird imagery (10:12–15; 16:1–4); fauna 1: shepherd imagery, and 2 (Isa 13:13–22, esp. vv. 14, and 21–22, fauna 2); and one with mixed metaphor of fauna 1 and flora 1 (Isa 17:1–6). Isaiah 24–27 presents one passage involving mixed metaphor: fauna 1, landscape, and flora 1 (Isa 24:1–13). Jeremiah contains sixteen passages of deportation that include nature imagery: fauna 1: shepherd

Nature Imagery within Images of Exile

iii

iv

v

vi

vii

viii

215

(Jer 8:3; 25:34–38 [with fauna 2]; 27:10, 15; 40:15; 49:5; 50:6–7; 50:17–20); fauna 2 (48:28; 50:24 [bird imagery]); flora (Jer 1:10; 12:14–17; 15:5–9; 17:1–4; 18:7, 9; 48:11–17); and water (51:54–56). Twelve passages in Jeremiah involve mixed metaphors: Jer 4:23–29 (landscape, fauna 2: bird migration, climate: clouds); 9:11–15 (landscape: desert, flora 2, fauna 1); Jer 13:20–27 (fauna 1: shepherd, flora 1, climate); 18:13–17 (water sources, landscape, climate: winds); 22:20–23 (landscape, fauna 1: shepherd, flora 2); 24:1–10 (fauna 1: shepherd and flora 1); Jer 46:13–24, 18–19, 20–23 (landscape, fauna 1: shepherd, fauna 2, flora 2, fauna 2); 49:28–33 (fauna 1: shepherd, flora 1, fauna 2, climate); 49:34–39 (climate, flora 1, fauna 1: shepherd); 50:1–4 (landscape, fauna 1); 50:11–13 (fauna 1, landscape); 51:41–44 (landscape, water). Ezekiel contains five passages in which deportation is depicted with nature imagery: fauna 1: shepherd (Ezek 34); flora (Ezek 4:9–17; 5:1–17); landscape (20:6, as a past reflection). Ten passages in Ezekiel involve mixed metaphors: Ezek 6:1–10 (landscape, flora 1); 12:1–16 (fauna 1, flora 1); 12:17–20 (flora 1, landscape); 17:1–10 (fauna 2, flora 1 and 2, water, climate 1, landscape); 19:1–9 (fauna 2, landscape); 19:10–14 (flora 1, climate, landscape); 22:1–16 (fauna 1, flora 1); 29:1–16 (fauna 1, flora 1, landscape); 30:10–12 (water, landscape); 30:20–26 (fauna 1, flora 1). Within the Twelve: Hosea contains three passages of deportation that include nature imagery – flora 1 (9:1–4); flora 2 (9:5–6; 9:15–17) – and two passages of mixed metaphors – Hos 8:4–10 (fauna 1, flora 1, climate: winds, fauna 2); 10:1–8 (flora 1 and 2, fauna 1, water, flora 2, landscape). Amos contains two passages of deportation with nature imagery: fauna 1: shepherd (Am 3:12); flora 1 (Am 9:8–10). Obadiah 3–7 presents one mixed metaphor (fauna 2: birds, flora 1). Micah contains one image of fauna 2: birds (Mic 1:13–16) and one mixed metaphor, 5:6–8 (involving climate 2, fauna 2 and 1, fauna 1: shepherd). Nahum contains one, fauna 1: shepherd (3:18–19). And there is one passage with mixed metaphors in Zech 7:8–14 (climate: winds and landscape). The book of Isaiah, divided by its major segments, shows the following distribution of references to restoration: Isaiah 1–39 contains one passage with fauna 1: shepherd (Isa 11:12) and one passage with mixed metaphors, Isa 30:22–24 (flora 1: shepherd, fauna 1). Isaiah 24–27 present one passage of mixed metaphors, Isa 27:12–13 (flora 1 and fauna 1: shepherd). In Isaiah 34–35 one passage of mixed metaphors is found, Isa 35:1–9 (landscape, flora 2, landscape, fauna 2, water, fauna 2). Isaiah 40–66 present twelve passages about restoration that use nature imagery: three fauna 1: shepherd (Isa 40:9–11; 52:11–12; 58:8), two flora (Isa 60:21–22; 62:8–9), four water (43:1–7; 44:22–28; 48:17–19; 48:20–22), and three landscape (51:1–3; 60:1–4; 60:18–20). Fifteen passages in Isaiah 40–66 use mixed metaphors: Isa 41:14–16 (flora 1, landscape, climate: winds); 41:17–20 (water sources, flora 2); 42:14–17 (landscape, water); 43:16–21 (water, landscape, flora 2, fauna 2, water); 44:1–5 (water, flora 2); 44:21–23 (landscape, flora 2); 45:1–8 (climate, flora 1 and 2); 49:8–13 (fauna 1: shepherd, water, landscape); 50:1–3 (water, fauna 2: fish, landscape, climate); 51:12–16 (landscape, water); 55:12–13 (fauna 1: shepherd, landscape, flora 2); 58:9b–12 (fauna 1, water); 60:5–17 (water [implicit], fauna 1 and 2, flora 2, landscape: sources); 65:8–10 (flora 1, fauna 1: shepherd); 65:17–25 (flora 1, fauna 1: shepherd and 2). Jeremiah has twenty passages that use nature imagery to describe restoration: fauna 1: shepherd (Jer 16:14–15; 23:1–4; 29:14; 30:10–11 // 46:27–28; 32:37; 40:12; 43:5; 50:8–10; 50:17–20), flora 1 (18:7, 9; 24:6; 31:2–6; 31:27–30; 31:38–40; 32:36–41; 42:10–17; 40:10–12), and landscape (31:35–37 [cosmic orders]; 34:42–44; 33:10). Five restoration passages in Jeremiah use mixed metaphors of nature: Jer 24:1–10 (fauna 1: shepherd, flora 1); 31:7–9 (fauna 1: shepherd, water); 31:10–14 (flora 1, fauna 1: shepherd, water); 31:23–25 (flora 1, fauna 1: shepherd, water); 33:12–13 (landscape, fauna 1: shepherd). Ezekiel contains two restoration passages that use nature imagery of fauna 1: shepherd (Ezek 34; 36:37–38) and four passages with mixed metaphors: Ezek 17:22–24 (fauna 2, flora 2, landscape); 29:1–16 (fauna 1, flora 1, landscape); 36:1–15 (landscape, flora 1); 36:22–32 (landscape, flora 1). The Twelve includes one passage which uses nature imagery for restoration in Hosea of fauna 2 (Hos 11:8–11), one in Amos of flora 1 (Am 9:11–15), two in Micah of fauna 1: shepherd (Mic 2:12–13; 4:6–7), one in Zephaniah of fauna 1: shepherd (Zeph 3:16–20), and two in Zechariah of flora 1 (Zech 8:11–13) and fauna 1 (Zech 9:9–10); and two with mixed metaphors: Zech 9:11–17 (water, fauna 1: shepherd, flora 1) and 10:8–10 (fauna 1, flora 1, landscape, water).

Trees and Traumas On the Use of Phytomorphic Metaphors in Prophetic Descriptions of Deportation and Exile Göran Eidevall 1. Introduction Several prophetic passages in the Hebrew Bible employ plant metaphors in descriptions of deportations, life in exile, or return from exile. The aim of this article is not to give a comprehensive overview of the use of phytomorphic (that is, plant-related) imagery in the prophetic literature. Rather, I intend to explore some metaphorical and rhetorical mechanisms at work, and to answer the question: What factors contribute to making imagery related to the conceptual metaphor people are plants suitable as a means of expressing traumatic experiences of forced migration and exile? To this end, I have selected a number of passages from four prophetic books: Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Hosea, and Amos. While the examples from Jeremiah and Ezekiel use plant metaphors in the context of migration and exile, the passages from Hosea and Amos can be seen as counter-images, as they employ phytomorphic imagery in the construction of utopian visions of life in the land, after the return from exile.

2. People as Plants: On Phytomorphic Metaphors in the Hebrew Bible Plant imagery is a frequently attested phenomenon in the Hebrew Bible, with a rich variety of expressions and applications. 1 I suggest that this 1

For a helpful overview of plant imagery in the Hebrew Bible, see T. Frymer-Kensky, “The Planting of Man: A Study in Biblical Imagery,” in Love & Death in the Ancient Near East: Essays in Honor of Marvin H. Pope (ed. J. H. Marks and R. M. Good; Guilford: Four Quarters, 1987), 129–136. See also the articles “Flowers,” “Plants,” and “Tree, Trees,” in Dictionary of Biblical Imagery (ed. L. Ryken et al.; Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1998), 294–296, 649–651, 890–892. See further the discussion in J. Y. Jindo, Biblical Metaphor Reconsidered: A Cognitive Approach to Poetic Prophecy in Jeremiah 1–24 (HSM 64; Winona

218

Göran Eidevall

type of metaphor should be called ‘phytomorphic’ (in the form of a plant), by analogy with more established terminology, such as ‘anthropomorphic’ (in human form) and ‘theriomorphic’ (in the form of an animal). 2 As a rule, books and articles dealing with metaphors in the Hebrew Bible employ the two last mentioned terms, sometimes supplemented by ‘physiomorphic,’ denoting various types of metaphors where the vehicle or source domain is related to nature, in a broad sense. 3 Hence, the term ‘phytomorphic’ can be said to describe a subcategory within physiomorphic metaphors. Why introduce yet another term? My primary aim is to bring a somewhat neglected feature to the forefront, namely the prominent role of plant-related imagery in the prophetic literature. One major reason why the phytomorphic category has not received as much attention as anthropomorphic or theriomorphic metaphors is that much biblical research has focused on representations of the divine. The God of Israel is, with one notable exception (Hos 14:9 [Eng. 14:8], which will be discussed below), never portrayed as a plant. This is, I suggest, due to the conscious efforts of the biblical authors and editors to dissociate YHWH from notions of vulnerability or perishability (cf. Isa 40:6–8). 4 The picture is, however, very different within biblical anthropology. Human beings are often likened to various kinds of plants or parts of plants: flowers, trees, or grain. The use of phytomorphic imagery is particularly profuse in the poetic parts of the Hebrew Bible. 5 In many cases, it is Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2010), 151–247. Jindo focuses especially (but not exclusively) on the use of plant imagery in the book of Jeremiah. For a survey of recent research, see J. M. Pantoja, The Metaphor of the Divine as Planter of the People: Stinking Grapes or Pleasant Planting? (BibInt 155; Leiden: Brill, 2017), 20–22. 2 To the best of my knowledge, the term ‘phytomorphic’ has not been deployed in any previous works on biblical metaphors. It does, however, occur in a study of rabbinical literature: D. Stern, Parables in Midrash: Narrative and Exegesis in Rabbinic Literature (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1991), 5: “A fable utilizes anthropomorphic animals or plants to portray the particularly theriomorphic or phytomorphic features of human behavior.” 3 The usefulness of such a tripartite division (anthropomorphic – theriomorphic – physiomorphic) in the study of biblical metaphors has been clearly demonstrated by M. Korpel, A Rift in the Clouds: Ugaritic and Hebrew Descriptions of the Divine (Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1990). See also M. S. Smith, Where the Gods Are: Spatial Dimensions of Anthropomorphism in the Biblical World (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2016). 4 This hypothesis finds support in the observations made by Korpel, Rift in the Clouds, 621–626, in the context of a comparison between Ugaritic and biblical portrayals of the divine. 5 According to an estimation cited by M. Weiss, The Bible from Within: The Method of Total Interpretation (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1984), 135, the Hebrew Bible contains roughly 250 instances of plant metaphors.

Trees and Traumas

219

possible to relate the expressions used to a central conceptual metaphor: people are plants. 6 Analogies between human beings and trees or flowers are easily constructed. This is due to the cross-cultural notion that human existence can be understood as a process of gradual growth. In this fundamental respect, men and women would seem to resemble trees and flowers. In the Hebrew language, further aspects of such a metaphorical analogy are added by the fact that several lexemes can be used about both plants and human beings. For instance, ‫( זרע‬zrʿ) can refer to either seed and grain or male semen, and ‫( פרי‬pry) may denote both tree fruit and human offspring. 7 It is in fact possible to outline the entire lifespan, or life cycle, of a man or woman with the help of phytomorphic imagery. 8 At first, the human plant is sown. Then it begins to grow and thrive. It may produce fruit (that is, children and /or various results of human labour), but in the end it must wither and disappear. A few well-known quotations from biblical poetry may suffice to illustrate this. 9 If we combine them in the following sequence, we get the outline of a story of a man’s entire life, from cradle to grave, consistently based upon a metaphorical concept, according to which a human being is like a plant: 10 “He grew up (‫ )ויעל‬before him like a tender shoot (‫)כיונק‬, and like a root (‫)וכשרש‬ out of dry ground” (Isa 53:2) “He is like a tree (‫ )כעץ‬planted by streams of water, which yields its fruit (‫ )פריו‬in season and whose leaf (‫ )ועלהו‬does not wither. Whatever he does prospers.” (Ps 1:3) “To your offspring (‫ )לזרעך‬I will give this land.” (Gen 12:7) “Your wife will be like a fruitful vine (‫ )פריה כגפן‬within your house; your sons will be like olive shoots (‫ )זיתים כשתלי‬around your table.” (Ps 128:3) “As for man, his days are like grass (‫)כחציר‬, he flourishes like a flower (‫ )כציץ‬of the field; the wind blows over it and it is gone, and its place remembers it no more.” (Ps 103:15) 6

See the sketchy but nonetheless pioneering study of A. Basson, “‘People are Plants:’ A Conceptual Metaphor in the Hebrew Bible,” OTE 19 (2006): 573–583. On the conceptual metaphor people are plants in a cognitive and cross-cultural perspective, see further G. Lakoff and M. Turner, More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1989), 6, 12–15, 41. 7 See further Frymer-Kensky, “Planting of Man,” 131. 8 This has been succinctly formulated by Lakoff and Turner, Cool Reason, 12: “A standard way of understanding and talking about the life cycle is in terms of a metaphor according to which people are plants or parts of plants and a human life corresponds to a plant’s life cycle.” 9 Additional examples have been listed by Basson, “People are Plants,” 577–581. 10 All five passages are cited from NIV.

220

Göran Eidevall

The examples cited above refer to individuals, but this type of metaphorical language can also be used about groups. Dynasties and nations are often depicted as trees. 11 While the present structure of a family or an entire nation may be conceived of as a trunk with many branches, roots usually stand for ancestry, and fruit for descendants. 12 According to the legend, the following words of hope were delivered by Isaiah in the midst of the Assyrian crisis: “The surviving remnant of Judah shall again take root downward, and bear fruit upward” (2 Kgs 19:30 = Isa 37:31; NRSV). Israel, that is, the Northern Kingdom, is typically pictured as a vine (see Ps 80:9–17 [Eng. 8–16], a passage alluding to the exodus tradition; Isa 5:7; Jer 2:21; 6:9; Hos 10:1). The vine metaphor is also used more generally about Israel /Judah as the people of YHWH. 13 It follows from these observations that plant metaphors may express experiences that are shared by many individuals within a collective, for instance a group of deportees. Yet one may ask: In what respect, if any, could such imagery provide a useful resource for depictions of forced migration and exile?

3. Phytomorphic Metaphors and Migration: Limitations and Possibilities The scribes who wrote the biblical texts seem to have had an urban outlook on life. 14 Nevertheless, it is a fact that the societies of ancient Israel and Judah depended heavily on agriculture. 15 The majority of the population took part in the production, or the distribution, of cereals, olives, and wine. It is therefore important to note that most plant metaphors in the Hebrew Bible can be linked to some agricultural activity. Hence, one 11 For an insightful discussion of tree metaphors in the Hebrew Bible, see K. Nielsen, “Der Baum in der Metaphorik des Alten Testaments,” in Das Kleid der Erde: Pflanzen in der Lebenswelt des alten Israel (ed. U. Neumann-Gorsolke and P. Riede; Stuttgart: Calwer, 2002), 114–131. Mention should also be made of Nielsen’s pioneering monograph dealing with tree imagery in Isaiah 1–39: K. Nielsen, There Is Hope for a Tree: The Tree Metaphor in Isaiah (JSOTSup 65; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1989). 12 See further Frymer-Kensky, “Planting of Man,” 132–134. 13 For a detailed study of the vine metaphor in the Hebrew Bible, and its relation to the metaphorical portrayal of YHWH as a wine-grower, see M. Pantoja, Metaphor of the Divine. 14 As argued in G. Eidevall, “Metaphorical Landscapes in the Psalms,” in Metaphors in the Psalms (ed. P. van Hecke and A. Labahn; BETL 231; Leuven: Peeters, 2010), 13–21, esp. 19–21. 15 See, e. g., M. Zohary, Plants of the Bible (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), 36.

Trees and Traumas

221

may reckon with a strong connection between the imagery used in the passages discussed in this article and the everyday life of the addressees of those passages. While this may facilitate the process of identification, there are also some factors that might complicate such a process. According to Max Black, a metaphor is (metaphorically!) like a filter, or a lens. 16 Whereas some features stand out perfectly clearly, others are hardly visible when we study a certain topic, or target domain, through a certain metaphorical lens. As demonstrated above, phytomorphic metaphors generally emphasize such aspects of life as development (growth) and productivity (fruit). At the same time, however, such imagery tends to portray human beings as utterly weak and helpless, just like flowers or bushes that depend on soil, water, and sunshine. In most of the prophetic passages discussed in the subsequent sections, the migrants (deportees or returnees) are assigned the role of patients (as opposed to agents), who are acted upon. In phytomorphic representations of human existence, moreover, the notion of stability is foregrounded. Conversely, the notion of mobility tends to be suppressed. With the exception of purely imaginary literary worlds, like those created in fairy tales and fantasy, trees and flowers cannot walk around. They may extend in various directions, and they may spread their seeds with the help of the wind, but the plants themselves are incapable of moving. Hence, phytomorphic metaphors are not at all apt in describing journeying individuals or groups. However, as I intend to demonstrate in the ensuing analysis, this inherent limitation in plant imagery holds a potential. The inability of phytomorphic language to represent mobility would primarily be an obstacle in descriptions of ordinary, more or less voluntary, journeys. It is an intriguing fact, however, that several prophetic texts deploy plant metaphors in depictions of involuntary migration. The restricted applicability of such imagery when it comes to mobility would seem to have been a key factor that made it especially useful as a means of expressing painful experiences related to deportations. If humans are like plants thriving in their soil, the process of being forced to leave home and go into exile stands out as something outrageous. The event described appears to be completely unnatural.

16 M. Black, Models and Metaphors (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1962), 39–45. In a similar vein, Lakoff and Turner, Cool Reason, 39, make the remark that “any metaphor highlights some aspects of an event and hides others.”

222

Göran Eidevall

One may add the observation that trees, flowers, and other plants differ from most animals and human beings in yet another fundamental respect: They are silent. They cannot produce any sounds (of warning, pain, or mourning) when they are threatened or damaged. This implicit inability to cry out might arguably add a further dimension to those prophetic passages which use phytomorphic (rather than theriomorphic) language in depictions of deportations.

4. Deportation Described in Terms of Uprooting Several texts in the Hebrew Bible speak of the dramatic and traumatic experiences associated with forced migration in terms of being “uprooted.” 17 As a rule the verb used is ‫( נתשׁ‬ntš), which denotes the act of plucking a plant, by pulling it up from its soil, with roots and all. In many cases deportees from Israel or Judah are metaphorically depicted as uprooted plants. It is important to note that such imagery tends to portray the human deportees as victims, not as agents. But whereas the humans are pictured as helpless plants, the deity or some other agent is depicted as a farmer or wine-grower, who is capable of transporting plants from one place to another. In several cases it is explicitly stated that the one who has plucked them up (or, will pluck them up) is YHWH himself, their patron deity. Plants that are removed from the soil cannot survive. Within the framework of covenant ideology, this type of imagery is sometimes used as a way of underlining the destructive dimension of the deity’s punitive actions. According to Deut 29:27, YHWH “uprooted” (‫ )נתשׁ‬his own people in anger, removed them from their land, and finally left them lying on the ground in a foreign country. Such a depiction leaves little room for hope. The same goes for Abijah’s prophecy in 1 Kgs 14:15, which proclaims that YHWH will scatter the uprooted plants to distant regions,

17 This particular use of the term ‫“( נתשׁ‬uproot”) would seem to be part of a deuteronomistically inspired phraseology. Thus, e. g., S. Herrmann, Die prophetischen Heilserwartungen im Alten Testament: Ursprung und Gestaltwandel (BWANT 85; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1965), 162–169. For a different opinion, see H. Weippert, Die Prosareden des Jeremiabuches (BZAW 132; Berlin: De Gruyter, 1973), 191–202. This metaphorical expression occurs most frequently in the book of Jeremiah: 1:10; 12:14–17; 18:7; 24:6; 31:28; 42:10; 45:4. The remaining attestations are found in Deuteronomy (29:27; a reference to the deportations from Judah in the 590s and 580s), 1 Kings (14:15; referring to the deportations from the Northern Kingdom in the 730s and 720s), Ezekiel (19:12), and Amos (9:15).

Trees and Traumas

223

“beyond the Euphrates.” In these texts, the act of dispersion seems to imply death. However, a closer look at the attestations of uprooting imagery in the prophetic literature shows that it is ambiguous. This is because it is possible to imagine more than one scenario as regards the fate of the uprooted plants. They could be thrown away (as in Deut 29:27). But alternatively, they might be planted somewhere else, and get a chance to adapt to a new environment. As a consequence, uprooting (and planting) metaphors may occur in both threats and promises. This will be demonstrated in the next section, where I discuss examples from the book of Jeremiah.

5. Uprooting and Planting in Jeremiah The rhetorical potential of this type of phytomorphic imagery, with its capacity to convey both hope and despair, is amply demonstrated in the book of Jeremiah. Notably, according to 1:10, Jeremiah received a calling to become a prophet “over nations and kingdoms,” with a mission to destroy and to “uproot” (‫)נתשׁ‬, but also to build and to “plant” (‫)נטע‬. 18 These formulations may of course stand for destruction and (re)construction in a general sense. In several other cases, however, the juxtaposed antonyms ‫( נתשׁ‬ntš; “uproot, tear up”) and ‫( נטע‬nt.ʿ; “plant”) undoubtedly occur in the specific context of forced migration. 19 In Jer 45:4 YHWH declares: “what I have planted I will uproot, that is, the whole land.” While uprooting evidently stands for deportation and exile, the motif of planting can, depending on the context, refer either to the pre-exilic past, or to return from exile and resettling. This is spelled out in more detail in Jer 18:7–10. Here YHWH, the divine farmer (who is portrayed as a potter in 18:5–6), explains that he might decide to uproot or plant any nation whatsoever, 18

The origin of these antonymic word pairs in Jer 1:10 and other passages in the book, and the relation between these passages, have been the subject of several studies. See, above all, S. M. Olyan, “‘To Uproot and to Pull Down, to Build and to Plant:’ Jer 1:10 and Its Earliest Interpreters,” in Hesed ve-emet: Studies in Honor of Ernest S. Frerichs (ed. J. Magness and S. Gitin; BJS 320; Atlanta: Scholars, 1998), 63–72. Cf. also R. Bach, “Bauen und Pflanzen,” in Studien zur Theologie der alttestamentlichen Überlieferungen (ed. R. Rendtorff and K. Koch; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1961), 7–32. 19 According to Jindo, Biblical Metaphor, 176, these “horticultural words,” which play such a prominent role in Jeremiah, can be linked to “the divine garden paradigm.” This seems to be a reasonable assumption. Arguably, though, such an interpretative focus needs to be supplemented by a perspective which regards uprooting and planting not merely as divine acts of gardening, but as expressions of human experiences.

224

Göran Eidevall

including Judah, adding that he is free to change his mind, should they change their ways. By contrast, some other passages in Jeremiah emphasize that Judah will not be treated exactly like the other nations. According to 12:14–17, both the people of Judah and the neighbouring peoples will be “plucked up” (‫)נתשׁ‬, that is, deported (v. 14), most likely to Babylon. 20 But after some time, all these peoples will be allowed to return to their homelands (v. 15). However, only Judah would seem to be given an unconditional promise. The other nations are exhorted to “learn the ways of my people,” which means: the worship of YHWH (v. 16). In case they fail to do so, they are threatened with permanent exile: “if they will not listen, then I will completely pluck up and destroy that nation” (Jer 12:17). As might have been expected, some depictions of return from exile tend to centre on the motif of planting, as the very opposite of being uprooted. In Jer 24:6, YHWH gives a promise to those who had been deported from Judah (represented by the good figs): “I will bring them back to this land; I will build them up and not tear them down; I will plant them, and not uproot them” (24:6, NIV). The similar promise in Jer 31:28 has been juxtaposed with another motif, which could be given a phytomorphic interpretation. In 31:27 YHWH declares that, in the future, he will “sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with the seed of humans and the seed of cattle” (v. 27). The nation, or its population, is pictured as a huge field where the divine farmer may sow seeds, and watch them grow together, into people as well as cattle. 21 With the exception of 31:27–28, the Jeremiah passages never elaborate on the metaphors of planting and uprooting. Due to the fact that the same word pair is repeated (often together with the word pair of building and destroying) the language looks formulaic. Any associations to actual experiences that such metaphors might evoke, for instance to traumatic memories of violence and humiliation during deportations, remain implicit. This changes somewhat, as we turn to the book of Ezekiel. 20 This reading of Jer 12:14, as referring to deportation from Judah as well as the other nations, has been advocated by, e. g., J. R. Lundbom, Jeremiah 1–20 (AB 21A; New York: Doubleday, 1999), 662, and G. Fischer, Jeremia 1–25 (HThKAT; Freiburg: Herder, 2005), 442. Others have argued that, in Judah’s case, “plucking up” actually stands for deliverance. So, e. g., L. Stulman, Jeremiah (AOTC; Nashville: Abingdon, 2005), 129. I find the latter interpretation unlikely, since it runs counter to the metaphorical use of ‫ נתשׁ‬elsewhere in Jeremiah (including the remainder of 12:14–17). 21 On this unusual metaphor and its likely background, see W. L. Holladay, Jeremiah 2 (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989), 196, and J. R. Lundbom, Jeremiah 21–36 (AB 21B; New York: Doubleday, 2004), 460.

Trees and Traumas

225

6. Exile as Transplantation: Examples from Ezekiel Sometimes uprooting may be followed by planting (that is, transplanting), but perhaps into a place offering poorer conditions for that particular plant. This theme is developed in a couple of passages in the book of Ezekiel. In Ezek 17:1–10, an allegorical narrative, two eagles, standing for Babylonia and Egypt, interact with trees of various kinds. 22 To begin with, Judah (or, the Davidic dynasty) is symbolized by a cedar. It is recounted that the Babylonian emperor broke off the top, that is, King Jehoiachin, and brought it to his own country (vv. 3–4). In the following section, Judah as a Babylonian vassal state, ruled by Zedekiah, is represented as a seed growing rapidly, because it is planted “in fertile soil” and “by abundant waters” (v. 5). 23 Somehow, this plant managed to develop from a willow (v. 5b) to a low-growing vine, which “produced roots and sent out branches” (17:6, NET). Apparently, however, the environment was not good enough. Yearning for more water, this small vine (standing for Zedekiah) suddenly began to extend its roots and its branches towards an eagle representing Egypt (v. 7). Here, interestingly, the vine is described as an agent with a will of its own. However, this plant with some traits of a person is held up as a warning example. In what follows, it is emphasized that the vine had indeed been planted into fertile soil with an abundance of water, and apparently with an adequate chance “to grow branches, bear fruit, and become a beautiful vine” (v. 8, NET). 24 In this way, the diplomatic efforts to form an alliance with Egypt are criticized as an unwarranted and futile attempt to attain a higher level of national prosperity. 25 The concluding comments that have been appended to this allegorical narrative have the form of a series of questions, posed by YHWH (vv. 9–10). These rhetorical questions convey the message that the people, represented by the vine, will have to face punishment in the form of deportations. Developing the phy22 For a fairly similar interpretation of this allegory as the one outlined here, but with more details, see D. I. Block, The Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 1–24 (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 522–533, or W. Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1: A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel, Chapters 1–24 (trans. R. E. Clements; Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979), 360–363. 23 The motif of a tree planted by water seems to have been a conventional metaphor for a good life characterized by stability and prosperity. See Job 29:19; Ps 1:3; and Jer 17:8. 24 In the words of P. Joyce, Ezekiel: A Commentary (LHBOTS 482; New York and London: T & T Clark, 2009), 136, “matters should have progressed well.” 25 With, e. g., Block, Ezekiel: Chapters 1–24, 531–532.

226

Göran Eidevall

tomorphic imagery further, the passage 17:9–10 depicts deportation and exile in terms of hazardous transplantation and subsequent withering: 26 9

“Will it prosper? Will he not rip out (‫ )נתק‬its roots and cause its fruit to rot and wither? All its foliage will wither. No strong arm or large army will be needed to pull it out by its roots. 10 Consider! It is planted (‫)שׁתל‬, but will it prosper? Will it not wither completely when the east wind blows on it? Will it not wither in the soil where it sprouted?”

Similar imagery appears in Ezekiel 19:10–14. In this extended simile, too, the nation of Judah (or, more specifically, the Davidic dynasty) is portrayed as a vine. At first it was “planted (‫ )שׁתל‬by water, fruitful and full of branches” (v. 10). Leaving realism behind, this text describes the vine as reaching up into the clouds (v. 11). This is likely a metaphor for hubris. 27 Such a supposition would help to explain what happened next. All of a sudden, the vine was “plucked up” (‫ )נתשׁ‬by someone (presumably YHWH), in a fit of anger (v. 12). Now, the story does not end there. The reader is told that the vine has been transplanted, but this time into a desert-like area, “a dry and thirsty land” (v. 13). And things get even worse. In the final scene of this elaborated simile, the vine is consumed by fire (v. 14). In both of these passages from Ezekiel, an interestingly ambiguous motif has been added to the relatively conventional depiction of forced migration as pulling up a plant by its roots. The event of going into exile is described in terms of transplantation into a dry land (17:10; 19:13). In other words, life in exile is pictured as a state of limited resources and few possibilities. According to Ezekiel 17 and 19, a deportee, far from home, is like a plant in a dry and infertile land, in the process of wilting. Possibly, however, this sorry plant could thrive again, if it were to be transplanted once more, into a well-watered area. As shown by the following examples, from the books of Amos and Hosea, phytomorphic language also occurs in hopeful visions of life in a restored homeland.

7. Planted Planters: A Utopia for Returnees (Amos 9:13–15) In the final part of this article I shall examine the use of agricultural metaphors in two utopian prophecies, Amos 9:13–15 and Hos 14:6–9 (Eng. vv. 5–8). In both cases, one may speak of a happy ending, which has 26 27

Translation quoted from NET. Thus also Block, Ezekiel: Chapters 1–24, 609, and Joyce, Ezekiel, 148.

Trees and Traumas

227

been appended to a lengthy series of accusations and threats, including predictions of deportations and exile (Hos 9:3, 6; Amos 4:3; 6:7). According to both passages, deportees from Israel or Judah (or their descendants) will return from exile to a land of unprecedented prosperity. The hopeful epilogue of the book of Amos comprises 9:11–15. However, for the purpose of this study it suffices to focus on verses 13–15: 28 13

Yes, days are coming, says YHWH, when the plowman will catch up with the reaper, and the one who treads grapes will catch up with the planter, when the mountains will drip grape juice, and all the hills will flow. 14 I will restore the fortunes of my people Israel: They shall rebuild deserted cities and inhabit them, they shall plant vineyards and drink their wine, they shall grow gardens and eat their fruit. 15 I will plant them on their own land, and they shall never again be uprooted from the land that I have given them, says YHWH your God.

Several of the agricultural motifs in this prophecy constitute reversals of passages in previous parts of the book of Amos. 29 Notably, the deity’s promise in 9:14a, ‫ת־שׁבוּת ַע ִמּי‬ ְ ‫ְשׁ ְב ִתּי ֶא‬ ַ ‫ו‬, here rendered by “I will restore the fortunes of my people Israel,” can be translated in more than one way. James Linville has suggested “I will reverse the reversals of my people Israel.” 30 One may add that the expression ‫( שׁבות שׁוב‬šûb š˘ebût) almost inevitably evokes the notion of return from exile. According to 9:13, the land awaiting the homecoming Israelites (that is, in all likelihood, the Judahites returning from dispersion) has become exceptionally fertile, with the capacity to produce multiple harvests each year. As a result, the seasons will overlap, and “the plowman will catch up with the reaper.” This vision stands in contrast to the catalogue of disasters in Amos 4:6–11, an account of recurring famine and thirst due to failed harvests (caused by mildew or by locust invasions) and severe drought. 31 This enumeration of calamities is interspersed with a refrain: “Yet you did not return to me, says YHWH” (Amos 4:6, 8, 9, 10, 11). The underlying idea appears to be that such disasters, conceived of as 28 All translations of passages from the book of Amos are cited from G. Eidevall, Amos: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 24G; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017), 79–88. 29 For the following, see also Eidevall, Amos, 241–243. 30 J. Linville, Amos and the Cosmic Imagination (SOTSMS; Burlington: Ashgate, 2008), 171. 31 See further Eidevall, Amos, 143–147.

228

Göran Eidevall

punishments decreed by the deity, could have a didactic function. In the book’s hopeful epilogue, 9:13–15, the perspective is markedly different. No warnings or threats are pronounced. Didactic punishments have been replaced with lavish gifts. Another reversal concerns the possibility of consuming what the land produces. In Amos 5:11, divine judgment over those who exploit the poor is pronounced by means of a traditional curse, implying imminent deportations: “You have built houses of hewn stone but you shall not live in them. You have planted pleasant vineyards but you shall not drink their wine.” In the book’s concluding vision of restoration, the curse has been inverted and the threat transformed into a promise. The returnees, the reader is told, will indeed be allowed to inhabit the houses that they have (re)built, and enjoy the wine from the vineyards that they have planted (9:14). Still, such depictions may not seem altogether reassuring, as long as history is understood as a perpetual chain of reversals. Therefore the final words of this vision, and of the book of Amos, emphasize the notion of permanence: “I will plant (‫ )נטע‬them on their own land, and they shall never again be uprooted (‫ )נתשׁ‬from the land that I have given them, says YHWH your God” (9:15). The phytomorphic motifs of planting and uprooting recall several passages in Jeremiah. But within the immediate literary context of Amos 9:13–15 a paradox arises. In 9:14 the returnees are described, quite literally, as planters of both vineyards and gardens. The metaphor in v. 15 brings about an unexpected metonymic shift: the planters themselves are now about to be planted. The farmers will become (like) grain on the fields, or perhaps (like) a majestic tree. We are not told what kind of plant the author has in mind; the main point of the metaphor is conveyed by the phrase “they shall never again be uprooted.” In this text, then, the phytomorphic language is designed to evoke an image of utter stability, a world where forced migration supposedly cannot take place. Yet the very formulation of this promise contains an indirect reference to memories of deportations.

Trees and Traumas

229

8. Trees Feeding on Trees: Introducing Reciprocity (Hos 14:6–9) The concluding vision of the book of Hosea, in chapter 14, features a number of conspicuous reversals and transformations. In addition, it contains a couple of unique and bold physiomorphic representations of YHWH. For the purposes of the present study the most interesting passage comprises 14:6–9 (Eng. vv. 5–8): 32 6

I will be like the dew to Israel. He will blossom like the lily. He will strike root, like (a tree in) Lebanon; 7 its /his shoots will spread, its /his splendor will be like (that of) the olive tree, and its /his fragrance will be like (that of) Lebanon. 8 They will return, as dwellers in its /his shade, they will grow (or: revive) grain. They will blossom like the vine, and its fame (will be) like the wine from Lebanon. 9 Ephraim, what have I to do with the idols any more? I, I answer him and watch over him. I am like a luxuriant fir tree, from me your fruit is found.

In v. 6aα YHWH says, “I will be like the dew (‫ )כטל‬to Israel.” The reader is reminded of previous utterances where dew metaphors are applied on YHWH’s people. Their “faithfulness” (‫ )חסד‬is said to be “like a morning cloud and like the dew that goes away early” (6:4), and it is stated as a threat that they themselves will become “like the dew that goes away early” (13:3). Clearly, the transitory and, so to speak, unreliable character of the morning mist is underlined in these passages. Against that background the metaphor in Hos 14:6 can be described in terms of transformation, since it associates the dew with divine faithfulness and permanence. 33 This reversal is brought about by a distinct emphasis on a completely different aspect of the dew, namely its importance to vegetation in Palestine, as a reliable source of moisture during the dry season. 34 The effects of the dew-like life-sustaining acts of YHWH are specified in the remainder of vv. 6–8 (Eng. vv. 5–7). It is said that Israel, personified and, at the same time, described in phytomorphic terms, will “blossom like the lily” (v. 6aβ), and that “its splendor will be like the olive tree” (v. 7a), with “a fragrance like (that of) Lebanon (v. 7b).” Furthermore, the people will “blossom like a vine” (v. 8a), and “its fame will be like (that 32

The author’s translation. With F. Landy, Hosea (2nd ed.; Sheffield: Phoenix, 2011), 203. 34 See further B. Oestreich, Metaphors and Similes for Yahweh in Hosea 14:2–9 (1–8) (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1998), 157–159. On another level, as noted by Landy, Hosea, 203, “the droplets of dew which initiate the process of fertility suggest male sexuality.” 33

230

Göran Eidevall

of) Lebanon” (v. 8b). The image of a flourishing garden is evoked, and “like Lebanon” is repeated as a refrain (vv. 6b, 7b, 8b). A detailed analysis of this passage, with its paradisiac connotations and its wide intertextual resonances (including links to passages in the Song of Songs), would exceed the scope of this article. 35 I shall only mention a few interesting observations. Firstly, in this particular instance of the conceptual metaphor people are plants, nothing is said about being planted or uprooted. The focus is on growth, both literally and metaphorically – a process of growth without any definite beginning or end. Interestingly, a more realistic perspective breaks through in the midst of the utopian imagery, in v. 8a: “They will return, as dwellers in its /his shade, they will grow grain.” This implies that the vision concerns people returning from exile. Apparently, the author has the idea that the returnees are going to live as farmers. 36 But in order to underline the stability and prosperity of their future existence, s /he pictures them as various kinds of plants. Secondly, in Hos 14:6–9 the role assigned to the deity is not that of a farmer. The relationship between the people and their God is not construed according to a hierarchical scheme. 37 There is not a sharp opposition between an active party and a passive one, between farmer and plant. I suggest that the relation between dew and vegetation is best described in terms of mutual interaction or symbiosis. Thirdly, Hos 14:6–9 is a vision of a paradoxical paradise. Plants begin to behave in unexpected ways, almost like humans. In v. 9b YHWH declares, “I am like a luxuriant fir tree, from me comes your fruit.” This is the only place in the Hebrew Bible where YHWH is likened to a tree. But what kind of tree? An evergreen tree with edible fruits? 38 Clearly this is an imaginary tree, a perfect one, like the tree of life in the garden of Eden. 39 The emphasis lies on its capacity to provide fruit for 35 For a brief discussion of links between Hosea 14 and the Song of Songs, see Landy, Hosea, 201–203. For a discussion of all the plant imagery involved in this passage, see G. Eidevall, Grapes in the Desert: Metaphors, Models, and Themes in Hosea 4–14 (ConBOT 43; Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1996), 213–220. See also J. A. Dearman, The Book of Hosea (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), 341–344. A detailed analysis of, in particular, the dew metaphor in v. 6 and the tree metaphor in v. 9, with plenty of background information, is provided by Oestreich, Metaphors, 157–234. 36 See further Eidevall, Grapes, 216–217, 222. 37 This theme is developed further in Eidevall, Grapes, 221–222, 232–233. 38 For an extensive discussion of proposed identifications, translations, and backgrounds, see Oestreich, Metaphors, 192–222. 39 See further Eidevall, Grapes, 219, 244–246. See also Eidevall, “Metaphorical Landscapes,” 14.

Trees and Traumas

231

the addressee, that is, for Ephraim, the Israelites. Earlier in this passage, however, tree metaphors are applied to the people: First, the returning Israelites are depicted as an impressive olive tree (v. 7). In the next scene, they appear to be sitting under a tree: “in its /his shade” (v. 8aα). Then the perspective switches again. The returnees are represented as a fruitful vine (v. 8aγ+b). Finally, they are invited to “find” their fruit, that is, to pluck it, from a luxuriant tree that represents YHWH. This kaleidoscopic sequence of constantly changing motifs creates some strange images: of one tree sitting under another tree, or of one tree feeding another tree with its fruits. I suggest that these incongruities are connected to a bold attempt to depict human-divine reciprocity, without involving any explicit anthropomorphic portrait of the deity. Lastly, Hos 14:6–9 says nothing about deportation or exile. As already mentioned, the motif of return from exile surfaces in v. 8a, at least implicitly: “They will return, (as) dwellers in its /his shade, they will grow grain.” Arguably, this prophecy needs to be read against the backdrop of the massive deportations from Samaria around 720 BCE (and possibly the deportations from Jerusalem in the 590s and 580s, as well). Yet forced migration is a non-topic in this text. One looks in vain for a formulation referring to the traumatic experiences of the past (cf. the discussion of Amos 9:15 above). Hos 14:6–9 seems to envision a blissful life in a garden of forgetfulness.

232

Göran Eidevall

9. Concluding Reflections In the prophetic texts discussed in this article phytomorphic metaphors are employed in descriptions of forced migration, life in exile, and return from exile. Generally speaking, the imagery would seem to be based on the following presuppositions: The deity is the farmer (agent), and the nation /individual is the plant (patient). This leaves little room for human initiative. In several passages in Jeremiah, groups of deportees are depicted as uprooted plants, that is, as victims. As a rule, however, the language used does not place any emphasis on their traumatic experiences. In a couple of passages in Ezekiel, life in exile is likened to the threatened existence of a tree that has been transplanted into an arid region. In the context of visions of life after the return from exile, phytomorphic imagery may instead convey a dream of security and prosperity, as shown by Amos 9:13–15 and Hosea 14:6–9. In one important respect the Hosea passage stands out as unique: Both YHWH and the people are depicted as trees. As a consequence, the notion of reciprocity in the human-divine relationship is foregrounded.

Images of Northern Exile The Deportations from the Kingdom of Israel in the Prophets Cian Power 1. Introduction The status of Judah’s Babylonian exile as the Hebrew Bible’s gôl¯ah par excellence was not a foregone conclusion. Another, earlier exile had comparably dramatic consequences – the Neo-Assyrian deportations from the “Northern” Kingdom of Israel in the late eighth century BCE. There is significant asymmetry in the biblical witnesses to these two exiles. Ezekiel, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah, and Esther describe life in the Judaean diaspora; but apart from the deuterocanonical book of Tobit, which follows a Naphtalite in Nineveh under King Shalmaneser of Assyria, we have no accounts of life in the “Israelian” exile. 1 And whereas we find references in EzraNehemiah and Zechariah to Judaeans that have returned from their exile, we have no texts that mention returned Israelians, apart from a lone priest sent back to Bethel by the king of Assyria (2 Kgs 17:25–28). 2 Yet this exile features prominently in the Hebrew Bible: the fall of Samaria is a major turning point in the Deuteronomistic History, reflected on at length in 2 Kgs 17, and references to it occur throughout the prophetic literature. In this article I study references to the Israelian exile in the prophetic books, using themes drawn from biblical historiography as a framework. Such specific attention to the Israelian exile marks this article as a new contribution to discussions of exile in the Hebrew Bible generally and in prophetic literature in particular. 3 The questions I address are, What ex1 This exile has understandably been called the “Assyrian exile,” but this is potentially ambiguous, since Judaeans were also exiled by the Assyrians, as the Lachish reliefs from Sennacherib’s palace vividly attest. The term “Israelian” to refer to the Northern Kingdom is a coinage of H. Louis Ginsberg; see H. L. Ginsberg, The Israelian Heritage of Judaism (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1982). 2 The priest is tasked with putting an end to a series of lion attacks by teaching proper worship of Yahweh to the peoples newly resettled in Samaria. 3 This article takes the studies of Robert Carroll and David Petersen, which examine exilic themes in several prophetic books, as starting points; R. P. Carroll, “Deportation and Dias-

234

Cian Power

planations are offered for the Israelian exile? What images and metaphors are used to describe it? And what are its theological dimensions? During this investigation, I focus particularly on rhetoric, that is, on the kinds of prophetic arguments that are constructed around the Israelian exile. In so doing I hope to offer some explanation as to why the Israelian exile is repeatedly mentioned in a prophetic corpus which is overwhelmingly concerned with Judah.

2. Historical Considerations Although the literary analysis presented in this article is largely ahistorical, an outline of the historical circumstances of the Israelian exile, as they have been pieced together from archaeological findings, Assyrian records, and biblical descriptions, is relevant. Here I follow especially K. Lawson Younger’s reconstruction. 4 The depopulation of northern Palestine and the Transjordan, evident from archaeological excavations and survey data, 5 likely occurred in several waves. In his Levantine campaigns in 734–732 BCE, King Tiglath-Pileser III of Assyria conquered from the Kingdom of Israel the Galilee, Gilead, and the coastal plain. These territories may or may not have become Assyrian provinces at this time. These conquests involved significant deportations to Assyria – Tiglath-Pileser’s annals mention more than thirteen thousand deportees (Ann. 24.9´). No evidence indicates that these areas were deliberately resettled. The Kingdom of Israel was thus reduced to the region surrounding the capital city Samaria. Against this reduced state, Shalmaneser V may have campaigned (ca. 724). Finally Sargon II conquered Samaria ca. 722. Many were deported from the defeated city and its environs – over twenty-seven thousand, according to the Nimrud Prism – to sites at the centre and the peripheries of the Assyrian empire. These exiles may be the very “Samarians” mentioned in documents from various locations under Assyrian

poric Discourses in the Prophetic Literature,” in Exile: Old Testament, Jewish, and Christian Conceptions (ed. J. M. Scott; JSJSup 56; Leiden: Brill, 1997), 63–85; D. L. Petersen, “Prophetic Rhetoric and Exile,” in The Prophets Speak on Forced Migration (ed. M. J. Boda, F. R. Ames, J. Ahn, and M. Leuchter; AIL 21; Atlanta: SBL, 2015), 9–18. 4 K. L. Younger, Jr., “The Deportations of the Israelites,” JBL 117 (1998): 201–227; idem, “The Fall of Samaria in Light of Recent Research,” CBQ 61 (1999): 461–482. 5 See N. Na’aman, “Population Changes in Palestine Following the Assyrian Deportations,” Tel Aviv 20 (1993): 104–124.

Images of Northern Exile

235

control in the eighth and seventh centuries. 6 Peoples from other regions conquered by Assyria were subsequently resettled in the new province of Samerina.

3. The Israelian Exile in Biblical Historiography An important set of intertexts to prophetic references to the Israelian exile are the presentations of that exile in the historiography of the Hebrew Bible, and an outline of these will be useful for my analysis in this article. In the books of Kings, reference is made to two rounds of Assyrian deportations from the Northern Kingdom. First, “in the days of King Pekah of Israel, King Tiglath-Pileser of Assyria came and captured Ijon, Abelbeth-maacah, Janoah, Kedesh, Hazor, Gilead, and Galilee, all the land of Naphtali; and he exiled them to Assyria” (2 Kgs 15:29). 7 This does not mark the end of the kingdom, however, which comes later with the defeat of Samaria: “In the ninth year of Hoshea [King of Israel] the king of Assyria captured Samaria and exiled Israel to Assyria [‫ָכד ֶמ ֶלְך ַאשּׁוּר ֶאת‬ ַ‫ל‬ ‫שּׁוּרה‬ ָ ‫ִשָׂר ֵאל ַא‬ ְ ‫]שׁ ְמרוֹן ַוֶיּגֶל ֶאת י‬. ֹ He settled them in Halah, on the Habor, the river of Gozan, and the cities of the Medes” (2 Kgs 17:6; similarly 2 Kgs 18:9–12). A long reflection on the fall of the kingdom follows, containing numerous overlapping claims which add up to a powerful, if mixed, argument explaining Israel’s end (2 Kgs 17:7–23). 8 I list a selection of these here, arranged in thematic categories, to enable a systematic analysis of the pictures painted by the prophetic books:

6 See S. Dalley, “Foreign Chariotry and Cavalry in the Armies of Tiglath-Pileser III and Sargon II,” Iraq 47 (1985): 31–48; G. Galil, “Israelite Exiles in Media: A New Look at ND 2443+,” VT 59 (2009): 71–79. 7 Unless otherwise stated, biblical citations in this article are to the MT. Translations are my own adaptations of the NRSV. 8 The evidently complex editorial history of 2 Kgs 17 is widely discussed; for a comprehensive analysis, see M. Brettler, “Ideology, History, and Theology in 2 Kings xvii 7–23,” VT 39 (1989): 268–282.

236

Cian Power

Cause C. Israel’s exile is a punishment enacted by Yahweh for its sins against him (see esp. vv. 7, 18) Status S.a. The exile is comprehensive (esp. v. 20) S.b. Yahweh rejects Israel through exile (v. 20) Spatiality /Location L.a. Israel is exiled from its land (v. 23) L.b. Israel is exiled from Yahweh’s presence ([‫מ ָפָּניו‬/‫ניו‬ ִ ָ ‫]מ ַעל ָפּ‬, ֵ vv. 18, 20, 23) L.c. Israel is exiled to Assyria (v. 6) L.d. Israel is exiled to various locations (v. 6) Agency A.a. The Assyrians (specifically, the Assyrian king) exile Israel (v. 6) A.b. Yahweh exiles Israel (vv. 18, 20, 23) Prophecy P.a. Yahweh warns Israel of its doom through prophecy (vv. 13, 23) P.b. Israel does not listen to Yahweh’s prophets (v. 14) Judah J.a. Judah is influenced by Israel’s sinful behaviour (v. 19)

A final reference to Israel’s fall in 2 Kgs occurs in the speech of the Rabshakeh at the walls of Jerusalem: “Has any of the gods of the nations ever delivered its land out of the hand of the king of Assyria? ... Have they delivered Samaria out of my hand?” (18:33–34). We may thus add the following item: A.c. The defeat of Israel features in the Assyrian king’s intimidating boasts

In the books of Chronicles, specific information is only given about one set of deportations from the north, which combines features of the two episodes in 2 Kgs (1 Chr 5:6, 26; cf. also 2 Chr 30:6).

4. The Israelian Exile in Biblical Prophecy Having isolated these various themes, I turn now to an analysis of images of the Israelian exile in biblical prophecy. However, a major methodological issue must first be addressed. How do we find the relevant references? The name ‫ִשָׂר ֵאל‬ ְ ‫י‬, “Israel,” which can refer to the Northern Kingdom, is

Images of Northern Exile

237

not always a sufficient indicator, since it can also refer to the entirety of Yahweh’s people. A more robust case that the Israelian exile is in view in some case can be made when one or more of the following are present: northern geographical terms, including Samaria and Bethel; terms with northern tribal valence, like Joseph, Ephraim, and Manasseh; and a clear differentiation from Judah. The historical setting apparently addressed in a given work is also relevant in interpreting references to Israel and exile. By these criteria the Israelian exile is most clearly represented in the books of Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Micah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, which I shall examine in approximate order of traditional scholarly dating. Other, less certain references are not addressed in this article. 9

4.1. Amos Several passages in the book of Amos clearly distinguish between the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, and claim that the primary focus of the prophet’s activity is the Kingdom of Israel (1:1; 2:4–6; 7:10–12). This aligns with the fact that the named targets of Amos’s critique are predominantly Israelian (e. g., Joseph and Bethel [5:6], Samaria [4:1]). I follow most scholars, then, in taking “Israel” in the work generally to refer to the Northern Kingdom, and in holding that the book was written with events of the mid-eighth century in mind. According to the book, the disasters that will befall Israel are Yahweh’s punishments for Israel’s many grave sins (e. g., 2:16; 3:14). This “theology of judgment,” as Paul Joyce has termed it, 10 is central to Amos. Thus the book clearly evinces theme C. Among the predictions made in the book, the threat of exile against Israel is found several times, often expressed through the verb ‫גלה‬, “to be exiled /deported.” Most commonly, specific candidates for exile are named: Yahweh “will carry away [‫ִשּׂא‬ ָ ‫ ”] ְונ‬the unjust women of Samaria (“the cows of Bashan,” 4:1–3); the lazy rich of Samaria and Zion will “be exiled at the head of the exiles [‫ִיגְלוּ ְבּרֹאשׁ‬ ‫”]גּלִים‬ ֹ (6:7); the sanctuary “Gilgal will certainly be exiled [‫ַה ִגּ ְלגָּל גָּלֹה‬ ‫( ”] ִי ְגלֶה‬5:5, with notable wordplay), as perhaps will the statues of the enigmatic astral deities (5:26); finally, the priest Amaziah of Bethel “shall die on unclean soil” (7:17). 11 The threat of exile is also made against the 9

E.g., Obad 18–20; Zech 10:6–10. See Paul Joyce’s contribution to the present volume. 11 Aram-Damascus (Amos 1:5) and high-ranking Ammonites (1:15) are also threated with exile. 10

238

Cian Power

nation as a whole, similar to item S.a. listed above: addressing the House of Israel, Yahweh declares “I will exile you [‫ֵיתי ֶא ְת ֶכם‬ ִ ‫ְה ְגל‬ ִ ‫( ”]ו‬5:27). Indeed, the prediction of Israel’s exile was apparently regarded as a central element in the prophecy of the figure associated with the book; the following prediction is quoted by Amaziah in a brief report of Amos’s oracles, and is reaffirmed by the literary character Amos: “Israel will certainly be exiled [‫ִשָׂר ֵאל גָּלֹה ִי ְגלֶה‬ ְ ‫( ”]י‬7:11, 17). 12 The possibility of exile is entertained for the last time in ch. 9: “if they go into captivity [‫שּׁ ִבי‬ ְ ‫]אם ֵילְכוּ ַב‬ ִ in front of their enemies ...” (v. 4). On the issue of agency, the human agents of the exile – called “a foe” (‫צר‬, ַ 3:11) and “a nation” (‫גּוֹי‬, 6:14) – are not identified, although Gaza is named as a polity that has previously exiled conquered peoples (1:6). Amos’s predictions of widespread exile may strongly recall the novel Neo-Assyrian practice of mass deportation, as Wolfgang Schütte and Jan Christian Gertz, among others, contend, but the identification (A.a. above) is not made explicitly in the text. 13 On the divine level, Amos is clear that Yahweh is the exiler (A.b.): “I will exile” [‫ֵיתי‬ ִ ‫ְה ְגל‬ ִ ‫( ]ו‬5:27); perhaps also in “I will shake [‫ִעוֹתי‬ ִ ‫ַהנ‬ ֲ ‫ ]ו‬the House of Israel” (9:9). In terms of place, two passages suggest a destination of exile towards the north, again consistent with, but not requiring, Assyria (cf. L.c.): “further than Damascus [‫שׂק‬ ֶ ‫ְד ָמּ‬ ַ‫ְאה ל‬ ָ ‫”]מ ָהל‬ ֵ (5:27) and “towards the harmôn” 12 This point is an adaptation of Petersen’s (“Prophetic Rhetoric,” 14) historical claim, made on the same basis: “this was a fundamental part of Amos’s message.” 13 W. Schütte, “Israels Exil in Juda und die Völkersprüche in Am 1–2,” Biblica 92 (2011): 528–553; J. C. Gertz, “Military Threat and the Concept of Exile in the Book of Amos,” in The Concept of the Exile in Ancient Israel and Its Historical Context (ed. E. Ben Zvi and C. Levin; BZAW 404; Berlin: De Gruyter, 2010), 11–26. Gertz has argued that the book of Amos’s earliest authors and editors “did not develop a concept of exile,” and that instead the book’s references to deportation treat the practice as (merely?) “a concomitant phenomenon of war” (“Military Threat,” 13). Here Gertz makes a sharp distinction between the English words “exile” and “deportation,” both expressed by a single Hebrew root ‫גלה‬. According to Gertz, a “developed” (20, 23) or “specific concept of exile” (21) is what we find in several biblical books that treat Judah’s Babylonian exile: exile is a divine punishment characterized by a near total deportation of the population, disrupting national institutions and signalling an end to a people’s history in its land (11). In general I agree with Gertz’s findings, but his approach differs from my own. Rather than starting with a concept of exile and searching for it in a particular biblical book, I attempt to use the various references in the prophetic books to reconstruct, from the bottom up, as it were, several understandings of the Israelian exile. This approach allows me to judge, for example, that Amos’s references to exile /deportation consist of a complex of related themes, which it is perhaps inappropriate to call “undeveloped.” It also permits me to identify particular elements of the Hebrew Bible’s various conceptions of exile /deportation that are present, absent, or implicit in Amos and other prophetic books, giving greater specificity to Gertz’s claims.

Images of Northern Exile

239

(4:3) (‫ה ַה ְרמוָֹנה‬, ַ perhaps equivalent to ‫ח ְרמוֹן‬, ֶ Mount Hermon). 14 A quite different image appears in the book’s final chapter, where numerous hypothetical “enemies [‫יהם‬ ֶ ‫ֹיב‬ ֵ ‫ ”]א‬are envisaged who take Israel captive to various locations “among all the nations [‫”]בָכל ַהגּוֹיִם‬ ְ (9:9). This resembles more closely L.d. above. Exile constitutes Israel leaving “its soil /land [‫”]א ְד ָמתוֹ‬ ַ (7:11, 17) – theme L.a. The book of Amos explicitly addresses the subject of prophecy. Yahweh appointed Amos to prophesy to Israel (7:15), which constitutes theme P.a. The claim that this prophetic message was rejected by at least some in Israel (P.b.) is expressed when Amaziah orders Amos to “never again prophesy at Bethel” (7:13). In addition to these themes familiar from biblical historiography, Amos displays a further concern: Yahweh’s relationship with Israel after its exile. This is mentioned in the final chapter of the work, in two modes. On the one hand, Israel in captivity is not beyond Yahweh’s justice – his “sword ... shall kill them” nonetheless (9:4). On the other, Israel’s restoration is described in a way suggestive of a return of exiles to their homeland: Yahweh will “plant Israel on their soil, and they will never again be uprooted off their soil [‫ָתשׁוּ עוֹד ֵמ ַעל ַא ְד ָמ ָתם‬ ְ ‫( ”]וְלֹא ִינּ‬9:15). As Göran Eidevall has argued, this verse relies on the “phytomorphic” metaphors “Israel is a plant” and “exile is uprooting.” 15 Especially in this, the book’s final chapter, which speaks of the “fallen booth of David” (9:12), a different historical horizon comes into focus. The restoration of this “Israel” apparently involves the restoration of Judah from its, much later, defeat. We may thus add the following category and item to our discussion: 16 Reversal R.a. Yahweh will reverse Israel’s exile

4.2. Hosea In the book of Hosea, as in Amos, several passages distinguish between Israel, often referred to as “Ephraim,” and Judah (e. g., 1:6–7; 4:15; 11:12). 14 For a discussion of possible interpretations of this difficult term, see S. Paul, Amos: A Commentary on the Book of Amos (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991), 104–105. 15 See G. Eidevall’s contribution to this volume. These metaphors may also underlie the specific wording of Amos 7:11, 17 where Israel is to be exiled ‫מ ַעל ַא ְד ָמתוֹ‬. ֵ 16 See the Appendix to this article for a full list of the themes relating to the Israelian exile arising from this discussion, with their attestations in the biblical prophetic books.

240

Cian Power

It is the Northern Kingdom and its institutions, apparently in the last decades of their existence, that are the primary focus of the book’s oracles. Specific language of exile /deportation (‫ )גלה‬and captivity (‫ )שׁבה‬is rare in Hosea; strictly speaking, only the calf statue of Beth-Aven (Bethel) “is exiled [‫ ”] ָגלָה‬and “conveyed to Assyria as tribute” (10:5–6). And although in other, metaphorical expressions referring to Israel’s doom, exile may be discernible (Israel has been swallowed [8:8]; Ephraim has died [13:1]; etc.), the clearest allusion to the exile of Israel itself is found in 9:3: “They shall not remain in Yahweh’s land. Ephraim shall return to Egypt and in Assyria they shall eat unclean [food].” In light of this, other passages that mention Ephraim going to Egypt or Assyria in the future probably refer to exile (8:13; 9:6; 11:5), and Israel ends up as “wanderers among the nations [‫”]נ ְד ִדים ַבּגּוֹיִם‬ ֹ (9:17; L.d.). Assyria – a location familiar from biblical historiography (L.c.) – and Egypt are ironic destinations, as fulfilments of Israel’s own desire: Israel had been visiting them to conduct diplomatic liaisons (5:13; 7:11; 12:1). In the context of Hosea’s references to Israel’s exodus from Egypt (2:15; 11:1; 12:13), talk of exile as a return to Egypt (‫ ;שׁוב‬8:13; 9:3; 11:5) suggests that exile reverses Yahweh’s earlier saving act. 17 In Hosea the role of the Assyrian king in Israel’s overthrow (A.a.) is explicitly mentioned (10:6; cf. 9:3). 18 This event is clearly explained through the theology of judgment (C.): “he will remember their iniquity, and punish their sins; they shall return to Egypt” (8:13). Nevertheless, Yahweh himself is not portrayed as an exiler (vs. A.b.), apart, perhaps, from in the image of Yahweh as a lion who will “carry off [‫שּׂא‬ ָ ‫”]א‬ ֶ his prey (5:14). Exile as a mark of Yahweh’s rejection of Israel (S.b.) is also clearly attested: “my God will reject them ... and they shall become wanderers ...” (9:17). This movement is a departure from “Yahweh’s land” (9:3; cf. L.b.). In making its criticisms of Israel, Hosea bears Judah in mind. The book expresses concern that Judah will follow Israel’s example, theme J.a.: “Ephraim stumbles in his guilt; Judah has also stumbled with them” (5:5; cf. 4:15). The treatment that Judah will receive for its disobedience also appears to match Israel’s in certain cases: “I will be like a lion to Ephraim, and like a young lion to the house of Judah” (5:14; cf. 10:11). 17 A similar pattern may be implicit in Amos with regard to the Aramaeans: they will be exiled to Kir (Amos 1:5), the place from which Yahweh originally brought them to their land (9:7). 18 For a thorough discussion of the problematic phrase ‫ָרב‬ ֵ‫( ֶמ ֶלְך י‬Hos 5:13; 10:6) and a novel solution, see H. D. Dewrell, “Yareb, Shalman, and the Date of the Book of Hosea,” CBQ 78 (2016): 413–429.

Images of Northern Exile

241

Hosea’s obscure references to prophets may make the claim P.a., that through prophecy Yahweh made known his intent to destroy Israel: “I have hewn by the prophets [‫יאים‬ ִ ‫ְב‬ ִ ‫]ח ַצ ְב ִתּי ַבּנּ‬ ָ ... and your condemnation goes forth as the light” (6:5; cf. 9:8; 12:10). Likewise, we seem to find theme P.b., that Israel rejected Yahweh’s prophets: “Israel cries: the prophet is a fool!” (9:9). Through references to Yahweh’s compassion, the book of Hosea expresses discomfort with the idea of Israel’s total destruction: “How can I hand you over Israel? How can I make you like Admah? ... My compassion becomes warm ... I will not again destroy Ephraim” (11:8–9). More clearly than in Amos, this provides an explanation for Yahweh’s promise of a definite reversal of the exile (R.a.): “They shall come trembling like birds from Egypt, and like doves from the land of Assyria. I will settle them in their homes” (11:11). From Hosea’s presentation of the exile, we may thus enumerate several new themes: L.e. Israel is exiled to Egypt R.b. The Israelian exile reverses the exodus from Egypt R.c. Yahweh has compassion for Israel

4.3. Isaiah References to the defeat and exile of Israel in the book of Isaiah, which are restricted to the “First Isaiah” (chs. 1–39), are somewhat difficult to isolate. In part this is because, as Reinhard Kratz has demonstrated, in Isaiah “the use of the name ‘Israel’ oscillates, meaning either the Northern Kingdom or the people of God from Israel and Judah.” 19 Certain of Isaiah’s oracles predict Israel’s downfall in the future (Isa 7:8, 17; 8:4; 28:2–3). Other passages look back on these events (10:9–11; 11:11–13). This difference in perspective has been considered relevant to the dating of Isaiah’s oracles to a period spanning the downfall of the Kingdom of Israel. 20 Although the book of Isaiah associates the Assyrians with the practice of ‫גלה‬, “exile,” following military defeat (20:4), the term itself is not applied directly to the downfall of Israel, which is expressed in other ways. In an oracle addressed to King Ahaz of Judah, who fears an alliance of Rezin 19

R. G. Kratz, “Israel in the Book of Isaiah,” JSOT 31 (2006): 103–128, 117. This kind of argumentation is discussed in H. G. M. Williamson, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 1–27 (3 vols.; ICC; London: T & T Clark, 2006–), 1:58–59. 20

242

Cian Power

of Aram-Damascus and Pekah of Israel, the character Isaiah prophesies that “the land whose two kings you dread will be abandoned [‫”]תּ ָעזֵב‬ ֵ (7:16). That this should happen through conquest by Assyria is suggested elsewhere: “the wealth of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria will be carried away [‫ִשּׂא‬ ָ ‫ ]י‬before the king of Assyria” (8:4). The king of Assyria is responsible (A.a.) and even boasts of his defeat of Samaria (A.c.): “What I have done to Samaria and her images shall I not do to Jerusalem and her idols?” (10:9–11). The comprehensiveness of Israel’s destruction (cf. S.a.) is apparently expressed through an image of destabilization of the people’s integrity: “within sixty-five years Ephraim will be too shattered to be a people [‫ֵחת ֶא ְפַריִם ֵמ ָעם‬ ַ ‫( ”]י‬7:8). The pairing of Assyria and Egypt as the destination of the exiles (L.c.; L.e.), familiar from Hosea, is also found in Isaiah (11:11; 27:12–13; perhaps also 19:18–25). The explanation for Israel’s defeat and implied exile is, once again, the theology of judgement (C.): Yahweh punished Israel with exile for its sins (e. g., 9:17). At least one oracle, however, appears to grapple with the shocking totality of this “punishment” from which not even the most vulnerable escape. The prophet’s firm belief in divine justice leads him to infer Israel’s complete depravity from its utter destruction: “For this reason the Lord will not have pity [‫ִשׂ ַמח‬ ְ ‫ ;לֹא י‬meaning uncertain] on their young people, or compassion on their orphans and widows; for everyone is godless and an evildoer, and every mouth speaks folly” (9:17). Discomfort with such total destruction may also motivate passages which speak of the restoration of Israelian territory (Zebulun, Naphtali, Galilee – 9:1) or of a return of Israelians (R.a.) from their dispersion among the nations (L.d.): “He will assemble the outcasts of Israel [‫נ ְִד ֵחי‬ ‫ִשָׂר ֵאל‬ ְ ‫]י‬, and gather the dispersed of Judah [‫ְהוּדה‬ ָ ‫ְפצוֹת י‬ ֻ ‫ ]נ‬from the four corners of the earth. The jealousy of Ephraim shall depart, the hostility of Judah shall be cut off” (Isa 11:11–13; cf. 27:12–13). 21 In this latter passage, Israel’s exile becomes associated with the exile of Judah (which Isaiah also forecasts; e. g., 6:11; 7:20), and this association is a feature of the rest of the prophetic books that I shall examine. In Isaiah, the association between exile and exodus seen in Hosea is applied to the return from exile – a common motif in Second Isaiah: “there shall be a highway from Assyria ... as there was for Israel when they came up from the land of Egypt” (11:16). The book of Isaiah addresses itself primarily to Judah and its institutions, in contrast to Amos and Hosea, but in common with the rest of the 21

These particular passages are discussed thoroughly by Frederik Poulsen in his contribution to this volume.

Images of Northern Exile

243

prophetic books I shall discuss. It is within this context that references to the defeat and exile of Israel occur, and they serve a variety of rhetorical goals, including reassuring Judah of its security (7:16; 8:4), and critiquing Assyrian imperial rhetoric (10:9–11). One passage (9:8–21) might be interpreted as a reflection on the fall of the Northern Kingdom per se, where we read of a cycle of rejection of prophetic warning (P.a, P.b.; vv. 9–10) and of admonitory punishment, a cycle that justifies Yahweh’s drastic final measures. We may articulate at least two new themes in Isaiah, then: J.b. Israel’s exile and Judah’s exile are associated R.d. Return from exile is a new exodus

4.4. Micah Micah’s oracles, like Isaiah’s, are orientated towards Judah but are keenly interested in the Northern Kingdom. Micah does not speak of the exile of the Israelians, and it is not possible to distinguish Israelians from Judaeans in the apparent reference to return from exile (“I will gather the survivors of Israel,” 2:12). However, the book does foretell the violent overthrow of Samaria as a punishment for its transgressions (cf. C.; 1:5–7). 22 Yahweh (or the prophet) laments this situation (1:8; cf. R.c.), especially because Judah has been influenced by Israel’s behaviour (J.a.): Samaria’s “wound is incurable. It has come to Judah ... to the gate of my people, Jerusalem” (1:9); “in [Zion] were found the transgressions of Israel” (1:13). This is expressed elsewhere by associating Judah with the most infamous Israelian dynasty: “you have kept the statutes of Omri and all the works of the house of Ahab, and you have followed their counsels. Therefore I will make you a desolation” (6:16). The apparent implication is that Judah is on course to be punished as Israel was punished (compare Hosea’s matching punishments for Israel and Judah). Judah must therefore pay attention to Israel’s fate to avoid its mistakes. We may thus add the following motifs: J.c. Israel’s punishment is a model for Judah’s J.d. Israel’s fate is a warning for Judah

Since Micah is the last book that I shall examine that places the destruction of Samaria in the future, it is pertinent at this point to make a canon-critical observation. In the wider context of the Hebrew Bible, 22

Assyria is named as a threat to Judah in Micah 5:5–6.

244

Cian Power

the prophetic books which predict Israel’s downfall in the future, namely, Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, and Micah, embody the notion that Israel was warned by Yahweh’s prophets before its destruction (P.a.). Furthermore, there can be no doubt that, for the compilers and editors of the prophetic books, the disaster that befell Israel, recorded in 2 Kgs 17, was precisely the one foretold by the prophets. Thus, P.b. can be inferred – Israel did not heed the prophetic warning. 23 Interpreted in light of these prophetic books, then, the fall of Israel vindicates the words of Yahweh’s prophets and testifies to his control over history.

4.5. Jeremiah The threatened and realized exile of Judah in the early sixth century BCE occupies a central position in the book of Jeremiah. As part of this discourse, the exile of Israel (“Israel” or “Ephraim” in the book), is mentioned on several occasions and is incorporated into the standard prophetic metaphor “Israel is Yahweh’s wife”: “for all the adulteries of Apostasy Israel, 24 I sent her away [‫יה‬ ָ ‫]שׁ ַלּ ְח ִתּ‬ ִ with a decree of divorce” (Jer 3:8). In this metaphor, Israel’s rejection by Yahweh through exile (S.b.) is expressed as divorce. The exile was complete (S.a.): “I cast out [‫כתּי‬ ִ ְ ‫שׁ ַל‬ ְ ‫]ה‬ ִ all your kinsmen, all the seed of Ephraim” (Jer 7:15). 25 The role of Assyria (A.a.), a lion that “devoured” [‫]אָכלוֹ‬ ֲ Israel (50:17), is only mentioned in the Oracles against Babylon (chs. 50–51), two chapters which stand out from the rest of the work in style and content. 26 More consistently it is Yahweh himself who is the literal or metaphorical exiler (A.b.; 3:8; 7:15; of Judah: 29:14; 30:11; etc.). Overall in Jeremiah, Israel’s specific sins receive less attention than in the prophets already discussed; one might say that the theology of judgment (C.) is asserted in Jeremiah’s prophetic rhetoric (e. g., 3:8) rather than argued for. In some passages, the exiles of Israel and Judah form a single diaspora (J.b.) from which a return (R.a.) is predicted: “The house of Judah shall join the house of Israel, and together they shall come from the land of the 23

This conviction may have played a role in the transmission and preservation of these works, even if not all the apparent predictions were fulfilled (e. g., the prediction of King Jeroboam II of Israel’s violent death in Amos 7:11). 24 ‫ִשָׂר ֵאל‬ ְ ‫שׁ ָבה י‬ ֻ ‫מ‬, ְ two nouns in apposition. 25 A contrasting picture emerges from the narrative portions of the book, which mention Yahweh-worshippers still living in former Israelian areas (41:9). 26 See, e. g., David Reimer’s pioneering study: D. Reimer, The Oracles against Babylon in Jeremiah 50–51: A Horror among the Nations (San Francisco: Mellen Research University Press, 1992).

Images of Northern Exile

245

north to the land that I gave your ancestors” (3:18; similarly 50:4). In other references to a return of Israel and Judah (e. g., 30:3), the distinct identity of a group of Israelian exiles is less pronounced. 27 Like Isaiah, Jeremiah associates return from exile with exodus (R.d.), going so far as to claim that the new event will replace the old in defining Israel’s relationship with Yahweh (16:14–15). In other passages, the restoration of Israel is in view without reference to Judah (3:11–14; 31:15–20; 50:19). Among these passages is the image of the northern matriarch Rachel weeping for her lost children (31:15–20; cf. Micah 1:16), which arouses pathos for the Northern Kingdom’s total destruction. 28 This passage points to Yahweh’s mercy and compassion (R.c.), and his special relationship with Israel, his “firstborn [‫”]בּכ ִֹרי‬ ְ and “dear son [‫ַקּיר לִי‬ ִ ‫”]בן י‬ ֵ (Jer 31:9, 20), to explain Yahweh’s promises to restore Israel (31:9, 20; cf. 3:12). Here we may even have an admission that the tone of references to Israel in Jeremiah’s prophecy is excessively negative: “As often as I [Yahweh] speak against him, I still remember him [‫ְכֶּרנּוּ‬ ְ ‫”]כּי ִמֵדּי ַד ְבּ ִרי בּוֹ ָזכֹר ֶאז‬ ִ (31:20). That is, despite the many condemnations, Yahweh has not abandoned Israel. Nevertheless, Jeremiah distinctively states that Israel’s restoration is premised on its repentance, prompted by its punishment: Ephraim pleads, “You disciplined me, and I took the discipline ... Bring me back ... For after I had turned away, I repented.” (31:18–19; cf. 3:11). Here, Israel’s exile is presented as an effective admonitory punishment, not the step taken after all hope for repentance had passed (in contrast to Isa 9:8–17). The relationship between Judah’s exile and Israel’s is presented as close and complex, most clearly in the extension of the marriage metaphor to include Judah as Israel’s sister: Treacherous Judah saw ... that for all the adulteries of Apostasy Israel, I had sent her away with a decree of divorce; yet her sister Treacherous Judah did not fear, but she too went and played the whore ... Apostasy Israel has shown herself less guilty than Treacherous Judah. (Jer 3:7–11)

That is, Judah was influenced to sin by Israel (J.a.), and should have learnt a lesson from Israel’s punishment (J.d.) but did not. Jeremiah distinctively 27 In fact, Carly Crouch has recently argued that the terms “Israel” and “Judah” in Jeremiah refer not to the northern and southern communities, but to two social groups within Judah and Jerusalem; C. Crouch, “‘Israel’ and ‘Judah’ in Jeremiah and Beyond” (paper presented at the SBL Annual Meeting, San Antonio, Texas, 19 November 2016). 28 The images of exile in this passage are analysed in depth by Martien A. Halvorson-Taylor in her article in this volume.

246

Cian Power

asserts that Judah’s sin is worse than Israel’s, perhaps because Judah had a historical lesson that Israel never did. 29 Finally, Israel’s exile is presented as a model for Judah’s punishment (J.c.) in the most explicit terms we have seen so far: “I will cast you [Judah] out of my sight, just as [‫שׁר‬ ֶ ‫]כּ ֲא‬ ַ I cast out all your kinsmen, all the seed of Ephraim” (Jer 7:15). 30 Regarding prophetic warning, Jeremiah repeatedly claims that Yahweh has sent “his servants the prophets” to warn his people in every era (e. g., 7:25; 25:4) – claims closely related to the Deuteronomistic statements about prophecy in the Northern Kingdom in 2 Kgs 17:13–14. However, we do not find the specific claim in Jeremiah that the Northern Kingdom was warned by prophets ahead of its destruction (P.a.), and the only reference to prophecy in Israel is to Samaria’s non-Yahwistic prophets (Jer 23:13). We may thus add: J.e. Judah failed to heed the warning of Israel’s fate J.f. Judah is more guilty than Israel

4.6. Ezekiel “Israel” in the book of Ezekiel, which is written from the perspective of a first-generation Judaean deportee to Babylonia, is the entire community of Yahweh, and the work shows only a minor interest in the Northern Kingdom (detected in references to “Samaria,” “Joseph,” and “Ephraim”). Nevertheless, the references to the fall and exile of the Kingdom of Israel that do occur are interesting and complex. Notably, the defeat of the Northern Kingdom forms part of the extended allegory in which Samaria, (“Oholah”) and Jerusalem (“Oholibah”) are sisters married to Yahweh: I delivered [Oholah] into the hands of her lovers, into the hands of the Assyrians, for whom she lusted. These uncovered [‫ ]גִּלּוּ‬her nakedness; they took [‫ָקחוּ‬ ָ ‫ ]ל‬her sons and her daughters; and they killed her with the sword [‫]הָרגוּ‬ ָ – she became a byword [‫]שׁם‬ ֵ among women. They executed judgment [‫פוּטים‬ ִ ‫]שׁ‬ ְ upon her. (Ezek 23:9–10)

These verses concisely express several themes common to references to the fall of the north so far discussed: Israel was defeated by the Assyrians (A.a.) as a punishment ordained by Yahweh (C.). The reference to the “taking” of Oholah’s children indicates the exile of the population, recalling Rachel’s lament (Jer 31). In addition, Anja Klein has argued that the use of the root ‫ גלה‬in this setting is a metaphor for exile as 29 30

Judah’s greater sin also /alternatively lies in its insincere repentance; Jer 3:10. Similarly, Assyria’s past punishment by Yahweh will be a model for Babylon’s; Jer 50:18.

Images of Northern Exile

247

uncovering nakedness. 31 Describing the conquest of Israel as its death recalls Hos 13:1. A passage that uses similar imagery is found in Ezek 16, where the sins of Jerusalem are compared with those of her sisters Sodom and Samaria (16:46–61). Here, Yahweh’s punishment of Samaria is presumed not described (e. g., v. 53), in contrast with Sodom’s, which Yahweh “removed” (‫ָא ִסיר‬ ָ ‫( )ו‬v. 50). This can be compared to other depictions of Yahweh as Judah’s exiler in Ezekiel (e. g., “I will scatter [‫ָרה‬ ֶ‫]אז‬,” ֱ 12:14; cf. A.b.). The restoration of the fallen north (cf. R.a.) in Ezekiel is mentioned clearly on two occasions. In one, Yahweh “will restore ... the fortunes [‫שׁ ִבית‬ ְ ... ‫ְשׁ ְב ִתּי‬ ַ ‫ו‬, ketiv] of Samaria and her daughters” (16:53) and subjugate Samaria to Jerusalem (16:61), without reference to a return of exiles. Elsewhere, Yahweh commands Ezekiel to perform a sign-act of uniting two sticks, representing the reunification of Israel (Joseph /Ephraim) and Judah (37:16–28). In Yahweh’s explanation of this sign-act, a return from exile is envisaged: “I will take the people of Israel from the nations among which they have gone ... and bring them to their own land” (37:21). Here, Israel’s and Judah’s exiles constitute a single diaspora (J.b.). In other passages, Ezekiel draws on a broad range of exodus traditions to express the return from exile (R.d.) and restoration of all Israel (20:33–44). Yahweh’s motivation to restore Israel is not compassion (vs. R.c.) but rather jealousy for his name (e. g., 20:44). Ezekiel creates no pathos for the fallen Northern Kingdom and expresses no unease regarding the completeness of its destruction. In fact, Israel’s restoration is explained as part of Yahweh’s goal of humiliating Judah (see further below): “I will restore your [Jerusalem’s] fortunes along with theirs [Sodom’s and Samaria’s], in order that you may bear your disgrace and be ashamed of all that you have done, becoming a consolation to them [‫ֹתן‬ ָ ‫ַח ֵמְך א‬ ֲ ‫”]בּנ‬ ְ (16:54). Indeed, Ezekiel’s references to the Northern Kingdom generally form part of his condemnation of Judah and Jerusalem. Judah was influenced by Israel to sin (J.a.): Jerusalem “followed [Sodom’s and Samaria’s] ways, and acted according to their abominations” (16:47). Judah witnessed the punishment of Israel but did not heed the warning (J.d, J.e.): “Her sister Oholibah saw this, yet she was more corrupt than she in her lusting” (23:11). 32 Judah’s punishment is modelled on Samaria’s (J.c.), expressed in the common prophetic image of the cup: “A cup of horror and desolation 31

See Anja Klein’s contribution to the present volume. A similar claim may have been made regarding Sodom in Ezek 16:50. Ancient versions (Symmachus, Aquila, Theodotion; Vg.) support amending MT’s ‫יתי‬ ִ ‫ ָר ִא‬here to ‫ר ִאית‬, ָ or 32

248

Cian Power

is the cup of your sister Samaria; you shall drink it and drain it out” (23:33–24). Throughout these comparisons, Ezekiel is insistent that Judah is more guilty than Israel (J.f.): “Samaria has not committed half your sins” (16:51; so also 23:11). 33 These references are intended to shame Judah: “Be ashamed, you also, and bear your disgrace, for you have made your sisters appear righteous” (16:52). This argument, of course, assumes that Ezekiel’s audience already acknowledges the magnitude of Samaria’s sin. Thus Ezekiel’s argument indicates that (something like) the explanations for Samaria’s fall offered in the other prophetic books were accepted by the book’s audience. Indeed, for Ezekiel Samaria’s sin is so excessive and so certain that Samaria has become proverbial (“a byword,” 23:10), and stands alongside Sodom (16:46), the other city renowned in the prophets for its wickedness.

5. Biblical Historiography and Prophecy Compared It has become clear that the prophetic books and biblical historiography share a great deal in common regarding their representations of the Israelian exile (see the Appendix to this article). Although simple historicalcritical conclusions cannot be drawn from this fact, a close interrelationship between these two traditions must be postulated. Several interesting differences, however, become apparent. For instance, the association between exile and exodus, a rich source of imagery for the prophets, is muted or absent in biblical historiography of the Israelian exile. Indeed, prophetic discourse about the Israelian exile is thoroughly characterized by metaphor and allusion, features typical of the genre. Furthermore, two complexes of themes are more extensively developed in the prophetic texts than in the historical books. The first is the relationship between the Israelian exile and Judah’s Babylonian exile. This concern is not absent from the reflections in the historical books (see 2 Kgs 17:19), but the various ways in which Israel’s punishment has significance for Judah (J.b–f.) are not articulated there. Now, it is possible that parts of 2 Kgs 17:7–23 were composed to highlight Israel’s fate as reading it as a variant 2fs form (see GKC § 44.h). Thus: “therefore I removed [Sodom and her daughters] as you saw.” 33 As in Jeremiah, Judah’s greater culpability may lie partly in the fact that Judah ignored an example lesson that Israel had not even received. Perhaps incidentally, no text in Ezekiel suggests that Israel received prophetic warning before its destruction.

Images of Northern Exile

249

an example or warning for Judah, a theme that was evident in several of the prophetic books (J.d). 34 Nevertheless, in the comparatively brief explanations of Judah’s later defeat and exile (2 Kgs 24:1–4, 19–20), the loop is not closed: the topic of the Israelian exile is not raised, and thus the notion that it should have served as a warning or example to Judah remains at most implicit. The second thematic complex is the reversal of exile in the future (R.a–d.). In 2 Chr 36:23 the Persian king Cyrus decrees the return of the Judaeans, and 2 Kgs 17 does not rule out the possibility of restoration for the Israelians who remain in exile “to this day” (v. 23). However, a return of the Israelians is never explicitly mentioned in biblical historiography. This may be explicable with reference to genre, since the historical books speak primarily about events of the past rather than the future, and no biblical text presents the Israelian return as an event that has happened. In addition, reference to the reversal of exile might also seem out of place in a passage like 2 Kgs 17, where it would potentially undermine the argument made there concerning the magnitude of Israel’s sin and punishment. Conversely, we may mention two elements from biblical historiography of the Israelian exile that are absent from the prophetic books. The first concerns distinct waves of deportation, which are clearly indicated in 2 Kgs (15:29; 17:6). Now, there may be good historical-critical grounds for linking different prophetic oracles concerning Israel’s exile with these distinct deportation events. For example, Isaiah’s references to Assyrian invasion in the context of the “Syro-Ephraimite War” (Isa 7) may be connected with Tiglath-Pileser’s campaigns, rather than the later conquest of Samaria by Sargon. 35 However, the prophetic books themselves do not address the fact that the Israelians were exiled in stages. This is notably different from prophetic discourse surrounding Judah’s Babylonian exile, which likewise occurred in stages. Especially for Jeremiah and Ezekiel the distinction between these stages is crucially important, as it can indicate whether an exiled Judaean is elected or rejected by Yahweh (see, e. g., Jer 24; Ezek 11:14–21). A second noteworthy difference concerns the foreign peoples resettled in Samaria by the Assyrians after the fall of the kingdom, mentioned in 34 This is the traditional view of the function of this chapter within the Deuteronomistic History; see M. Noth, Überlieferungsgeschichtliche Studien I: Die sammelnden und bearbeitenden Geschichtswerke im Alten Testament (Halle a.d. Saale, 1943; repr., Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1963), 84–86. 35 See, e. g., M. A. Sweeney, Isaiah 1–39 (FOTL 16; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 159–161.

250

Cian Power

Kings. It appears that the prophetic books do not allude to this colonization of Samaria. They certainly do not display the polemical, proto-antiSamaritan accusations of idolatry and polylatry found in 2 Kgs 17. 36 Finally, this comparison also reveals a notable absence from both sets of texts. A widely held hypothesis in biblical scholarship is that after the fall of Samaria many Israelians settled in Judah and Jerusalem. Scholars have used this hypothesis to explain both the expansion of Jerusalem around this time and the presence in the Hebrew Bible of supposedly Israelian literary and theological traditions. 37 Now, a movement of Israelians into Judah in connection with the fall of the Kingdom of Israel is not described in biblical historiographical works. 38 My analysis has likewise uncovered no references to such a migration in the biblical prophets. That is, Judah is not among the destinations, such as Assyria and Egypt, to which Israelians would or did go according to the prophetic books, nor is Judah encouraged to offer shelter to Israelian refugees, as Isaiah urges it to do for “the outcasts of Moab” (Isa 16:2–4). The historical significance of this observation is unclear, yet it seems curious that this putative migration is not mentioned in the books most interested in the fate of the Israelians.

6. Conclusion This analysis has revealed major points of consensus across most of the prophetic representations of the Israelian exile: Yahweh decreed the destruction of Israel, and his prophets announced it; this destruction was executed by Assyria’s king and his armies, and devastated the community; as a result, Israelians were scattered to various locations, especially Assyria and Egypt; eventually Yahweh will restore the Israelians to their land. One conviction in particular binds all of these texts together: the thesis that Israel’s fall was a just punishment for its sins. Variety and idiosyncrasies of numerous sorts emerged in these representations – for instance, in the role of Yahweh’s compassion in Israel’s 36

The biblical rhetoric surrounding the Samaritans is investigated in G. N. Knoppers, Jews and Samaritans: Their Origins and History of their Early Relations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013). 37 The fullest recent articulation of these claims is found in I. Finkelstein, The Forgotten Kingdom: The Archaeology and History of Northern Israel (ANEM 5; Atlanta: SBL, 2013). 38 The books of Chronicles suggest travel, if not migration, of Israelians to Jerusalem after the fall of the kingdom; see, e. g., 2 Chr 30.

Images of Northern Exile

251

restoration, and in the many images, including exodus, used to express exile and return. The most significant variation between these texts, however, lies in the argumentative or rhetorical functions that references to the Israelian exile serve. This multiplicity is aligned with the literary orientation of a given text – towards Israel, Judah, or both – and with its temporal horizon – before or after Israel’s fall – and it presumably relates to the differing historical contexts and purposes of the authors and editors of these works. In spite of the ultimate unrecoverability of these historical contexts, it is tempting to discern a diachronic development of uses of the Israelian exile in biblical prophecy. We might suppose that the basic thesis – that Israel was punished by Yahweh with defeat and exile – is found in its earliest form in Amos and Hosea, books that directly address the fall of the Northern Kingdom on its own terms. In Isaiah and Micah, this thesis was repurposed as a historical lesson for a Judaean audience. This didactic interpretation of Israel’s fall and exile was inherited by Jeremiah and Ezekiel, who concluded that Judah had ignored the warning and had been dealt Israel’s punishment. Such a reconstruction, which would require a great deal of compositional and redaction-critical argumentation, would be in keeping with the work of scholars who stress the close connections among the prophetic books in the areas of imagery and rhetoric. 39 In any case, the adaptability of the meaning of the Israelian exile and its usefulness in Judaean prophecy help to explain why Israel’s fall occupies such a prominent place in Judah’s Bible. A thorough comparison of how Judah’s Babylonian exile is represented in the Hebrew Bible with the picture of the Israelian exile that has emerged in this article must await future study. However, we may briefly note in closing that several major themes in the prophetic discourse concerning the Babylonian exile were expressed independently (and perhaps originally) in connection with the Israelian exile: the association of exile with exodus; the notion of an Israelite diaspora among the nations; the prediction of a future reversal of exile; and so on. Moreover, the structure of prophetic explanations of Israel’s fall – the theology of judgment – is fundamentally the same as those that explain Judah’s end. Indeed, it seems eminently plausible to suppose, as scholars have done, that ideas and imagery formulated in response to the end of the Kingdom of Israel in-

39

See, e. g., J. Nogalski, Redactional Process in the Book of the Twelve (BZAW 218; Berlin: De Gruyter, 1993).

252

Cian Power

fluenced authors who meditated upon Judah’s eventual downfall. 40 Thus, since the Babylonian exile proved to be a definitive moment for Judah’s self-understanding, the Israelian exile may have played a crucial role in shaping the literature and theology of the Hebrew Bible.

Appendix: Themes relating to the Israelian exile with their attestations in biblical prophecy “[]” indicates that the prophetic book contains an uncertain attestation of the theme or attests a closely related theme. Underlining indicates themes not attested in biblical historiography. Cause C. Israel’s exile is a punishment enacted by Yahweh for its sins against him (Isa, Jer, Ezek, Hos, Amos, [Mic]) Status S.a. The exile is comprehensive ([Isa], Jer, [Ezek]) S.b. Yahweh rejects Israel through exile (Jer, Hos) Spatiality /Location L.a. Israel is exiled from its land (Amos) L.b. Israel is exiled from Yahweh’s presence (Hos) L.c. Israel is exiled to Assyria (Isa, Hos) L.d. Israel is exiled to various locations (Isa, Hos, Amos) L.e. Israel is exiled to Egypt (Isa, Hos) Agency A.a. The Assyrians (specifically, the Assyrian king) exile Israel (Isa, Jer, Ezek, Hos) A.b. Yahweh exiles Israel (Jer, [Ezek], Amos) A.c. The defeat of Israel features in the Assyrian king’s intimidating boasts (Isa) Prophecy P.a. Yahweh warns Israel of its doom through prophecy (Isa, [Hos], Amos) P.b. Israel does not listen to Yahweh’s prophets (Isa, Hos, Amos) Judah J.a. Judah is influenced by Israel’s sinful behaviour (Jer, Ezek, Hos, Mic) J.b. Israel’s exile and Judah’s exile are associated (Isa, Jer, Ezek) J.c. Israel’s punishment is a model for Judah’s (Jer, Ezek, Mic) 40

So Petersen, “Prophetic Rhetoric,” 18.

Images of Northern Exile

J.d. Israel’s fate is a warning for Judah (Jer, Ezek, Mic) J.e. Judah failed to heed the warning of Israel’s fate (Jer, Ezek) J.f. Judah is more guilty than Israel (Jer, Ezek) Reversal R.a. Yahweh will reverse Israel’s exile (Isa, Jer, [Ezek], Hos, Amos) R.b. The Israelian exile reverses the exodus from Egypt (Hos) R.c. Yahweh has compassion for Israel (Isa, Hos, [Mic]) R.d. Return from exile is a new exodus (Isa, Jer, Ezek)

253

Jonah, the Eternal Fugitive Exploring the Intertextuality of Jonah’s Flight in the Bible and Its Later Reception Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer 1. Introduction The notion of “Exile” is one of the most prevalent literary motifs in postmonarchic literature. In its most basic sense, it refers to the exile to and the return from Babylon in the sixth century BCE. In its extended, metaphorical sense, it can refer to various types of marginalization, political exclusion, religious alienation, and a feeling of separation from God. 1 The book of Jonah does not interact with the concept of exile in any overt manner, 2 yet the concept of exile is there, present but often veiled, in both its concrete and its metaphorical meanings. 3 The present article will investigate the ways in which the book of Jonah envisages the character of Jonah as a type for perpetual exile. My investigation falls into three parts. First, I shall survey and evaluate the scholarly history of seeing Jonah as a book about exile. Second, I shall highlight how a series of textual allusions in the book of Jonah to especially the Eden narrative and the story of Cain and Abel in Gen 3–4 together portray Jonah as a man set apart and adrift from both his homeland and his God. This sense of alienation and exclusion is partly self-inflicted – caused by his flight from God – but not thereby any less painful. Third, I shall look at how the notion of Jonah as a fugitive from God’s presence has been taken up in two pieces of twentieth-century literature, resulting in the depiction 1 M. A. Halvorson-Taylor, Enduring Exile: the Metaphorization of Exile in the Hebrew Bible (VTSup 141; Leiden: Brill, 2011), 1. 2 See, for example, R. P. Carroll, “Deportation and Diasporic Discourses in the Prophetic Literature,” in Exile: Old Testament, Jewish, and Christian Conceptions (ed. James M. Scott; JSJSup 56; Leiden: Brill, 1997), 63–85, 69–70, who despite his initial claim that “the Hebrew Bible is the book of Exile” later on discards the notion that the book of Jonah is anything more than marginally interested in the exile. 3 See especially the article by D. J. Downs, “The Specter of Exile in the Story of Jonah,” HBT 31 (2009): 27–44.

256

Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer

of Jonah as the eternal exile who wishes to flee from his destiny and his God, yet who knows all along the futility of this endeavour.

2. History of Research The idea of Jonah being a book about exile is not new, yet those scholars who adhere to this view have, at least to my knowledge, all focused on the fish. Jonah, imprisoned and longing for home whilst inside the fish, is understood as a symbol of Israel’s exile and, by extension, its symbolic death. Wright, for example, writing in 1886, argued that Jonah’s captivity in the fish may serve as an allegory for Israel’s time in exile. 4 A decade later, Smith maintained that Jonah’s disappearance into the great fish, as well as his subsequent ejection upon dry land, symbolizes the exile and subsequent restoration of the people of Israel. 5 Significantly more recently, Ackroyd, although not fully condoning an allegorical reading of the book of Jonah, nevertheless voiced the possibility that the fish is a symbol of exile itself. 6 Going one step further, Ephros has argued that Jonah’s time inside the fish is a form of punishment meant to teach him a lesson. 7 Along similar lines, Smith-Christopher maintains that Jonah, like the people of Israel, is called to a mission but he, like the people of Israel, rejects God’s calling and disobeys the divine commands. As a result of his sins, Jonah goes into the darkness of the fish in the same way as Israel goes into the darkness of exile. 8 Most recently, Downs has suggested that the exilic experience casts a long shadow over the book of Jonah, a book that represents a branch of post-monarchic theology that is positive towards the Gentile nations. Downs focuses on the notion of exile as “re /dis-location” and explores the 4 C. H. H. Wright, “The Book of Jonah Considered from an Allegorical Point of View,” in Biblical Essays: Exegetical Studies on the Books of Job and Jonah, Ezekiel’s Prophecy of Gog and Magog, St. Peter’s ‘Spirits in Prison’, and the Key to the Apocalypse (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1886), 34–98, 55–56. 5 G. A. Smith, The Book of the Twelve Prophets, Vol. 2 (The Expositor’s Bible; London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1898), 503. 6 P. Ackroyd, Exile and Restoration: A Study of Hebrew Thought of the Sixth Century BC (London: SCM Press, 1968), 244–245. 7 A. Z. Ephros, “The Book of Jonah as Allegory,” JBQ 27 (1999): 141–151, 143. 8 D. L. Smith-Christopher, A Biblical Theology of Exile (OBT; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2002), 133.

Jonah, the Eternal Fugitive

257

ways in which the book of Jonah evokes Israel’s experience of banishment from and return to the land, and how the memory of exile haunts the narrative. 9 In his opinion, the book of Jonah ultimately rejects violent nationalism, triggered by bitter memories of destruction and exile, in favour of God’s grace and mercy. 10 The most evocative imagery of exile as a place of confinement inside a creature is probably found in the oracle against Babylon in Jer 50–51. In Jer 51:34, Nebuchadnezzar is depicted as a monster that has devoured (root ‫ )אכל‬the speaker(s) (either 1 sg. or 1 pl. depending on whether following the qere or the ketiv) who are later identified with the inhabitants of Zion (v. 35b). Even though it is unclear whether Jer 51:34 refers specifically to the exiles – it is in my view more likely that the verse speaks of Nebuchadnezzar’s destruction of Jerusalem – its overarching Babylonian context strengthens the link between exile and the imagery of being swallowed by a beast. 11

2.1. Critique of the Exilic Reading My own approach lies close to that of Downs insofar as the concept of exile in the book of Jonah is found less in its overt symbolism and more in its overtones and associations. I shall, however, go beyond the imagery of the fish and instead explore more widely how the character of Jonah can be read as a symbol of the (perpetual) exile. The fish plays an ambiguous role in the book of Jonah. Jonah’s time inside the fish may be understood as a representation of exile and punishment, an interpretation that is strengthened when the narrative in Jonah 1, 3–4 is read together with the psalm in Jonah 2 (cf. below, Jonah 2:7b). At the same time, this interpretation does not fully fit with the overarching tone of the Jonah narrative for the following two interconnected reasons: First, the above-mentioned symbolic readings depend to a large extent on the interpretation of Jonah’s time inside the fish as punishment for his disobedience. 12 While many interpreters through the ages have under9

Downs, “Specter of Exile,” 30–31. Downs, “Specter of Exile,” 43. 11 For a discussion of the animal imagery in this verse, see Benjamin A. Foreman, Animal Metaphors and the People of Israel in the Book of Jeremiah (FRLANT 238; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011), 112–113. 12 The defence of the salvific aspects of exile is not fully relevant in the present context (Downs, “Specter of Exile,” 36–37). The issue is less whether the exile can be understood not only as punishment but also as a time of recuperation and an act of redemption; rather 10

258

Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer

stood “the fish incident” this way, 13 it rests on remarkably meagre textual support. God sends the wind (v. 4) with the ultimate aim of getting Jonah into the sea, but this act is never described as a punitive action. Jonah confesses that he is the reason for the wind and that being tossed into the sea will cause the wind to still (v. 12), yet again the wind is never described as a punishment; it is rather God’s way of forcing Jonah to abandon his flight and ultimately to obey the divine command. The notion of punishment is also alien to the theology of the psalm in Jonah 2. Jonah is clearly in distress (v. 3), God has hurled him into the abyss (v. 4), and Jonah is banished from God’s presence (v. 5), yet God saved him (vv. 3, 7). Second, the biblical account describes the fish as Jonah’s redeemer. God provides the big fish to swallow Jonah (2:1 [Eng. 1:17]) to save him from drowning. It is only in later reception – beginning with the LXX’s choice of the word κήτος to denote the fish and later substantiated in the Zohar and the New Testament – that the fish becomes “monstrified” and turned into a symbol of death and hell. 14 The reference to “the belly of Sheol” in Jonah 2:3 [Eng. 2:2] is in my view a description of Jonah’s situation prior to the appearance of the fish: Jonah faced death in the abyss, he cried out to God, and God sent the fish to save him. The anticipated salvation is thus not the future return to dry land; the salvation is the appearance of the fish, which, from Jonah’s perspective, now lies in the past. In view of this ambiguity vis-à-vis the fish’s role in the narrative, my investigation will focus less on the fish and more on the language of estrangement, abandonment, and expulsion in the book of Jonah. As we shall see, Jonah himself – rather than the fish – constitutes a symbol of the exilic life. Jonah may have left voluntarily – in fact he is fleeing from God – but the end result is one of exile. He is a rootless man who wanders and whom the reader leaves stranded outside of Nineveh, that is, in exile.

the point that I wish to make here is that Jonah’s sojourn inside the fish is never portrayed as a form of punishment at all. 13 For a discussion of the fish in reception history, see L.-S. Tiemeyer, “Jonah and His Fish: The Monstrification of God’s Servant in Early Jewish and Christian Reception History,” in Fallen Animals: Art, Religion, Literature (ed. Z. Hadromi-Allouche; Ecocritical Theory and Practice; Lanham: Lexington, 2017), 47–70. 14 Cf. G. M. Landes, “The Kerygma of the Book of Jonah: The Contextual Interpretation of the Jonah Psalm,” Int 21 (1967): 3–31, 11–12.

Jonah, the Eternal Fugitive

259

3. Jonah, a Man Banished from God’s Presence Jonah’s flight from God’s presence is a key motif in the book of Jonah. Here I hope to show that this motif is linked intertextually to (1) the notion of Adam and Eve’s expulsion from paradise and (2) the notion of Cain as a “restless wanderer” across the earth (Gen 4:12b, ‫)נע ונד תהיה בארץ‬. As a result of an intricate web of textual allusions to Gen 3–4, as well as to Gen 1–11 more widely, 15 Jonah is portrayed as a perpetual exile.

3.1. Banishment From God’s Presence Beginning with Jonah 1:3, 10, I maintain that the rare expression '‫מלפני ה‬ used in these two verses alludes to Gen 4:16 and thus connects Jonah with Cain. Following Cain’s killing of his brother Abel, God declares that Cain will be a restless wanderer on the earth (v. 13). In response, Cain states that God has driven him away from the face of the earth and that he will be hidden from God’s face (v. 14a, ‫הן גרשת אתי היום מעל פני האדמה‬ ‫)ומפניך אסתר‬. He further fears that he will be killed by whoever finds him. In response, God puts a mark on Cain so that nobody will kill him. Cain ultimately sets out ‘from Yhwh’s presence’ (v. 16a, '‫)ויצא קין מלפני ה‬. As noted by Downs, Cain’s banishment and ensuing rootless wanderings, when conflated with Jonah’s attempt to flee from God’s presence, evoke the notion of exile. 16 In parallel, I contend that Jonah 2 alludes back to the expulsion of Adam and Eve from paradise in two ways. First, in Jonah 2:5a [Eng. 2:4a], the psalmist expresses how he has been “banished” from before God’s eyes (‫)נגרשתי מנגד עיניך‬. The use of the root ‫ גרש‬brings to mind not only the aforementioned banishment of Cain, but also God’s expulsion of Adam and Eve in Gen 3:24 (v. 24a, ‫)ויגרש את האדם‬. Jonah, like the first human couple, has been driven away from God. 17 This link to the Eden 15

The parallels between the Jonah narrative and the story of Cain have been noted by several earlier exegetes, although not understood in the way that the present article suggests. See especially G. Vanoni, Das Buch Jona: Literar- und formkritische Untersuchung (St. Ottilien: Eos Verlag, 1978), 143; M. Gerhards, Studien zum Jonabuch (Biblisch-Theologische Studien 78; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2006), 138–140; P. Weimer, Eine Geschichte voller Überraschungen: Annäherungen an die Jonaerzählung (SBS 217; Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 2009), 174–178; J. E. Anderson, “Jonah’s Peculiar Re-Creation,” BTB 41 (2011): 179–188; and Y. Berger, Jonah in the Shadows of Eden (Indiana Studies in Biblical Literature; Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 2016), esp. 13–14, 44–45, 70–71, 78–79, 83–86. 16 Downs, “Specter of Exile,” 32–33, 39. 17 Noted by Downs, “Specter of Exile,” 38, note 37.

260

Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer

narrative is strengthened by the additional allusion in Jonah 2:4 [Eng. 2:3] to Gen 3:23. God “sent forth” Jonah into the deep (v. 4a, ‫ותשליכני‬ ‫ )מצולה בלבב ימים ונחר יסבבני‬and he “sent forth” Adam from the garden (v. 23a, ‫)וישלחהו ה' אלהים מגן עדן‬. We are thus dealing with a sustained allusion in Jonah 2 to the Eden narrative: Gen 3:23 and Jonah 2:4, 6 are linked through the use of the phonetically similar roots ‫ שלח‬and ‫שלך‬, and Gen 3:24 and Jonah 2:5a are linked through the use of the root ‫גרש‬.

3.2. Jonah’s Anger and Jonah’s Exit to the East The affinity between Jonah, Cain, and Adam and Eve is strengthened by three additional allusions in the Jonah narrative to the Genesis account (Gen 3:24; 4:5–6, and 4:16). First, the wording in Jonah 4:1, 4 which expresses Jonah’s anger and God’s request for an explanation of said anger (v. 1, ‫וירע אל יונה רעה‬ ‫גדולה ויחר לו‬, v. 4, ‫ )ויאמר ה' ההיטב חרה לך‬is strongly reminiscent of the dialogue between Cain and God in Gen 4:5–6 (v. 5bα, ‫ויחר לקין מאד‬, v. 6bα, ‫)למה חרה לך‬, due to the shared use of the root ‫חרה‬. 18 Furthermore, the reason behind the two men’s anger at God is similar, insofar as their anger is motivated by their perception of God’s (in-)justice. For Cain, God is behaving unjustly because he accepted Abel’s offer but rejected Cain’s own. For Jonah, God is behaving unjustly as he will accept the Ninevites’ repentance as a reason for not destroying their city. Taking into account the highly likely post-monarchic dating of the book of Jonah, Jonah’s anger can easily be construed as a reaction, along the lines of Lamentations, towards God’s act of destroying Jerusalem and before that also Samaria. Thus, both Jonah and Cain demand divine consistency and fairness and are annoyed with his apparent capriciousness. Second, the description in Jonah 4:5a of Jonah’s exit from Nineveh to “the east” (‫ )מקדם‬of the city (‫ )ויצא יונה מן העיר וישב מקדם לעיר‬is reminiscent of Cain’s exit from God’s presence and his stay in Nod “east of” (‫ )קדמת‬Eden in Gen 4:16 (‫)ויצא קין מלפני ה' וישב בארץ נוד קדמת עדן‬. This textual affinity serves to emphasize Jonah’s rootlessness. Third, the aforementioned expression “to the east” (‫ )מקדם‬in Jonah 4:5a also alludes back to Gen 3:24. As God drives Adam out of Eden and 18 This parallel was noted already by Rabbi Elijah of Vilna. See further M. Schapiro, The Book of Yonah: “Journey of the Soul”: An Allegorical Commentary Adapted from the Vilna Gaon’s Aderes Eliyahu (Artscroll Judaica Classics; Brooklyn: Mesorah, 1997), 93 ('‫ויאמר ה‬ ‫ וכי כדבר הזה טוב אתה עושה שחרה לך ואתה מקנא בחם כמו למה חרה לך אצל‬.'‫ההיטב כו‬ ‫)קין‬. See also Downs, “Specter of Exile,” 41.

Jonah, the Eternal Fugitive

261

places the cherubim as guards on the eastern side (v. 24aβ, ‫וישכן מקדם לגן‬ ‫)עדן את הכרבים‬, so Jonah sits on the eastern side of Nineveh.

3.3. No Home to Return to In parallel, Jonah’s rootless and exilic existence is emphasized in both the beginning and the end of the Jonah narrative. From the very beginning in Jonah 1:1–3, Jonah is described as perpetually on the road, from somewhere unspecified to Joppa, heading for Tarshish but ultimately ending up in Nineveh. Unless readers of the book of Jonah import information about Jonah from 2 Kings 14:25, they are never informed about Jonah’s place of residence. The open ending of the book of Jonah conveys the same impression of rootlessness and exile. The readers leave Jonah sitting with his withered kikayon east of Nineveh, unsure whether or not Jonah has adopted God’s perspective and thus accepted his divine right to pardon Nineveh. The biblical narrative thus leaves Jonah in a seemingly never-ending exile very much like that of Cain. Jonah never goes “home” because he, like Cain, does not have a home. The use of the verb ‫ ישב‬in Jonah 4:5 may thus be ironic: although the primary meaning in the case of Jonah is “to sit,” there is also a sense through the allusion to the Cain narrative that Jonah ends up dwelling east of Nineveh. Likewise, Adam and Eve can never return home but end up dwelling in permanent exile east of Eden (Gen 3:24). Jonah’s rootlessness and continuous exile is further stressed in select later reception. In the “Lives of the Prophets” (Vitae Prophetarum), a document of Jewish origin written most likely in Jerusalem in Greek around the turn of the first century, 19 Jonah, born near Ashdod, does not return home after his journey to Nineveh but instead settles in Tyre where he later dies. After being resurrected by Elijah (and thus identified with the son of the widow from Zarephath [1 Kgs 17]), he travels to Judah where he later dies in Saraar. Jonah is thus described as a wanderer who does not return home because his reputation as a prophet has been damaged. The deutero-canonical book Tobit may also be germane to this discussion, albeit in an obscure manner. Tob 14:4 refers directly to the character of Jonah, 20 and the connection is further emphasized through a number 19 See further A. M. Schwemer, “The Lives of the Prophets and the Book of the Twelve,” in The Book of the Twelve: Composition, Reception, and Interpretation (ed. L.-S. Tiemeyer and J. Wöhrle; FIOTL/VTSup; Leiden: Brill, forthcoming). 20 There are two manuscript traditions of Tob 14:4. Alexandrinus and Vaticanus (GI) mention “Jonah” whereas Sinaiticus (GII) follows the longer tradition which mentions “Nahum.”

262

Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer

of thematic links: both narratives take place at the same time (eighth century BCE) and in the same place (Mesopotamia), both narratives involve travelling, both Jonah and Tobit wish to die, both Jonah and Tobit’s son Tobias encounter a fish, and both narratives speak of Nineveh’s destruction. Although the links between these two books are difficult to assess, the similarity between Jonah and Tobit the diaspora Jew serve to depict Jonah as an exilic figure.

3.4. Less Obvious Links If it were not clear that the book of Jonah draws on Gen 3–4, the following examples would not be probable allusions /intertexts. Given the likelihood of a sustained allusion in Jonah to this text, however, they are worth mentioning. For readers already attuned to echoes of Gen 3–4, the reference to ‫ הבלי שוא‬in Jonah 2:9 [Eng. 2:8], often but not necessarily translated as “worthless idols,” 21 brings Cain’s brother Abel (‫ )הבל‬to mind. 22 It is also possible that the worm which destroys the kikayon in Jonah 4:6–7 echoes the serpent in Gen 3. 23 Beyond the limited scope of Gen 3–4, there are potentially other links to Gen 1–11. Beginning with allusions to Gen 1–2, the reference to “the abyss” (‫ )תהום‬in Jonah 2:6 [Eng. 2:5] brings Gen 1:2 (‫ )תהום‬to mind, 24 and the reference to God as “the God of heaven who has made the sea and the dry land” in Jonah 1:9 (‫ואת ה' אלהי השמים אני ירא אשר עשה את‬ ‫)הים ואת היבשה‬, as well as Jonah’s ending up on “dry land” in Jonah 2:11 [Eng. 2:10] (‫)ויאמר ה' לדג ויקא את יונה אל היבשה‬, evoke Gen 1:9–10 (‫יבשה‬, ‫)ימים‬. 25 Turning to potential links between Jonah and the Flood narrative in Gen 6–8, the abovementioned notion of the “abyss” in Jonah 2:6 may also allude to Gen 7:11 (‫)תהום‬, the reference to the “dry land” may allude to the dryness of the earth in Gen 8:7 (‫)עד יבשת המים מעל הארץ‬, 21 See the discussion in N. P. Love, “Translating Jonah 2.9: Looking for a Breath of Fresh Air,” BT 63 (2013): 266–283. 22 See E. W. Hesse and I. M. Kikawada, “Jonah and Genesis 1–11,” AJBI 10 (1984): 3–19, 5. See also Berger, Jonah in the Shadows of Eden, 83–86, for other possible allusions in the Jonah story to Abel. 23 Cf. Anderson, “Jonah’s Peculiar Re-Creation,” 186. 24 Cf. D. I. Block, The Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 25–48 (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 47, who argues that the depiction of water threatening Jonah and the deep engulfing him (v. 6, ‫ )אפפוני מים עד נפש תהום יסבבני סוף חבוש לראשי‬brings to mind the imagery of Ezek 26:19b, where God declares to Tyre that he will bring up the oceanic deep upon her and let the masses of water cover her ( ‫ )בהעלות בהעלותעליך את תהום וכסוך המים הרבים‬in his act of destruction. 25 See further Anderson, “Jonah’s Peculiar Re-Creation,” 181–182.

Jonah, the Eternal Fugitive

263

14 (‫)יבשה הארץ‬, and the name “Jonah” may allude to the dove (‫ )יונה‬on board the ark in Gen 8:8–12. 26 Last but not least, the shared notion of God’s change of mind (niphal of the root ‫ )נחם‬binds the prologue of the flood narrative (Gen 6:6) to Jonah 3:9–10 and 4:2.

3.5. Discussion Neither the allusions in Jonah to the Cain narrative nor the allusions to the Eden narrative establish a strict typological correspondence, yet they do suggest that the Jonah narrative interacts with Gen 3–4. Beginning with the affinity between the book of Jonah and the Cain narrative, the former, to quote Downs, “play[s] with the notion of human anger at Yhwh’s mysterious purposes, with Yhwh’s response in the form of a provocative query.” Both narratives portray God as beyond human control and understanding. Like Cain who refuses to accept God’s (fickle and seemingly unjust) right to accept his brother’s offering while rejecting his own, Jonah likewise does not accept God’s (equally fickle) right to forgive Nineveh. 27 Turning to the allusion to Gen 3, although there is again no strict typological relationship between Jonah and Adam (and Eve), the notion that disobedience leads to banishment is at the forefront of the allusion. Jonah, like Adam, disobeyed God, so Jonah, like Adam, is thrown out (root ‫ שלח‬/ ‫)שלך‬, banished from God’s presence (root ‫)גרש‬, and positioned in the east (‫)קדם‬. The tension in the final text of the book between Jonah’s voluntary flight in Jonah 1:3 on the one hand, and his sense of being driven away expressed in Jonah 2:4 on the other, together with the allusions to Gen 3–4, creates a portrayal of Jonah as a rootless exile. Jonah leaves in an act of disobedience against God (cf. Adam and Eve eating the fruit; Cain’s murder), yet he is driven away from God as a result of this act (cf. Adam, Eve, and Cain’s banishment). In addition, both Jonah’s flight and Cain’s banishment from God are futile insofar as no person can ever flee completely from God. As Ps 139:7–9 makes clear, the psalmist cannot flee from God’s presence, neither in heaven nor in death (Sheol) (v. 8, ‫אם‬ ‫)אסק שמים שם אתה ואציעה שולא הנך‬. Rather than understanding God’s presence as a comfort, however, both Jonah and Cain are haunted by their inability to escape God.

26 27

See further Anderson, “Jonah’s Peculiar Re-Creation,” 184–185. Downs, “Specter of Exile,” 42–43.

264

Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer

4. Additional Links to Exile Jonah is also a man who is cast away and left to die. The notion of “hurling” (Hiphil of ‫ )טול‬is used four times within the short space of Jonah 1 (1:4, 5, 12, and 15). This verb is used elsewhere in the prophetic literature as a common trope for “exile.” Jeremiah 16:13 declares that God will “cast” the people [of Jerusalem] out of their land, and Jer 22:26, 28 state that God will cast Jehoiachin, his mother, and his offspring into exile in a foreign land. 28 Along similar lines, Isa 22:17–18, attesting the pilpel form of the same root ‫טול‬, describes how God will “hurl” the royal minister Shebna (v. 17) and toss him to a “vast land” like a ball. The notion of a “storm” (‫ )סער‬in Jonah 1:4, 11, 12, 13 may also sometimes have connotations of exile, as evidenced by Zech 7:14. 29 The statement in Jonah 2:7aβ [Eng. 2:6 aβ] to “bars” that will forever close Jonah in (‫ )הארץ ברחיה בעדי לעולם‬is first and foremost a reference to death. The prophet experiences sinking to the bottom of the sea and expresses his belief that he will never return to dry land again. In tandem with the images of death, this reference serves as a symbol of imprisonment, as does the reference to God’s rescue of the prophet from the “pit” later in the same verse (2:7b, ‫)ותעל משחת חיי ה' אלהי‬. Together, they create a picture of Jonah’s state of isolation and distress inside the fish. The image of “bars” alludes to the fish’s maws that have closed Jonah in and keep him imprisoned. Notions of imprisonment, although not in themselves references to any form of physical exile, serve to denote a strong sense of alienation, entrapment, and lack of future hope.

5. Jonah, the Perpetual Exile The image of Jonah as a man fleeing from and also being banned from God’s presence has been taken up in various ways in later reception. In short, Jonah is often depicted as the eternal diaspora Jew, understood to be separated from God yet also haunted by him. Here, I want to mention one shortstory and one novel that pick up the image of Jonah as a type for the “wandering Jew” and explore how they both, in their own way, emphasize Jonah’s marginalization and exilic existence. 28

Carroll, “Deportation,” 65; Downs, “Specter of Exile,” 34–35. A. R. Petterson, “Exile and Re-exile in the Book of the Twelve,” IBR Book of the Twelve Research Group: 1–19, 6. Accessed via https://www.ibr-bbr.org/files/pdf/2015/Exile%20and% 20Re-exile%20in%20the%20Twelve%20-%20Petterson.pdf. 29

Jonah, the Eternal Fugitive

265

5.1. “My Christina” Beginning with “My Christina” (La meva Cristina), the Catalan novelist Mercè Rodoreda (1908–1983) uses the biblical Jonah narrative as a paradigm for exploring the notion of marginalization and estrangement that are the companions of exile. 30 A shipwrecked sailor is swallowed and thus saved by a whale. At first, the short story follows the biblical plot and understands the whale as the sailor’s saviour and sanctuary. The sailor is grateful towards the whale and gives her the name “Christina,” named after the boat that has been shipwrecked and that he has been forced to abandon. Half-way through the narrative, the sailor sees green land and manages to leave the whale. As he is swimming towards land, however, the whale catches up with him and swallows him anew. At this point, the whale becomes an image of hell as the relationship between the sailor and his saviour turns violent and bitter, symbolized by the fact that the sailor begins to hurt the whale from the inside. The sailor remains inside the whale for years and slowly becomes one with her through eating her flesh. At first, he seeks to keep track of the time by slashing the inside of the whale, but slowly he seeks oblivion and retreats into a hollow of a cheek, kept in place by the whale with the help of her tongue. The whale, from her perspective, covers the sailor in layers of mucus that eventually forms a shell, like a pearl, in order to render harmless this foreign object in her body and thus to save herself from his destructive actions. When the whale dies, the sailor can finally escape but he finds that he is unable to reintegrate into society. Instead, he is forever known as the “pearl man” as not all pieces of his shell can be removed. He is both physically and mentally transformed by his sojourn in the whale and, as a result, regarded as a freak by his former compatriots. Most poignantly, the sailor arrives in a village where he is met by a woman who calls him “her husband.” The sailor, however, cannot recognize her, pushes her to the ground, and leaves. The reader is left wondering if this actually was the sailor’s home but he has become so attuned to his exilic existence that he cannot acknowledge it as such. For the sailor, even though his exile in one sense is over, his exile continues as he longs for “his Christina” and the bond that they shared. The sailor, like Jonah, can no longer go home: both because home as he remembers it no longer exists, and because he is no

30

M. Rodoreda, My Christina and Other Stories (trans. D. Rosenthal; Saint Paul: Graywolf Press, 1984).

266

Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer

longer the man that he was before he left. 31 Life in exile, first perceived to be a haven and then transformed into a prison, has altered him beyond recognition, as embodied Exile tried to turn him into something less foreign and instead part of herself.

5.2. The Strange Nation of Rafael Mendes The same tradition of Jonah as a fugitive appears in the novel The Strange Nation of Rafael Mendes (A estranha nação de Rafael Mendes) by the Jewish Brazilian author Moacyr Scliar (1935–2011). 32 The present-day character, Rafael Mendes (the name is a word-play on ‫“ = רפא אל‬God’s physician” and a derivative of Maimonides), explores the lives of his ancestors, going all the way back to Jonah (pp. 39, 69–70, 75–83). The Jonah narrative lends structure to the novel through repeated allusions to the book and through references to rootlessness, sea journeys, and (near) death by drowning. I was able to track down someone named Jonah as the most distant of my known ancestors. [...] Throughout the ages, they fled from place to place, from country to country; they crossed oceans, they scaled mountains, living strange adventures, sensing a disturbing summons. (p. 75)

Inside the fish, Jonah contemplates his fate as a prophet and as a Jew: why did God chose him for this mission, why would he not have sent Jonah to a nice place instead, filled with gentle loving people where it was easy to be a prophet? But Jehova is cruel. Cruel to sinners, cruel to his chosen people. (p. 81)

As the novel continues, the reader encounters a long sequence of Jonah’s descendants, each of them characterized by their rootlessness, created by a combination of being persecuted and of searching for the golden tree. Habacuc, living in the first century CE, flees from the Romans to Yafo, boards a ship, and ends up in Spain (presumably an allusion to Tarshish in the biblical Jonah narrative) and ultimately in Toledo. As his flight coincides with the death of Jesus, Habacuc’s descendants are doomed to be rootless: 31 See further the discussion in G. C. Nichols, “Exile, Gender, and Mercè Rodoreda,” MLN 101, no. 2 Hispanic Issue (1986): 405–417. 32 M. Scliar, The Strange Nation of Rafael Mendes (trans. E. F. Giacomelli; New York: Ballantine Books, 1987).

Jonah, the Eternal Fugitive

267

“Your crime didn’t go unnoticed,” replied the voice. “Because of the sins you and others have committed, a god has died, Habacuc. As punishment, your descendants will wander the earth until they finally hark to the word of the children of light. Have I made myself understood?” (p. 93)

Later descendants also run away and /or die at sea. Maimonides’s brother, for example, dies in a shipwreck (p. 95) while Maimonides himself is forced to leave Spain due to the Almohad invasion. In a later incarnation, Rafael Mendes’s friend Joseph drowns (p. 144) and Rafael’s son runs away repeatedly when he encounters man’s cruelty (pp. 145, 165) and persecution (p. 169). Later incarnations continue to flee (p. 172). Some incarnations are closer to the biblical Jonah story than others. The Rafael Mendes who lived during the Inquisition is a New Christian (cristãos-novos). Whilst imprisoned, Rafael and his friend Afonso discuss their ancestors. The link is again made to Jonah: did he really sin when he fled from God? After prolonged torture, both men manage to escape on board a ship heading to Brazil. Near the coast of Brazil, the weather suddenly changes. The sailors blame the two “descendants of Christ’s killers” on board: “Divine punishment has befallen us,” muttered the sailors, “for we are harbouring two heretics, two descendants of Christ’s killers.” Tension kept mounting, and one night Rafael and Afonso woke up with shouts and the clangor of swords. [...] “Save yourselves,” the captain shouted at them, “jump into the sea.” (p. 126)

Rafael survives but stays forever homeless and is constantly fleeing to new shores. Another Rafael Mendes aspires to become a sailor. In a clear allusion to Jonah’s encounter with the sailors, Rafael mistakes the other sailors for Hebrews, only to be disappointed (pp. 185–90). In the penultimate incarnation, Rafael Mendes seeks to return to Spain to fight with the Republicans (p. 259). He never reaches Spain, however, but instead dies on board the ship and, like Jonah, his body is thrown into the sea: During a brief moment of lucidity, he announced that he would be dying soon; he asked that his body be cast into the sea so that like Jonah (to use his own words) he could reach his destination. (p. 259)

Scliar’s novel evokes the book of Jonah, creating in Rafael an alternative type of Jonah. In Scliar’s hands, Rafael like Jonah has a mission, but unlike Jonah he does not know exactly what that mission is. Furthermore, Rafael like Jonah flees but while Jonah’s flight is an active rebellion, Rafael’s flight

268

Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer

is mostly passive, undertaken in response to the events that befall him. 33 Finally, Rafael, like Jonah, wishes to reach Spain (i. e. Tarshish) but none of them reach their destination, either dying at sea or being forced to reroute to Nineveh. The lasting impression is that of Jonah and of his alter ego, Rafael, as the eternal exile who, haunted by his God, has no home and who never reaches his promised land.

6. Conclusion In this article, I have read the Jonah narrative through two different lenses: through its intertextual interaction backwards with Gen 3–4 and through its intertextual interaction forwards with two twentieth-century literary writings. We have seen that the notion of Jonah as an exile, extant already in the biblical narrative predominantly through its allusion to Cain as well as to Adam and Eve, yet nevertheless partly veiled and hidden from clear view, is brought to the forefront in its subsequent reception. In the hands of later readers, the allusions in the book of Jonah to the first human family that are embedded in the biblical text helped transform the character of Jonah from a rebellious prophet who disobeys God into a rootless man who is unable ever to return home.

33 See further L. B. Barr, “The Jonah Experience: The Jews of Brazil According to Scliar,” in The Jewish Diaspora in Latin America: New Studies on History and Literature (ed. David Sheinin and Lois Baer Barr; New York and London: Garland Publishing, 1996), 33–52, 42–45.

List of Contributors Sonja Ammann, Assistant Professor, University of Basel Ulrich Berges, Professor, University of Bonn /Extra-ordinary Professor, University of Pretoria Göran Eidevall, Professor, University of Uppsala Martien A. Halvorson-Taylor, Associate Professor, University of Virginia Søren Holst, Associate Professor, University of Copenhagen Else K. Holt, Associate Professor, University of Aarhus Jesper Høgenhaven, Professor, University of Copenhagen Paul M. Joyce, Professor, King’s College London Hyun Chul Paul Kim, Professor, Methodist Theological School in Ohio Anja Klein, Senior Lecturer, University of Edinburgh Francis Landy, Professor (em.), University of Alberta Frederik Poulsen, Assistant Professor, University of Copenhagen Cian Power, Independent Scholar Dalit Rom-Shiloni, Associate Professor, Tel Aviv University Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer, Reader, University of Aberdeen

Index Index of References Genesis 1 1–2 1–11 1:2 1:9–10 2 3 3–4 3:23 3:24 4:5 4:5–6 4:6 4:12 4:13 4:14 4:16 6–8 6:6 7:11 8:7 8:8–12 8:14 10:18 11:1–9 11:8 11:9 12:7 13 13:9 13:10 20:15 25:23 27:12 27:22 29:6–9 31:34 31:37 39:20 41:6 42:36

142 262 259, 262 262 262 116 262–63 255, 259, 262–63, 268 260 259–61 250 260 260 259 259 259 259–60 262 263 260 262 263 263 29 28–29 28 28 219 131 131 131 131 114 47 47 51 47 47 48 40 118

46:29–30 47:6 49:7

54 131 29

Exodus 1:16 1:22 2:16 9:24 9:31 10:21 10:21–23 10:23 12:11 12:38 13:17 13:21 14 14–15 14:16 14:19 14:21 15:13 16:32 20:5–6 20:26 21:7 24 24:10 24:16 24:16–17 24:17 28:42–43 32:34 34 40:34

51 51 51 140 206 47 47 47 65 67 73 65, 72–73 205 64 71 65, 72 71 73 75 92 152 51 142 142–43 140 140 140 152 73 105 148

Leviticus 16 18:6–19 20:10–18 20:11 20:17–21

74 169 170 169 169

272 23:24–32 25:9 26 26:33 26:36–39 Numbers 5:11–31 11:4 11:8 18:20

Index 74 41 95 30, 190 190 83 75 75 127

Deuteronomy 2:6 4:27 4:27–28 8:3 8:16 16:3 17:14–20 18:18 20 20:5 20:5–7 20:5–10 20:14 20:19–20 22:1 23:2 23:13–14 28 28:28 28:29 28:30–32 28:36 28:48 28:64 29:27 30:1–4 30:3 30:4 32:9 32:12 32:13 32:47

69 29, 190 190 69, 75 75 65 20 76 101 102 101 101 51 49 31 76 152 29, 95 47 47 101–2 190 49, 68 29 222–23 32 29, 191 32 75 73 75 70

Joshua 1:8 15:13 19

76 127 205

Judges 5:28–31 16:21

53 48

16:26

47

Ruth 1:11 3:2

114 30

1 Samuel 2:5 11:11 17:14–15 23:28

53 29 51 128

2 Samuel 8:1 8:2 8:13–14 10:1–5 20:18 23

36 36 36 36 164 20

1 Kings 7:27–39 8:11 14:15 17 18:32 22:17

143 148 30, 222 261 39 30

2 Kings 4:13 8:16–24 14:25 15:29 17 17:3 17:5–6 17:6 17:7 17:7–23 17:13 17:13–14 17:14 17:18 17:19 17:20 17:21 17:23 17:25–28 17:27–28 18:9–12 18:33–34 19:30 19:30–31 22:4

129 106 261 235, 249 94, 233, 235, 244, 249–50 190 189–90 190, 235–36, 249 236 235, 248 236 246 236 190, 236 236, 248 236 31 190, 236, 249 233 190 235 236 220 190 164

273

Index 23:26 24–25 24:1–4 24:3 24:8–17 24:14 24:14–16 24:19–20 24:20 25:5 25:7 25:11 25:11–12 25:12 25:21 25:26 25:27–30

92 94 249 190 190 190 54 249 190 29 48 54 189–90 190 190 54, 190 54

1 Chronicles 5:6 5:26

236 236

2 Chronicles 5:14 7:1 18:25–26 21:12–15 24:13 30 30:5–6 30:6 30:10 32:30 35:17–18 36:23

148 148 48 106 72 250 190 236 190 74 190 249

Ezra 1:1–4 1:5 4–5

191 191 106

Nehemiah 2 4:1 6 9:11 9:12 9:19 9:36–37

106 72 106 71 73 73 50

Esther 3:8 8:13–14

28 106

Job 1:3

132

5:14 12:25 18:15 22:3 29:19

47 47 30 164 225

Psalms 1:3 5:10 39:5–6 44:12 47:5 49:2 49:9 71:6 74:13–14 74:15 77:21 78:13 78:14 78:15 78:53 78:71 78:72 80:9–17 81:4 81:17 103:15 103:17 106:27 107 107:33 107:35 107:35–36 107:36–38 107:38 107:40–41 107:42 109:24 112:4 128:3 137 139:7–9 139:8 146:7–8 147:2

219, 225 128 20 31 75 20 20 114 36 71 73 71 73 71 73 75 73 220 41 75 219 69 30 50, 74, 102–3 74 74 103 102 103 103 103 57 71 219 54, 59, 100 263 263 47 35

Proverbs 2:16 15:7 17:2 30:15–16

128 30 127 16

Isaiah

274 1 1–12 1–39 1:2 1:2–3 1:4 1:8 1:10 1:21 1:22 2:2–4 2:3 2:5 3:16–24 4:2–6 4:4 5 5:1–7 5:7 5:8 5:11 5:11–13 5:12 5:13 5:14 5:18 5:20 5:21–22 5:22 5:25 5:25-11:16 5:26 5:30 6 6:1–3 6:2 6:3 6:4 6:6 6:8 6:9–10 6:10 6:11 6:11–12 6:12 6:13 7 7:2 7:3 7:8 7:11

Index 10 27 46 24 16 66 51 76 51 165 24, 42 76 48 51 34 165 16, 23 38 220 66 16, 66 68 16 16, 49, 68, 73 16, 25 66 46, 66 16 16, 66 34 33 46 46 12–13, 16, 20, 23, 143–44 144 143 16, 148 143 143 20 18, 48 17 242 17 17, 144, 146 17 249 37 17 241–42 18

7:16 7:17 7:20 8:1–4 8:4 8:16–17 8:17 8:18 8:20–22 8:22 9:1 9:5 9:5–6 9:8–17 9:8–21 9:9–10 9:11 9:16 9:17 9:19 9:20 10:1 10:4 10:5 10:5–34 10:8–9 10:9–11 10:12–15 10:13 10:13–14 10:14 10:21 10:21–22 11 11:1–9 11:1–10 11:3 11:6–8 11:9 11:10 11:11 11:11–12 11:11–13 11:11–16 11:12 11:13 11:13–14 11:14 11:15 11:15–16 11:16 12

242–43 17, 241 242 17 241–43 12 12 144 46 32, 47, 50 242 18 17 245 243 243 34 34 242 59 34 66 34 85 33 195 195, 241–43 194 195 194–95 194–96 18 18 33, 42 33 17, 19 14 13, 25 34, 42 33 22, 33–34, 40, 242 33, 36 241–42 4, 27–28, 33, 41–42 29, 34–37, 41 35 33, 35 36–37 37, 40–41 33–34, 36, 38 32, 34, 37, 242 27, 33

275

Index 13:1–22 13:2–22 13:5 13:6 13:9 13:9–16 13:10 13:13 13:13–16 13:14 13:14–16 13:15–16 13:17 14 14:17 15:5–6 16:2–4 16:3–4 17:1–6 17:13 19:18–25 19:25 20 20:4 22:17 22:17–18 24–27 24:1 24:1–3 24:1–14 24:22 25:7 25:8 26:14 26:19 27 27:1 27:2–6 27:7 27:7–13 27:8 27:8–9 27:9 27:10–11 27:12 27:12–13 27:13 28:1 28:2–3 28:16–17 28:25

197 197 198 46 46, 197 197 46 46, 197 197 31, 198, 211 197 198 197 10 48 49 250 32 202 40 242 75 18 18, 241 264 264 27, 37 29 37 202 48 25 42 42 42 38 38, 41 38 38 4, 27–28, 37–38 38–40 37 38–39, 41–42 37 38, 41 27, 37–38, 40, 42, 198, 242 38, 41–42 13 241 22 29

28:27 29:11–12 29:15 29:18–19 30:24 30:26 31:1 33:1 33:20 34–35 34:13 35:1–2 35:1–9 35:1–10 35:2 35:6 35:10 36–38 36:12 37:31 38:12 39:6–7 39:7 39:8 40 40–48 40–66 40:1 40:1–2 40:2 40:3 40:5 40:6–8 40:7 40:8 40:9 40:9–11 40:10 40:11 40:27–28 41:14–16 41:16 41:17 41:17–20 41:18 41:18–19 41:19 41:20 42:1 42:3 42:4 42:5–9

41 17 47, 66 47 30, 192 72 66 66, 164 20 63, 203 211 212 204 27 208, 212 71 207 9 59 220 19 9 19, 48 9 20 77 46, 67, 74 9 9 107 24, 47, 60 24, 143 218 53 69 202 201 202 27 58 204 30, 208 68, 203–5 203, 207, 212 73, 205 47 205 208 76 206 76 63

276 42:6 42:7 42:14–17 42:15 42:16 42:17 42:19–22 42:21 42:22 43:1–7 43:5 43:6 43:16 43:16–17 43:16–21 43:17 43:19 43:19–20 43:20 43:21 43:25 44:1–5 44:3 44:5 44:21 44:21–23 44:23 44:28 45:1 45:1–8 45:2–3 45:4 45:5 45:7 45:8 45:9–10 45:13 45:15 46:8–9 47 47:1 47:1–4 47:1–5 47:3 47:5 47:6 47:7 47:15 48:10 48:17–19 48:20 48:20–21

Index 22, 67 47 204, 207 49 47, 49, 73, 208 48 48 76 48 27, 207 208 54 205 64 204–5, 207, 211–12 206 205–6 73 206 206 57 204, 207 73 208 57–58 204 70, 208 64 64 191, 204 47 21 21 23 208 66 20 12, 21 57 51 51–52 179 52 179 51–52 75 57 47 165 207 70 67, 77

48:20–22 48:21 49:1 49:2 49:4 49:6 49:7–13 49:8 49:8–12 49:8–13 49:9 49:10 49:11 49:13 49:14 49:14–15 49:14–21 49:15 49:22 49:26 50:1–2 50:1–3 50:2 50:10 51:2 51:3 51:4 51:7 51:10 51:12–16 51:13 51:16 51:17–21 51:18–20 51:19 52 52:1 52:1–2 52:2 52:3 52:5 52:11 52:11–12 52:12 53:2 53:8 54:1 54:4 54:10 54:11 54:11–13 54:13

207 71, 73 114 77 58 22, 67 63 67 27 204, 207 48–49 49 37 208 58 57 22 22–23, 58 35, 54 59 22 204, 207 208 48 53 49, 74, 207 76 76 36 204 57 76–77, 208 22 53 49 51 52 51 51 60 60 16 64, 67, 70, 77 72 219 19 53 53, 57, 60 60 40 53 53

277

Index 54:17 55 55/56–66 55:1 55:1–2 55:1–5 55:1–56:8 55:2 55:3 55:5 55:6–7 55:7 55:7–11 55:8–11 55:10 55:10–11 55:11 55:12 55:12–13 55:13 55:17 56 56–59 56:1–8 56:2 56:3 56:3–4 56:3–5 56:4 56:5 56:8 56:10 57:11 57:13 57:18 58 58:1–7 58:2 58:6–7 58:7 58:8 58:8–10 58:8–12 58:9–12 58:10 58:11 58:11–12 58:13–14 58:14 59 59:9 59:9–10

76 4, 63, 66–69, 71, 77 63–64, 66, 70 50 50, 75 66 68, 77 75 67 67 66 67, 71, 77 69 66 50 68–69 70 68 66, 70, 204, 212 68, 70, 208 69 65 75 68, 70–71 77 19, 53, 68, 70, 77 76 48 70 53, 68 32, 35, 77 48 57 40 73 4, 63, 71, 74, 77 71 72 63 50 47, 71–73, 77 71, 73 71 204, 207 50, 71, 73 73–74 71, 73 71, 74–75 74–75 75 47, 50 72

59:20 59:21 60:1 60:1–22 60:2 60:3 60:4 60:5–17 60:8 60:9 60:13 61 61:1 61:1–3 61:5–6 62:5 62:6–7 62:8–9 62:10 62:10–12 62:11 63:1–6 63:12 63:17 65 65:8–10 65:13 65:17 65:17–25 65:20 65:21–22 65:21–23 65:25 66 66:1 66:12 66:12–13 66:13 66:18–24 66:19 66:20 66:22 66:23 66:24

75–76 25, 76–77 71 42 71 71 54 204, 207 211 54 148 64, 66 14, 47 63 50 53 25 50 37 27 51, 74 75 71 75 103 204 50 24 204 25, 127 50 102 50 14 148 24 23 51 42 22, 24 54 24 24 24

Jeremiah 1:1 1:1–3 1:9 1:10 1:18–19 2–3 2:2

126 99 76, 81, 83 103, 222–23 82 181 86

278 2:20 2:21 2:33 3:4 3:6–8 3:7–11 3:8 3:10 3:11 3:11–14 3:12 3:14–15 3:15 3:18 4 4–6 4:7 4:11 4:13 4:19 4:19–21 4:19–31 4:20 4:23–29 4:29 4:30 4:30–31 4:31 5:6 6:1 6:9 6:17 6:24 7:15 7:25 8 8:1–3 8:3 8:9 8:13 8:22 9:9–10 9:11–15 9:15 10 10:16 10:19 10:19–20 10:19–21 10:19–25 10:20 10:21

Index 86 220 181 181 87 245 244 246 245 245 245 107 82 36, 245 111, 115, 117 112, 180 89 30 210 112–14 112–15, 199 112, 114 117 202 112–15 112, 114–15 113 112, 114–15 211 41 220 82 112, 115 244, 246 246 91 90 91 91 211 72 207 207 29 117 75 117 199 199 199 117–18, 199 30, 199

11:16 12:14 12:14–17 12:15 12:16 12:17 13:16 13:18 13:18–19 13:18–27 13:19 13:20 13:20–22 13:20–27 13:21 13:22 13:23–24 13:25–27 13:26 13:27 14:1–6 14:12–16 15:1 15:4 15:7 15:16 16:10–13 16:13 16:14–15 17:8 17:25 18–35 18:5–6 18:7 18:7–10 21:5 21:8 21:9 22:4 22:18–19 22:20–23 22:24–30 22:26 22:28 23 23:1–2 23:1–4 23:5–6 23:13 24 24:5–8 24:6

142 224 222, 224 224 224 224 47 179 179–80, 182 169, 179, 181–82 179, 182 180 179–80 179, 182, 199 180–81 179–82 179, 199 179, 181 181 181 49 49 82 92 31 81, 83 190 264 245 225 74 135 223 222 223 85 129 126 74 89 202 191 264 264 82 30 199, 201 90 246 249 86 222, 224

Index 24:7 25:4 25:34–38 25:36 25:37 25:38 26 26–29 26–36 27–28 27–29 27:1 27:10 27:12–15 29 29:1–7 29:4–23 29:5–7 29:10 29:14 29:16–20 29:21 29:23 29:32 30–31 30:1–4 30:1–31:22 30:3 30:5–7 30:5–11 30:6 30:7 30:8–11 30:10 30:10–11 30:11 30:12–15 30:12–17 30:13 30:14 30:15 30:16–17 30:17 31 31:5 31:7–9 31:8 31:9 31:10 31:10–14 31:12 31:14

88 246 199, 210 200 200 200 98 98–99, 104 98 98, 104 104–5 98 146 85 4, 92, 97–104, 106 190 106 93, 98, 100, 102–3 98 31, 244 99 104 99, 104 107 4 109, 112 109 110, 245 110, 112–13 111–12, 114–15 112, 115 115 110, 112, 115–16 116 201 244 110, 117–18 111, 117 117 117 117 110, 177 72, 117 246 211 207 116 245 31 201, 211 74 74

31:15 31:15–17 31:15–20 31:15–22 31:16–17 31:18–19 31:20 31:21 31:22 31:25 31:27 31:27–28 31:28 31:29 31:29–30 31:31–33 32 32:8 32:38–40 32:44 33:6 33:10 36 36:37 37 37–38 37–40 37–43 37:4 37:11 37:11–16 37:11–40:6 37:12 37:13 37:14 37:14–15 37:15–18 37:20 37:21 38 38:1 38:1–13 38:2 38:3 38:6 38:7 38:9–10 38:13 38:17 38:17–18 38:19 38:21

279 110, 118 111 245 118 110, 119 245 245 37 120 74 92, 224 89, 224 222, 224 92 91–92 88 127 126 88 126 72 190 105 105 123–25, 135 123, 135 129 4, 121–24, 134–35 124, 128, 135 126 5, 121, 124, 125–26 123 125–27, 129 125–26, 129 125, 129 124 48 124 125 122, 124–25 124 124 122, 124–26, 129 125 123–24 125 124 125 122 122 124 122

280 39–45 39:3 39:4–10 39:7 39:11–12 39:11–13 39:14 40 40:1 40:1–6 40:4 40:5 40:6 40:17 41:9 41:16 42 42–43 42:10 42:13–14 42:14 42:15–16 42:19 43 43:1–7 43:5–7 43:6 45:4 46:16 46:26 46:27–28 48:28 48:40 49:5 49:22 49:28–33 49:32 49:36 50–51 50:4 50:4–5 50:8–10 50:17 50:18 50:19 50:21–25 50:24 51:6 51:9 51:19 51:34 51:35

Index 77 130 130 48 130 130 128, 130 123–24, 130–31, 135 123 5, 121, 129–31 122, 131–32 128–29, 131–33 128–29, 133 122 244 134 93 122–23 93, 222 122 124 93 93 93, 124, 133, 135 54 133 5, 121, 133–34 222–23 198 210 201 210 210 201 210 211 30, 190 30, 190 85, 244, 257 245 36 201 31, 210, 244 246 245 210 210 198 198 75 257 257

51:45 51:59–64 52 52:2 52:8

198 105 77, 130 30 29

Lamentations 1:11 1:19–20 2:11–12 2:20–21 3:2 3:6 3:34 4:1–2 4:9 4:15 4:17 5:2 5:3 5:4 5:6 5:9–10

50 50 50 50 47 47 47 53 49–50 52 132 50 50 50 50 50

Ezekiel 1 1–5 1–24 1–33 1:1 1:1–3 1:2 1:3 1:4 1:4–28 1:5 1:5–6 1:5–14 1:9 1:12 1:15–21 1:16 1:17 1:18 1:20 1:22 1:22–23 1:24 1:26 1:27 1:28 3:1–3

5, 93, 137, 139, 143, 146 77 160–61 160 137–38, 171 167 171 137 140 140 141 139 140 141 141 141 141 141 142 142 142 142 142 142–43 142, 144 140, 142 81, 83

281

Index 3:8–9 3:10–15 3:11 3:15 3:17–21 3:22–23 3:23 3:25 4 4–24 4:1–3 4:4–8 4:9–13 4:10 4:12–14 4:13 4:13–14 4:15 5 5:2 5:9–12 5:10 5:10–12 5:11 5:12 5:13 6:5 6:6 7:2 7:27 8 8–9 8–11 8:3 8:4 8:5 8:7–18 8:10–11 8:12 8:14 8:16 9 9:3 9:9 10–11 10:2 10:4 10:9–22 10:15 10:20 10:22 11

82 167 138, 171 137, 171 82 137 137 152 166 161, 168 152 152 152 152 59 152 152 152 156, 158–59, 166 190 153 190 154 162 190 85 30 89 35, 143 90 144 144–45 5, 137, 143, 154 144 137, 144 144 144 144 145 145 145 145 147 145 146 143 147 146 137 137, 141 137 154

11:14–21 11:15 11:15–16 11:16 11:19–20 11:22–23 11:24 11:25 12 12:3 12:4 12:7 12:11 12:13 12:14 12:14–15 14:14 14:20 14:21 16 16:1 16:1–43 16:2–14 16:2–43 16:6 16:8 16:9–14 16:15 16:15–19 16:15–34 16:16 16:16–21 16:20–21 16:24–25 16:26 16:28–29 16:33–34 16:35–43 16:36 16:37 16:37–38 16:38 16:39 16:44 16:44–58 16:46 16:46–61 16:47 16:50

249 86 146 30, 86, 93, 155 88 93 147, 171 171 31, 77 170–71 171 171 171 137 247 31 82 82 143 5, 86, 161, 167–72, 175–76, 178–79, 182–86, 247 172 172, 175 173 172 173 86, 173 173 86, 173 173 173 173 173 173 173 173 173 173 173 170, 173, 178 87, 168, 170–71, 173–75, 184 177 174, 183 174 174 174 248 247 174, 247 247

282 16:51 16:52 16:53 16:54 16:56 16:57 16:59–63 16:60 16:61 16:62 16:63 17 17–22 17:1–10 17:3–4 17:5 17:6 17:7 17:8 17:9–10 17:10 17:22–24 18 18:1–4 18:2 19 19:1–9 19:10 19:10–14 19:11 19:12 19:13 19:14 20 20–24 20:1 20:21 20:23 20:27 20:30 20:33–44 20:39 20:44 21 21–22 21:2 21:7 22 22:1–16 22:2 22:3 22:3–4

Index 248 248 247 247 174 170, 174 172, 174 175 247 175 175 226 161 207, 210, 225 225 225 225 225 225 225–26 40, 226 191 92 91 92 172, 226 210 226 226 226 222, 226 68, 226 226 161 161 161 161 138 161 161 247 161 161, 247 161 161 161 161 155–56, 158, 161 161–62 161–62 162, 165 162

22:3–14 22:3–16 22:4 22:4–5 22:5 22:6–12 22:10 22:10–11 22:12 22:12–13 22:13–14 22:14 22:15 22:15–16 22:16 22:17–22 22:23–31 22:26 23 23:1–4 23:1–27 23:1–30 23:2–4 23:3 23:5–7 23:5–10 23:8 23:9–10 23:10 23:11 23:11–21 23:11–49 23:12 23:13 23:15 23:15–18 23:18 23:19–21 23:22–27 23:22–34 23:24 23:25 23:26 23:28–30 23:28–49 23:29 23:31

165 163 162, 165 162 162 162 169–70 162 165 165 162 164 138, 155, 158–60, 162–66 154, 165 162, 164–65 161, 165 161 85 5, 161, 167–71, 175–76, 178–79, 182–86 175–76 176 176 87 176 176 176 176 246 168, 170–71, 176–78, 184, 248 176, 247–48 176 176 176 151 177 176 170, 176–77 176 177 177 177 177, 184 177 177 176 168, 170–71, 177–78, 184 178

283

Index 23:31–34 23:33–34 23:45 23:46–48 23:47 23:48 24 24–32 24:3–14 24:10 25:3 29:12 30:20–26 30:26 31 33 33–48 33:3 33:21 33:24–25 34 34–39 34–48 34:1–10 34:2 34:5–6 34:11 34:11–15 34:11–16 34:12 34:17–24 34:21 34:23 34:23–24 34:31 36 36:8–9 36:8–10 36:8–12 36:19 36:23–32 36:24–25 36:24–28 36:24–38 36:25 36:26–27 36:29 36:33 36:36–38 37 37:1 37:1–2

177–78 248 183 185 184 185 77, 161 160 164 164 171 201 207 201 172 161 160 41 168, 171 86 30, 201 168 160 201 82 30 82 168 201 30 201 30 82 90 201 156, 158–59, 166 209 89 208, 211 138 168 156 156 160 165 88 165 156, 165 156 91, 166 57 47, 53, 91, 137

37:1–10 37:6 37:11 37:11–14 37:15–28 37:16–28 37:20–23 37:21 39:23 39:23–29 39:28 40–48 43 43:1–7 43:1–9 43:3 43:5 43:6 43:7 44:23

168 143 53 168 36 247 168 247 170–71 168 170–71 93, 168 5, 137 93 147, 149 137, 147 147–48 148 148 85

Daniel 1:3–6 8:23 9:24

54 164 164

Hosea 1:6–7 2 2:4–17 2:12 2:15 4:15 5:5 5:13 5:14 6:4 6:5 7:11 8:8 8:9 8:13 9:3 9:5–6 9:6 9:8 9:9 9:17 10:1 10:5–6 10:6 10:11 11:1

239 87 179 179 240 239–40 240 240 240 229 241 240 240 210 240 227, 240 199, 211 227, 240 241 241 240 220 240 240 240 240

284 11:4 11:5 11:8–9 11:10–11 11:11 11:12 12:1 12:10 12:13 13:1 13:3 14:6 14:6–8 14:6–9 14:7 14:8 14:9

Index 75 240 241 211 241 239 240 241 240 240, 247 229 229–30 229 226, 229–32 229–31 229–31 218, 230

Joel 2:1 2:1–2 2:15 3:4 4:2 4:6

41 46 41 46 29 146

Amos 1:1 1:5 1:15 2:4–6 2:16 3:11 3:14 4:1 4:1–3 4:3 4:6 4:6–11 4:8 4:9 4:10 4:11 5:5 5:6 5:11 5:18–20 5:26 5:27 6:7 6:14 7:10–12 7:11

237 237, 240 237 237 237 238 237 237 237 239 227 227 227 227 227 227 237 237 228 46 237 238 237 238 237 238–39, 244

7:13 7:15 7:17 8:11 9:4 9:7 9:9 9:11–15 9:12 9:13 9:13–15 9:14 9:15

239 239 237–39 68 238–39 240 238–39 227 239 227 226–28, 232 227–28 222, 228, 231, 239

Obadiah 18–20

237

Jonah 1 1:1–3 1:3 1:4 1:5 1:9 1:10 1:11 1:11–13 1:12 1:13 1:15 2 2:1 2:3 2:4 2:5 2:6 2:7 2:9 2:12 3–4 3:9–10 4:1 4:2 4:4 4:5

257 261 259, 263 264 164 262 259 264 40 264 264 264 257–59 258 258 258, 260, 263 258–60 260, 262 257–58, 264 262 258 257 263 260 263 260 260–61

Micah 1:5–7 1:8 1:9 1:13 1:16 2:12 5:5–6

243 243 243 243 210, 245 243 243

285

Index

29 179 179–80 53 201

2:10 2:11 2:15 7:14 9:11–12 9:14 10:6–10 10:11 13:9

66 66 67 40, 264 47 41 237 36 30

Habakkuk 1:8 3:14

210 29

Malachi 2:3 3:20

30 71–72

Zephaniah 3:10

29

Tobit 14:4

261

Zechariah 2 2:1–4

67 31

Sirach 38:17 49:3

164 164

5:6–8 6:16

211 243

Nahum 2:2 3:1–7 3:5 3:10 3:18–19

Author Index Abernethy, A. T. 49–50 Abrego, J. M. 132–33 Ackroyd, P. 167, 256 Adams, S. L. 50 Ahn, J. J. 45, 49 Albertz, R. 77, 169 Allen, L. C. 161–62, 164, 170, 172–76, 178, 180 Anderson, G. W. 81 Anderson, J. E. 259, 262–63 Assmann, J. 57–58 Aster, S. Z. 194–97 Bach, R. 223 Bar-Effrat, S. 57 Barr, L. B. 268 Barstad, H. M. 208 Barthélemy, D. 133 Basson, A. 219 Baumann, G. 168–70, 174, 176, 178, 180–81, 183–85 Bechtel, L. M. 183–84 Belibtreu, E. 48 Ben Zvi, E. 9 Berger, Y. 259, 262 Berges, U. 9, 24, 64–66, 68–69, 76–77 Bergmann, C. D. 57 Berlin, A. 11, 101 Berquist, J. L. 70 Bertholet, A. 143, 164 Beuken, W. A. M. 12, 18–19, 34, 36, 40–41, 72, 75 Biddle, M. E. 49, 184 Black, M. 221 Blanchot, M. 12–13 Blenkinsopp, J. 12, 19, 165, 194 Block, D. I. 161–62, 164, 170, 173–74, 225–26, 262 Bogaert, P. M. 130 Brayford, S. A. 183 Brettler, M. 235

Bridgeman, V. 51 Bright, J. 125, 132 Brownlee, W. H. 155 Brueggemann, W. 58 Burrows, M. 81 Caird, G. B. 84 Camp, C. V. 11 Carr, D. M. 10 Carroll, R. P. 14–15, 105–6, 113, 125, 130, 135, 137, 149, 180–81, 199–200, 233, 255, 264 Chapman, C. 116 Childs, B. S. 89, 194–95 Chilton, B. D. 195 Chong, O.-S. 60 Cixous, H. 13–14 Clements, R. E. 12, 27, 34, 39, 46, 89, 161, 197 Clines, D. J. A. 170 Cohen, M. 165 Cohen, R. 94 Collins, T. 84, 89 Cornill, C. H. 126–29 Craigie, P. C. 180 Croatto, J. S. 24, 35 Crouch, C. L. 83, 245 Cruz, J. 55–56 Dahood, M. 20 Dalley, S. 235 Darr, K. P. 185 Davidson, S. V. 130 Davies, P. R. 92 Davis, E. F. 83 Day, L. 168, 172–73 de Beaugency, É. 165 de Jong, M. J. 161 de Moor, J. C. 83 Dearman, J. A. 230 Delaney, C. 183

287

Index Derrida, J. 12 Dewrell, H. D. 240 Diamond, A. R. P. 129 Dijkstra, M. 132 Dille, S. 47, 54 Douglas, M. 104 Downs, D. J. 255, 257, 259–60, 263–64 Doyle, B. 39, 41 Drinkard, Jr., J. F. 180 Driver, G. R. 40 Driver, S. R. 125 Duhm, B. 150 Eichrodt, W. 164 Eidevall, G. 220, 227, 230, 239 Eph’al, I. 190 Ephros, A. Z. 256 Erlandsson, S. 177 Farrer, A. 84 Finkelstein, I. 250 Fischer, G. 74, 76, 180, 182, 224 Fischer, I. 69 Fishbane, M. 74, 84, 170 Fitzgerald, A. 184 Fohrer, G. 164 Fontaine, C. R. 11 Foreman, B. A. 257 Frahm, E. 48 Franke, C. 48, 52 Frantzmann, M. 52 Friebel, K. G. 82 Fried, L. S. 20 Frymer-Kensky, T. 217, 219–20 Fuchs, A. 189 Gadd, J. C. 190 Galambush, J. 168, 172 Galil, G. 235 Galling, K. 164 Gärtner, J. 69 Gerhards, M. 259 Gerstenberger, E. S. 102–4 Gertz, J. C. 238 Gesenius, W. 127–28, 131–32, 170, 180–81 Gibson, J. C. L. 84 Gile, J. 28, 30, 138 Ginsberg, H. L. 233 Giovannini, M. J. 183 Goldingay, J. 21–22, 72–73, 77 Goldstein, R. 50, 125, 134

Gordon, P. 181 Granerød, G. 100 Gray, D. K. H. 24 Graybill, R. 18 Grayson, A. K. 190 Green, B. 123 Greenberg, M. 83, 152–53, 161–65, 174, 177 Gregory, B. C. 63–64 Gudme, A. K. d. H. 3, 167 Hadijev, S. 183, 185 Hakham, A. 196, 198, 205 Halbwachs, M. 58 Hall, G. H. 177 Halvorson-Taylor, M. A. 11, 56–57, 63–64, 73, 87, 110, 112, 118, 121, 245, 255 Hardmeier, C. 130, 132 Harshav, B. 55 Heinisch, P. 165 Hendel, R. 58 Herrmann, S. 222 Hesse, E. W. 262 Hibbard, J. T. 27 Hill, J. 131 Hills, D. 11 Hjelm, I. 3, 167 Holladay, W. L. 82–84, 92, 127, 129, 180–81, 199, 224 Holt, E. K. 92, 123 Hossfeld, F.-L. 69, 74, 102 Høgenhaven, J. 35, 86, 93, 150, 154, 166 Isaksson, B.

126

Jakobson, R. 11 Janzen, J. G. 131 Jastrow, M. 128 Jenner, K. D. 41 Jenni, E. 162 Jeppesen, K. 61 Jindo, J. Y. 217, 223 Johnson, D. G. 39 Joüon, P. 179 Joyce, P. M. 81, 83, 86, 93, 165, 225–26, 237 Kamionkowski, S. T. 56 Keil, C. F. 138, 140, 165 Kelley, P. H. 180 Kessler, J. 107

288 Kiefer, J. 169–71 Kikawada, I. M. 262 Kim, H. C. P. 52 Kleber, K. 48 Klein, A. 87, 168, 181, 183, 247 Knierim, R. P. 57 Knoppers, G. N. 63, 65, 250 Koenen, K. 74 König, F. E. 132 Koole, J. L. 73 Korpel, M. C. A. 68, 71, 218 Kostamo, S. K. 9 Kratz, R. G. 100, 241 Kremers, H. 123 Kristeva, J. 13 Krüger, T. 172, 176, 178, 183 Lacan, J. 14 LaCapra, D. 10 Lack, R. 65–66, 72 Lakoff, G. 55, 219, 221 Landes, G. M. 258 Landy, F. 9, 13–14, 17, 20, 63, 65, 91, 229–30 Lang, B. 91, 151 Lapsley, J. 50 Laufer, S. 122, 135 Lemche, N. P. 46 Lieu, J. M. 58 Lim, B. H. 54 Linville, J. 21, 227 Lipka, H. 172, 174, 178, 183–84 Liss, H. 18–19 Love, N. P. 262 Lund, Ø. 60 Lundbom, J. R. 199–200, 224 Lust, J. 28–29 Lyons, M. A. 160, 165 Løland, H. 11 MacDonald, N. 50 Machinist, P. 195 Magdalene, F. R. 174, 185 Maier, C. 168, 174, 184 Maier, M. P. 67 Malley, M. 57 Marks, H. 12 McKane, W. 125, 127–32, 179–80, 199–200 Meade, D. G. 72 Migsch, H. 126, 128 Miller, G. D. 84

Index Miller, J. W. 81, 87 Miller, Jr., P. D. 85 Moughtin-Mumby, S. Moyal, H. 196, 198 Muraoka, T. 179

54, 87

Na’aman, N. 234 Navarro, E. F. 63 Nichols, G. C. 266 Nielsen, K. 55, 220 Nogalski, J. 15, 251 Noth, M. 249 Novotny, J. 190 O’Brien, J. M. 94 Oded, B. 189–90 Odell, M. S. 83 Oestreich, B. 229–30 Olyan, S. M. 223 Osuji, A. 99 Oswalt, J. N. 34–35, 39, 42 Otto, E. 70, 76 Pantoja, J. M. 218, 220 Pardee, D. 105 Parker, J. 51 Patte, D. 157 Paul, S. M. 24, 40, 48, 202, 206, 208, 239 Pearce, L. E. 100, 191 Petersen, D. L. 233–34, 238, 252 Petterson, A. R. 264 Pohlmann, K. F. 127, 139–40, 163, 171–73, 176–78 Poulsen, F. 27, 35–36, 42, 145, 242 Power, C. 36 Preuß, H. D. 162 Raitt, T. M. 90 Reimer, D. 244 Renz, T. 165 Richards, I. A. 56 Ricæur, P. 56 Roberts, J. J. M. 198 Rodoreda, M. 265 Rom-Shiloni, D. 54, 64, 81, 84, 86, 190–91, 201 Rudolph, W. 126–27, 129, 132, 179–80, 200 Sanders, J. A. 89 Schapiro, M. 260 Schmid, K. 180

289

Index Schütte, W. 238 Schwemer, A. M. 261 Scliar, M. 266 Seitz, C. R. 34, 84, 127 Sharp, C. 97, 99–101, 104 Shields, M. E. 168, 172, 174 Skinner, J. 122, 125 Smelik, K. A. D. 105–6 Smith, D. L. 47 Smith, D. M. 46 Smith, G. A. 256 Smith, J. Z. 21 Smith, M. S. 218 Smith-Christopher, D. L. 52, 63, 256 Smoak, J. D. 53 Sommer, B. 75 Soskice, J. M. 85 Sperber, J. 128 Steck, O. H. 27, 70, 76, 175, 184–85 Stern, D. 218 Stern, J. 55 Stevens, M. E. 67 Stiebert, J. 175, 183–84 Stienstra, N. 179 Streane, A. W. 128, 131 Stipp, H.-J. 126–27, 130, 133–34 Stone, K. 183 Stowe, D. W. 59 Stromberg, J. 19, 33, 35, 64 Stulman, L. 224 Sweeney, M. A. 18, 24, 39, 52, 73, 195, 197, 249 Tadmor, H. 189, 195 Tiemeyer, L.-S. 25, 91, 208, 258 Tov, E. 98–99 Trible, P. 182 Tsevat, M. 128 Turner, K. J. 28 Turner, M. 219, 221 van Dijk-Hemmes, F. 168, 185 van Hecke, P. 11 van Wieringen, A. L. H. M. 20 Vanoni, G. 259

von Rad, G. 88 Vieweger, D. 81 Volz, P. 125, 127, 129, 132 Wanke, G. 123, 132, 134 Washington, H. C. 181 Weems, R. 168 Weimer, P. 259 Weinfeld, M. 71 Weippert, H. 100, 222 Weiser, A. 127 Weiss, M. 218 Westermann, C. 24, 76, 169, 206 Wetter, A.-M. 32 Wevers, J. W. 164 Widengren, G. 30, 32 Wildberger, H. 12, 34, 36, 39, 41, 194, 196, 198 Willey, P. T. 49–50, 52–53 Williamson, H. G. M. 34, 93, 241 Willis, J. T. 38, 50 Willis, W. 47 Wilson, I. D. 14, 20–21 Wilson, R. R. 83 Winnicott, D. W. 14 Wischnowsky, M. 184 Wolff, H. W. 68 Wong, K. L. 164–65 Wright, C. H. H. 256 Wu, D. Y. 183 Wunsch, C. 100, 191 Yamada, S. 195 Yerushalmi, Y. H. Yoshiaki, Y. 60 Young, E. J. 34 Younger, Jr., K. L.

58 234

Zenger, E. 69, 74, 102 Ziegler, J. 128 Zimmerli, W. 139–40, 143–45, 162–64, 170–73, 176–77, 225 Zobel, H.-J. 169, 181–82 Zohary, M. 220 Zoric, V. 55