Perspectives on Hebrew Scriptures X: Comprising the Contents of Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, vol. 13 9781463237646

Citation preview

Perspectives on Hebrew Scriptures

Perspectives on Hebrew Scriptures and its Contexts 23

This series contains volumes dealing with the study of the Hebrew Bible, ancient Israelite society and related ancient societies, Biblical Hebrew and cognate languages, the reception of biblical texts through the centuries, and the history of the discipline. The series includes monographs, edited collections, and the printed version of the Journal of Hebrew Scriptures.

Perspectives on Hebrew Scriptures X

Comprising the Contents of Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, vol. 13

Edited by

Christophe Nihan Ehud Ben Zvi

R ^ OR ORGIAS RESS

2017

Gorgias Press LLC, 954 River Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA www.gorgiaspress.com Copyright © 2017 by Gorgias Press LLC

All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise without the prior written permission of Gorgias Press LLC. 2017

ISBN 978-1-4632-0691-8

Printed in the United States of America

ISSN 1935-6897

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ARTICLES

Yahweh's Breast: Interpreting Haggai's Temple through Melanie Klein's Projective Identification Theory Jeremiah W Cataldo 1 The Qumran Scrolls of the Book of Judges: Literary Formation, Textual Criticism, and Historical Linguistics Robert Rezetko 23 The Use of Leviticus in Ezra-Nehemiah Hannah K. Harrington 99 An Optative Indicative? A Real Factual Past? Toward A CognitiveTypological Approach to the Precative Qatal Alex Andrason 119 "It Is Not Right For a Man Who Worships God to Repay His Neighbor Evil For Evil": Christian Ethics in Joseph and Aseneth (Chapters 22-29) RivkaNir 163 Scripturalization and the Aaronide Dynasties James W. Watts

195

Josephus,^«//^»//» 10.180—82, Jeremiah, and Nebuchadnezzar Craig W.Tyson 211 Creation in Collision? Isaiah 40—48 and Zoroastrianism, Babylonian Religion and Genesis 1 Tina Dykesteen Nilsen 227 Zechariah 9—14 and the Ptolemaic Period Hervé Gonzalez

Continuation of Zechariah

during the 247

A 7th Century BCE Bulla Fragment From Area D3 In The 'City of David'/Silwan Yuval Gadot, Yuval Goren and Oded Lipschits 295 v

vi

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

An Emendation of Hab 2:4a in the light of Hab 1:5 Thomas Renz

307

Jerubaal, Jacob and the Battle for Shechem: A Tradition History Zev Färber

319

Malbim's Approach to the Sins Of Biblical Personages Amos Frisch

348

Double Meaning in the Parable of the Poor Man's Ewe (2 Sam 12:1—4) Joshua Berman 371 REVIEWS

Maria Teresa Ortega Monasterio, José Manueal Sánchez Caro, and Guadalupe Seijas de los Ríos, A TRAVÉS DE LOS SIGLOS: HISTORIA DEL TEXTO BÍBLICO

Reviewed by Andrés Piquer Otero

389

Ingrid E. Lilly, TWO BOOKS OF EZEKIEL: PAPYRUS 967 AND THE MASORETIC TEXT AS VARIANT LITERARY EDITIONS

Reviewed by Penelope Bartner

391

Garett Galvin, EGYPT AS A PLACE OF REFUGE

Reviewed by Safwat Marzouk

396

Christopher B. Ansberry, BE WISE, MY SON, AND MAKE M Y HEART GLAD: AN EXPLORATION OF THE COURTLY NATURE OF THE BOOK OF PROVERBS

Reviewed by Edward Ho

401

Stuart W e e k s , ECCLESIASTES AND SCEPTICISM

Reviewed by Doug Ingram Friedhelm Hartenstein and Bernd Janowski, PSALMEN Reviewed by Scott C.Jones

405 408

L a u r e n A. M o n r o e , JOSIAH'S REFORM AND THE DYNAMICS OF DEFILEMENT: ISRAELITE RITES OF VIOLENCE AND THE MAKING OF A BIBLICAL TEXT

Reviewed by Mark Leuchter Jan P. Fokkelman, THE BOOK OF JOB IN FORM:

413 A LITERARY

TRANSLATION WITH COMMENTARY

Reviewed by Amy Erickson

419

R a y m o n d J . Person, THE DEUTERONOMISTIC HISTORY AND THE BOOK OF CHRONICLES: SCRIBAL WORKS IN AN ORAL WORLD

Reviewed by Sean E. Cook

423

TABLE OF CONTENTS

vii

Reinhard Feldmeier and H e r m a n n Spieckermann, GOD OF THE LIVING: A BIBLICAL THEOLOGY R e v i e w e d by J o s e p h R y a n Kelly 426 J e f f r e y Boss, HUMAN CONSCIOUSNESS OF GOD IN THE BOOK OF JOB: A THEOLOGICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL COMMENTARY Reviewed by August Konkel 431 Barbara M . L e u n g Lai, THROUGH THE T-WlNDOW: THE INNER LIFE OF CHARACTERS IN THE HEBREW BIBLE R e v i e w e d by D. N a t h a n Pinney 434 D a v i d A . Bergen, DlSCHRONOLOGY AND DIALOGIC IN THE BIBLE'S PRIMARY NARRATIVE Reviewed by Aaron J. Culp 437 J e n n i e R. Ebeling, WOMEN'S LIVES IN BIBLICAL TIMES R e v i e w e d by Cynthia Shafer-Elliott 440 Susanne Gillmayr-Bucher, ERZÄHLTE WELTEN IM RICHTERBUCH R e v i e w e d b y Phillippe Guilllaume 443 UWE RECHBERGER, VON DER KLAGE ZUM LOB: STUDIEN ZUM "STIMMUNGSUMSCHWUNG" IN DEN PSALMEN Reviewed b y j a k o b Wöhrle 447 Camilla H e l e n a V o n Heijne, THE MESSENGER OF THE LORD IN EARLY JEWISH INTERPRETATIONS OF GENESIS R e v i e w e d by M i c h a e l H u n d l e y 452 M a x i n e L . G r o s s m a n (ed), REDISCOVERING THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS: AN ASSESSMENT OF OLD AND NEW APPROACHES AND METHODS 455 R e v i e w e d by Russell D. Taylor J r KEITH BODNER, JEROBOAM'S ROYAL DRAMA R e v i e w e d by Lissa M . W r a y Beal 458 Sarah Lebhar Hall, CONQUERING CHARACTER: THE CHARACTERIZATION OF JOSHUA IN JOSHUA 1-11 R e v i e w e d by G o r d o n Oeste 461 RODRIGO F. DE SOUSA, ESCHATOLOGY AND MESSIANISM IN L X X ISAIAH 1 - 1 2 R e v i e w e d by A n t h o n y R. Pyles 464 REINHARD ACHENBACH, RAINER ALBERTZ, AND JAKOB WÖHRLE (EDS), THE FOREIGNER AND THE LAW: PERSPECTIVES FROM THE HEBREW BIBLE AND THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST R e v i e w e d by M a r k A . Christian 467

viii

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

Caryn

A.

Reeder,

THE

ENEMY

IN

THE

HOUSEHOLD:

FAMILY

V I O L E N C E IN D E U T E R O N O M Y AND B E Y O N D Reviewed by R o b e r t R. Beck

476

DON C. BENJAMIN, STONES A N D STORIES: A N INTRODUCTION TO ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE BIBLE R e v i e w e d b y C h r i s t o p h e r B. A n s b e r r y

478

JENNIE BARBOUR, T H E STORY OF ISRAEL IN T H E B O O K OF Q O H E L E T : ECCLESIASTES AS CULTURAL MEMORY R e v i e w e d b y M a r t i n A . Shields ANGELA

R.

ROSKOP,

THE

482

WILDERNESS

ITINERARIES:

GENRE,

GEOGRAPHY, AND T H E G R O W T H OF T O R A H Reviewed by G r a h a m Davies

486

REINOUD OOSTING., T H E R O L E OF ZLON/JERUSALEM IN ISAIAH 4 0 - 5 5 : A CORPUS-LINGUISTIC APPROACH Reviewed by Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer Koowon

490

K i m , INCUBATION AS A T Y P E - S C E N E IN T H E

KIRTA,

AND

HANNAH

STORIES:

A

'AQHATU,

FORM-CRITICAL

AND

NARRATOLOGICAL STUDY OF ICTU 1 . 1 4 1 - 1 . 1 5 I I I , 1.171—II, AND 1 SAMUEL 1 : 1 - 2 : 1 1 R e v i e w e d b y S t e p h e n C. R u s s e l

496

EHUD BEN ZVI AND DIANA V . EDELMAN (EDS), T H E PRODUCTION OF PROPHECY:

CONSTRUCTING

PROPHECY

AND

PROPHETS

IN

YEHUD Reviewed by Michael H . Floyd

500

J a m e s H . C h a r l e s w o r t h et al. (eds), T E M P L E SCROLL A N D RELATED DOCUMENTS, VOL. 7 OF T H E D E A D SEA SCROLLS: HEBREW, ARAMAIC, AND G R E E K TEXTS WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS R e v i e w e d b y R o b e r t C. K a s h o w

503

D i a n a V . E d e l m a n , P h i l i p R. D a v i e s , C h r i s t o p h e N i h a n a n d

Thomas

R o m e r , O P E N I N G T H E B O O K S OF MOSES Reviewed b y j e f f r e y G . Audrisch

506

WILLIAM G . DEVER, T H E LIVES OF ORDINARY P E O P L E IN A N C I E N T ISRAEL: W H E R E ARCHAEOLOGY A N D THE BIBLE INTERSECT Reviewed by J o h n L. McLaughlin

510

Steven Tuell, E Z E K I E L Reviewed by D . N a t h a n Phinney MICHAEL D .

MATLOCK, DISCOVERING

513 THE TRADITIONS

OF

PROSE

PRAYERS IN EARLY JEWISH LITERATURE Reviewed by Rodney Werline

516

TABLE OF CONTENTS

IX

BRADFORD A . ANDERSON, BROTHERHOOD AND INHERITANCE: A CANONICAL READING OF THE ESAU AND EDOM TRADITIONS REVIEWED BYJUAN MANUEL TEBES 520 RANNFRID I. THELLE, APPROACHES TO THE CHOSEN PLACE: ACCESSING A BIBLICAL CONCEPT J . GORDON MCCONVILLE 524 DIRK J . HUMAN (ED), PSALMODY AND POETRY IN OLD TESTAMENT ETHICS REVIEWED BY ANDREW SLOANE 527 ANTHONY HEACOCK, JONATHAN LOVED DAVID: MANLY LOVE IN THE BIBLE AND THE HERMENEUTICS OF SEX REVIEWED BY JONATHAN ROWE 530 DANNY MATHEWS, ROYAL MOTIFS IN THE PENTATEUCHAL PORTRAYAL OF MOSES REVIEWED BY DAVID B . SCHREINER 534 WILLA M . JOHNSON, THE HOLY SEED HAS BEEN DEFILED: THE INTERETHNIC MARRIAGE DILEMMA IN EZRA 9 - 1 0 REVIEWED BY LISBETH S. FRIED 538 DONG-HYUK KIM, EARLY BIBLICAL HEBREW, LATE BIBLICAL HEBREW, AND LINGUISTIC VARIABILITY: A SOCIOLINGUISTIC EVALUATION OF THE LINGUISTIC DATING OF BIBLICAL TEXTS REVIEWED BY ROBERT REZETKO 542 MICAH D . KIEL, THE "WHOLE TRUTH": RETHINKING RETRIBUTION IN THE BOOK OF TOBIT REVIEWED BY FRANCIS M . MACATANGAY 558 ULRICH BERGES, ISAÍAS: E L PROFETA Y EL LIBRO REVIEWED BY ENRIQUE SANZ GIMÉNEZ-RICO 561 ARMIN LANGE AND MATTHIAS WEIGOLD, BIBLICAL QUOTATIONS AND ALLUSIONS IN SECOND TEMPLE JEWISH LITERATURE REVIEWED BY KYUNG BAEK 564 JOSÉ MARTÍNEZ DELGADO (ED), E L VIAJE LINGÜÍSTICO DE LA BIBLIA REVIEWED BY GUADALUPE SEIJAS DE LOS RIOS ZARZOSA 567 HELMUT UTZSCHNEIDER AND WOLFGANG OSWALD, EXODUS 1 - 1 5 REVIEWED BY THOMAS B . DOZEMAN 571

Christopher

G. Frechette, MESOPOTAMIAN RITUAL-PRAYERS OF

"HAND-LIFTING" (AKKADIAN SUILLAS): A N INVESTIGATION OF FUNCTION IN LIGHT OF THE IDIOMATIC MEANING OF THE RUBRIC

Reviewed by William Morrow

574

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

X

E c k a r t O t t o , DEUTERONOMIUM 1 - 1 1 : E R S T E R T E I L B A N D :

1,1-4,43;

ZWEITER T E I L B A N D : 4 , 4 4 - 1 1 , 3 2 Reviewed by Pekka Pitkänen MAGNAR

KARTVEIT,

REJOICE,

577

DEAR

ZLON:

HEBREW

CONSTRUCT

PHRASES WITH " D A U G H T E R " AND " V I R G I N " AS N O M E N R E G E N S Reviewed by Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer

583

KONRAD S C H M I D , G E N E S I S A N D T H E M O S E S

STORY: ISRAEL'S

DUAL

ORIGINS IN T H E HEBREW B I B L E R e v i e w e d b y Bill T . A r n o l d

589

HANNE VON WEISSENBERG, JUHA PAKKALA AND MARKO MARTITILA (EDS), CHANGES

IN

SCRIPTURE:

REWRITING

AND

INTERPRETING

AUTHORITATIVE TRADITIONS IN T H E S E C O N D T E M P L E PERIOD Reviewed by Garrick Allen

592

KLEIN RALPH W., 2 CHRONICLES: A COMMENTARY R e v i e w e d b y S t e v e n J . Schweitzer

596

JASON T . LECUREUX, T H E THEMATIC U N I T Y OF T H E B O O K OF T H E TWELVE Reviewed by J a m e s Nogalski MARY KATHERINE Y . ASSYRIANS

IN

H.

598

HORN, T H E

ISAIAH:

CHARACTERIZATION

SYNCHRONIC

AND

OF

THE

DIACHRONIC

PERSPECTIVES R e v i e w e d b y Paul S. E v a n s MARK R . SNEED, T H E POLITICS OF PESSIMISM IN ECCLESIASTES:

602 A

SOCIAL-SCIENCE PERSPECTIVE R e v i e w e d b y S t e p h e n J . B e n n e t t a n d Charles A w a s u

606

GEOFFREY P . MILLER, T H E WAYS OF A K I N G : L E G A L A N D POLITICAL IDEAS IN T H E B I B L E Reviewed by Ian D o u g l a s Wilson

609

BLANE CONKLIN, O A T H FORMULAS IN BIBLICAL HEBREW R e v i e w e d b y j o s h u a E . Stewart

613

D a n i e l C . H a r l o w , M a t t h e w J . G o f f , K a r i n a M . H o g a n , a n d J o e l S. K a m i n s k y (eds), T H E " O T H E R " IN S E C O N D T E M P L E JUDAISM: ESSAYS IN H O N O R OF J O H N J . COLLINS Reviewed by Anthony Meyer

616

ELIE ASSIS, T H E B O O K OF J O E L : A PROPHET BETWEEN CALAMITY AND HOPE Reviewed b y j o e l Barker

621

JEREMY SCHIPPER, PARABLES AND CONFLICT IN T H E HEBREW B I B L E Reviewed by Mari J0rstad

625

TABLE OF CONTENTS

XI

EHUD BEN ZVI AND CHRISTOPH LEVIN (EDS), REMEMBERING AND FORGETTING IN EARLY SECOND TEMPLE JUDAH REVIEWED BY A . J . CULP 627 MATTHEW J . M . COOMBER, RE-READING THE PROPHETS THROUGH CORPORATE GLOBALIZATION: A CULTURAL-EVOLUTIONARY APPROACH TO ECONOMIC INJUSTICE IN THE HEBREW BIBLE REVIEWED BY PETER ALTMANN 630 MATTHEW R . SCHLIMM, FROM FRATRICIDE TO FORGIVENESS: THE LANGUAGE AND ETHICS OF ANGER IN GENESIS REVIEWED BY DUSTIN J . BORELAND 634 DAVID PENCHANSKY, UNDERSTANDING ISRAELITE WISDOM LITERATURE: CONFLICT AND DISSONANCE IN THE HEBREW TEXT REVIEWED BY KEVIN CHAU 639 GREG SCHMIDT GOERING, WISDOM'S ROOT REVEALED: BEN SLRA AND THE ELECTION OF ISRAEL REVIEWED BY RODNEY WERLINE 642 JOHN E . ANDERSON, JACOB AND THE DIVINE TRICKSTER: A THEOLOGY OF DECEPTION AND Y H W H ' S FIDELITY TO THE ANCESTRAL PROMISE IN THE JACOB CYCLE REVIEWED BY DIANA LIPTON 646 MICHAEL PIETSCH, DIE KULTREFORM JOSIAS: STUDIEN ZUR RELIGIONSGESCHICHTE ISRAELS IN DER SPÄTEN KÖNIGSZEIT REVIEWED BY MARTIN LEUENBERGER 650 GEZA G . XERAVITS (ED), A PIOUS SEDUCTRESS: STUDIES IN THE BOOK OF JUDITH REVIEWED BY FRANCIS M . MACATANGAY 655

Index

659

PREFACE

The present volume includes all the articles and reviews published electronically in volume 13 (2013) of the Journal of Hebrew Scriptures. These articles and reviews are accessible online at http://www.jhsonline.org. The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures (JUS) provides free access to peerreviewed articles related to the history of ancient Israel and its literature. The journal's general policy is to serve the production and diffusion of scholarly publications that are well-researched, original, adhere to high academic standards, and have the potential to open new avenues in the field. Because of its electronic format, the journal also contributes to the establishment of new discursive interactions between scholars, and opens increased possibilities for scholars, graduate students, public institutions, and a more general audience to access the journal's publications. This also applies to scholars working in developing nations, where access to scholarly publications often remains an issue. By bringing together authors and readers from different countries, JUS thus contributes to a scholarly conversation which is not restricted by geographical boundaries. In addition, it is the policy of the journal to promote not only publications by scholars who are already well established in the field, but also appropriate publications by scholars who are in earlier stages of their academic careers. While the journal has substantially increased the number of its published contributions throughout the years, the editorial work remains managed, in the main, by volunteers. Mark J. Boda serves as Review Editor for books published in North America and elsewhere in the English speaking world. For this volume, Konrad Schmid and Peter Altmann have served as Review Editors for the book reviews published in "continental" Europe in any language except Spanish. Maria-Teresa Ortega Monasterio is the Review Editor for books published in Spanish. We thank all of them for their work, which represents a major contribution to JHS. The editorial board of the journal consists of Peter Altmann, Ehud Ben Zvi, Adele Berlin, Mark J. Boda, Philip R. Davies, Michael V. Fox, William K. Gilders, Gary N. Knoppers, Robert A. Kugler, Francis Landy, Niels Peter Lemche, Mark Leuchter, Oded Lipschits, Hanna Liss, John L. McLaughlin, Reinhard xiii

xiv

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

Müller, Hindy Najman, Scott B. Noegel, Maria-Teresa Ortega Monasterio, Gary A. Rendsburg, Konrad Schmid and Jacob L. Wright. We thank all of them for their continuous work with, and in support of, the journal. We also thank occasional reviewers of submissions, who have similarly contributed to maintaining the high standards of the journal and to improving the quality of the published articles with their comments and suggestions. The publication of the journal is supported by the Faculty of Theology and Religious Studies at the Université de Lausanne (Switzerland), and is made possible by the work of many people. In particular, Hervé Gonzalez, Julia Rhyder and Melanie Marvin have significantly contributed to the production of the articles contained in the present volume. We wish to take this opportunity to thank them for all the work they have done, and continue to do, for JHS. The present manuscript was prepared by Melanie Marvin, with the assistance of Melonie Schmierer-Lee. Finally, we would like to thank George Kiraz for publishing the printed version of JHS through Gorgias Press. As we complete this preface and recall the various contributions of so many this year, we are reminded again that the continued existence of this open access journal and its present publication in hard copy depend on the passion and dedication of volunteers from around the globe. Christophe Nihan University of Lausanne, Switzerland Ehud Ben Zvi University of Alberta

ABBREVIATIONS AASF AASOR AAR AB ABD ABRL ACJS AcOr ADPV AJBI AJSR ANES ANET

AnBib AnOr AOAT AOS AOT AOTC ArBib AS AS OR ASV ATD AuOr AUS S BA

Annales Academiae scientiarum fennicae Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research American Academy of Religion Anchor Bible Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by David Noel Freedman. 6 vols. New York, 1992 Anchor Bible Reference Library Annual of the College of Jewish Studies Acta orientalia Abhandlungen des Deutschen Valästina-Vereins Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute Association for Jewish Studies Review Anàent Near Eastern Studies Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. Edited b y j . B. Pritchard. 3d ed.; Princeton, 1969 Analecta biblica Analecta orientalia Alter Orient und Altes Testament American Oriental Series Apollos Old Testament Commentaries Abingdon Old Testament Commentaries The Aramaic Bible Assjriological Studies American School of Oriental Research American Standard Version Das Alte Testament Deutsch Aula orientalis Andrews University Seminary Studies Biblical Archaeologist xv

xvi

BAR BASOR BBB BBET BBR BDB

BEATAJ BETL BH BHS Bib Biblnt BibOr BJRL BJS BS BKAT BN BR BSOAS B.T. BWANT BZ BZAR BZAW CAD CANE CBC

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

Biblical Archaeology Review Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research Bonner biblische Beiträge Beiträge zur biblischen Exegese und Theologie Bulletin for Biblical Research F. Brown, S. R. Driver, and C. A. Briggs. A Hebrew and English lexicon of the Old Testament (Oxford, 1907 Beiträge zur Erforschung des Alten Testaments und des antiken Judentum Bibliotheca ephemeridum theologicarum lovaniensium Biblical Hebrew Biblia TLebraica Stuttgartensia. Edited by K. Elliger and W. Rudolph. Stuttgart, 1983 Biblica Biblical Interpretation Biblica et orient alia Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester Brown Judaic Studies Bibliotheca Sacra Biblischer Kommentar, Altes Testament. Edited by M. Noth and H. W. Wolff Biblische Notizen Biblical Research Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies Babylonian Talmud Beitrage zur Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament Biblische Zeitschrift Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft The Assyrian Dictionaiy of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Chicago, 1956— Civilisations of the Ancient Near East. Edited by J. Sasson. 4 vols. New York, 1995 Cambridge Bible Commentary

ABBREVIATIONS

CBOTS CBQ CBQMS CNEB CHANE ConBNT COS DCH DDD2

DJD DPV DSD EBH EI EEF ESV ETL FAT FB FOTL FRLANT FZPT GAT GKG GTJ HAHAT

xvii

Coniectanea Biblica Old Testament Series Catholic Biblical Quarterly Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series Cambridge Commentary on the New English Bible Culture and Histoiy of the Ancient Near East Coniectanea neotestamentica or Coniectanea biblica: New Testament Series Context of Scripture Dictionary of Classical Hebrew. Edited by D. J. A. Clines. Sheffield, 1993Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible. Edited by K. van der Toorn, B. Becking, and P. W. van der Horst. Second Extensively Revised Edition; Leiden/Grand Rapids, 1999. Sheffield, 1993Discoveries in the Judaean Desert Deutsch Verein zur Erforschung Palsätinas Dead Sea Discoveries Early Biblical Hebrew Eret^ Israel Egypt Exploration Fund English Standard Version Ephemerides Theologicae Eovaniens es Forschungen zum Alten Testament Forschung zur Bibel Forms of the Old Testament Literature Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments Freiburger Zeitshrift für Philosophie und Theologie Gundrisse zum Alten Testament Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar. Edited by E. Kautzsch. Translated by A. E. Cowley. 2d. ed. Oxford, 1910 Grace Theological Journal W. Gesenius, F. Buhl, Hebräisches und aramäisches Handwörterbuch über das Alte Testament. Leipzig, 1915

xviii

HALOT

HAR HAT HBS HCSB HejJ HS HSS HSM HTR HTS HUCA IAA IBC ICC IDAM IE J IES Int IOSCS J AAR JANES JANES CU J AOS JB JBT JB£) JCS JESHO JETS JHS JJS JNES JNST

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

Koehler, L., W. Baumgartner, and J. J. Stamm. The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Translated and edited under the supervision of M. E . J . Richardson. 4 vols. Leiden, 1994-1999 Hebrew Annual Review Handbuch zum Alten Testament Herder's Biblical Studies Holman Christian Standard Bible Hejthrop Journal Hebrew Studies Harvard Semitic Studies Harvard Semitic Monographs Harvard Theological Review Harvard Theological Studies Hebrew Union College Annual Israel Antiquities Authority International Bible Commentary International Critical Commentary Israel Department of Antiquities and Museums Israel Exploration Journal Israel Exploration Society Interpretation International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies Journal of the American Academy of the Religion Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia University Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia University Journal of the American Oriental Society Jerusalem Bible Journal of Biblical Titerature Jewish Bible Quarterly Journal of Cuneiform Studies Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society Journal of Hebrew Scriptures Journal of Jewish Studies Journal of Near Eastern Studies Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages

ABBREVIATIONS

/OTT

JPS m J* JSem JSJSup JSOT JSOTSup JSPSup JSS JTS KAI KAT KBL KHC KJV KTU

LBH LCL LHBOTS LXX MH MSIA MT NAC NEAEHL

xix

Journal of Translation and Textlinguistics Jewish Publication Soríetj Jewish Quarterly Review Journal of Religion Journal of Semitics Journal for the Study of Judaism Supplement Series Journalfor the Study of the Old Testament Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Supplement Series Journal of Semitic Studies Journal of Theological Studies Kanaanäishe und aramäische Inschriften. H. Donner and W. Röllig. 2d ed. Wiesbaden, 1966-1969 Kommentar zum Alten Testament Koehler, L. and W. Baumgartner, Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti libros. 2d ed. Leiden, 1958 Kurzer Hand-Commentar zum Alten Testament King James Version Die keilalphabetischen Texte aus Ugarit. Edited by M. Dietrich, O. Loretz, and J. Sanmartín. AO AT 24/1. Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1976. 2d enlarged edition of KTU: The Cuneiform Alphabet Texts from Ugarit, Ras Ibn Hani, and Other Places. Edited by M. Dietrich, O. Loretz, and J. Sanmartín. Münster, 1996 (= CTU) Late Biblical Hebrew Loeb Classical Library Library of Hebrew Bible / Old Testament Studies Septuagint Mishnaic Hebrew Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University Masoretic Text New American Commentary The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Eand. Edited by E. Stern. 4 vols. Jerusalem, 1993

XX

NEchtB NCB NCBC NIB NIBCOT NICOT NIDOTTE

NIV NIVI NJB NJPS NJPSV NET NRSV OBO ÖBS OG OIP OL OLA OEZ Or OTE OTG OTL OTS OTS OtSt PEQ PEF Proof QH RA RB RJEÎB

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

NeueEchterBibel New Century Bible N e w Century Bible Commentary The New Interpreter's Bible N e w International Commentary on the Old Testament N e w International Commentary on the Old Testament New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis. Edited by W . A. VanGemeren. 5 vols. Grand Rapids, 1997 New International Version New International Version, Inclusive Language Edition New Jerusalem Bible Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures: The New JPS Translation According to the Traditional Hebrew Text New Jewish Publication Soàety Translation New Eiving Translation New Revised Standard Version Orbis biblicus et orientalis Österreichische biblische Studien Old Greek Oriental Institute Publications Old Latin Orientalia lovaniensia analecta Orientalistische Eiteratur^eitung Orientalia Old Testament Essays Old Testament Guides Old Testament Library Oudtestamentische Studien Old Testament Studies Oudtestamentische Studien Palestine Exploration Quarterly Palestine Exploration E und Pro of texts Qumran Hebrew Rjsvue d'assyriologie et d'archéologie orientale Revue biblique Revised English Bible

ABBREVIATIONS

RevExp R^evQ RGG RJBEA RJ3L RS V SAAS SBAB SBL SBLDS SBLEJL SBLSCS SBLSP SBLSymS SBLWAW SBT SemeiaSt SHCANE SJOT SSN SubBi STDJ TA TBC TDOT

ThStKr ThWAT

TLZ TNIV TOTC TRE TRJSV

xxi

Review and Expositor Revue de Qumran Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart Revista de interpretación bíblica latino-americana Review of Biblical Literature Revised Standard Version State Archives of Assyria Studies Stuttgarter biblische Aufsatzbände Society of Biblical Literature Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series Society of Biblical Literature Early Judaism and Its Literature Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint and Cognate Studies Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series Society of Biblical Literature Writings from the Ancient World Studies in Biblical Theology Semeia Studies Studies in the History and Culture of the Ancient Near East Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament Studia semítica neerlandica Subsidia bíblica Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah Tel Aviv Torch Bible Commentary Theological Dictionaiy of the Old Testament. Edited by G . J . Botterweck and H. Ringgren. Grand Rapids, 1974Theologische Studien und Kritiken Theologisches Wörterbuch ^um Alten Testamentum. Edited by G. Botterweck and H. Ringgren. Stuttgart, 1970Theologische Literaturzeitung Today 's Newlntemational Version Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries Theologische Rxalen^yklopädie Theological Review

xxii

TU TynBul UF VT VTSup WBC WMANT WTJ ZA ZABR ZAH ZAW ZBK ZDVP ZThK

PERSPECTIVES ON H E B R E W SCRIPTURES

Texte und Untersuchungen Tyndale Bulletin XJgarit-Forschungen Vetus Testamentum Vetus Testamentum Supplements Word Biblical Commentary Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament Westminster Theological Journal Zeitschriftfür Assyriologie Zeitschriftför altorientalische und biblische Rechtgeschichte Zeitschriftfür Althebraistik Zeitschriftför die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Zürucher Bibelkommentare Zeitschrift desdeutschen Valästina-Vereins Zeitschriftför Theologie und Kirche

YAHWEH'S BREAST: INTERPRETING HAGGAI'S TEMPLE THROUGH MELANIE KLEIN'S PROJECTIVE IDENTIFICATION THEORY

JEREMIAH W . CATALDO GRAND VALLEY STATE UNIVERSITY

BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO KLEIN'S PROJECTIVE IDENTIFICATION THEORY

When Melanie Klein wrote during 1946—1960 the articles that would be collected in the volume Envy and Gratitude, she was responding to the growing popularity of Freud's theoretical "switch." While Freud previously argued that a pleasure principle resided at the core of all actions and behaviours, he later recognized that on a deeper level, organisms were more motivated by a "fear" of death. Melanie Klein did much to expand an understanding of this "fear" as a driving motivation in the formation of identity. She argued that all organisms project and internalize their experiences based on fears of annihilation. Through this process of dis/engagement, projection and internalization, organisms establish their identities through the creation of object relations, where "objects" may be physical or ideal. In this way, she was able to synthesize notions of pleasure and pain but make them less primary than Freud was wont to do. While she did not reject Oedipal theory entirely, she emphasized more the role of individual experiences rather than desire in the formation of relationships. In offering a new theory on defense mechanisms, she argued that 1

2

JEREMIAH W. CATALDO

individuals develop identities through object relations, the affects and effects of which are either internalized or externalized according to whether anxiety over death is heightened or decreased. She argued further that "mechanisms," such as those of defense, should be understood as abstract and generalized descriptions of an unconscious "phantasy," which is itself the mental content of the mechanism. 1 In this sense, phantasy reflects the idealized self, a product of internalized and projected experiences, that is both the mobilization for and the product of projective identification. Anxiety, therefore, does not always occur on a conscious level. It could also be found affecting the unconscious and motivating there the formation of object-relations. It is through projective identification, reflecting both conscious and unconscious motivations, that individuals establish relationships and mechanisms of defense. Object-relations theory has become a fundamental component to modern psychoanalytic theory, and has provided a theoretical basis for even more recent theories on linguistic structures and meaning systems. Klein's theory on projective identification clarifies the importance of identification through relationships. By identifying objects and establishing relationships with them through processes centered on the individual ego—that is, what is good or bad for me—individuals establish patterns of relationship and mechanisms of defense from the subject's perspective. Should those relationships become influential on a collective level, the meaning that defines them must somehow transcend the individual subject. This 'transcendent' meaning is preserved within a shared object, which becomes, for the sake of the group's identity, the foundational object-relation for the group. CONNECTING KLEIN'S THEORY TO HAGGAI

To date, the symbolic value of the Jerusalem temple as expressed in Haggai is inadequately understood. Scholarly pursuit of the prophet's perspective on the restitution of the cult too often restricts the generally accepted meaning of the temple as a literary symbol. 2 In fact, most studies of the Persian-Period province of Judah have focused primarily on the centrality 1 Cf. H. Segal, "Introduction," in M. Klein, Enty and Gratitude, and other works, 1946-1963 (New York: Vintage Digital, 2011). 2 E. Assis, for example, concludes that in Haggai the sole purpose of building the temple was "to give glory to God and to make His name great"("The Temple in the Book of Haggai," JHS 8, Article 19 [2008], 9). J. Kessler, for additional example, argues that for Haggai the temple was an important symbol for the life and faith of the Yehudean community—a symbol expressed in a way that emphasized the role of the prophetic office (cf. The Book of Haggai: Prophey and Society in Early Persian Yehud [Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2007], 275—279).

YAHWEH'S BREAST

3

and perceived importance of the Jerusalem cult and its priesthood. 3 Yet while the existence and function of both are unquestionably important for the temple, to focus there is to miss Haggai's interpretation of the temple as a shared object, the purpose for which was to preserve the remnant community from social-political irrelevance—in other words, the dissolution of the community. Upon its arrival in Yehud from Babylonia, both geographic and political locations representing two different cultural contexts, 4 the community was faced with a choice: either allow its members to assimilate into preexisting systems and institutions, as Haggai attests was happening (which can be inferred from Hag 1:3—4), or legitimate and institutionalize the boundaries of its identity within a new cultural context (an option to which the "purification" of Joshua in Zech 3:1—10 attests). The former option resulted ultimately in the irrelevance of the community's collective identity. The latter option was something new, something Utopian, as it required a revision of the social—political normative (as the coronation in Zech 6:9—14 would require). To reiterate, scholarly focus has too often been on the physical temple itself rather than upon Haggai's prescriptive view of the temple as fulfilling the collective function of identity preservation. 5 This focus continues to result in a prevailing uncertainty regarding the synergetic relationship between the symbolism of the Jerusalem temple and an idealization of collective identity expressed in Haggai. 6

3 This point has been argued at length in J. W. Cataldo, A Theocratic Yehud? Issues of Government in Yehud (LHBOTS, 498; London: T & T Clark, 2009). 4 As studies of Lithuanian refugees (cf. L. Baskauskas, "The Lithuanian Refugee Experience and Grief," International Migration Review 15 [1981], 276—291; R.G. Krisciunas, "The Emigrant experience: The Decision of Lithuanian Refugees to Emigrate, 1945—1950," in Uthuanian Quarterly ]ournal of Arts and Sciences http://www.lituanus.org/1983_2/83_2_03.htm), among others, have shown us, the cultural identity between groups who emigrate and return and those who remain in the land develop on different trajectories. The differences grow exponentially starker with each consecutive generation that grows up before "returning." 5 Cf. C.L. Meyers and E.M. Meyers, Haggai, Zechariah 1—8 (ABD, 25B; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1987), xli; J. Kessler, "Building the Second Temple: Questions of Time, Text, and History in Haggai 1.1-15, 1 "JSOT 27 (2002), 243-256; M.J. Boda, "Messengers of Hope in Haggai-Malachi, 1 "JSOT 32 (2007), 113-131. 6 P. Ackroyd makes a similar observation even in 1968 (see Exile and Restoration: A Study of Hebrew Thought of the Sixth Century BC, OTL [Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1968], 162-63).

4

JEREMIAH W . CATALDO

In that regard, Melarne Klein's theory on projective identification provides greater clarity in understanding this synergetic relationship. 7 In particular, this theory reveals, as this article will show, that Haggai's idealized collective identity was a response to a persecutory anxiety of "irrelevance," in the sense that the community will cease to be recognizable as a distinct group, thus a type of ideological death, because the symbolic value of the Jerusalem temple would lose its constructive force. Scholarly tendency has often been to interpret the temple, as it is portrayed in Haggai, as directly correlative with successful economic production, depending upon passages such as Hag 2:15—19.8 The correlation is there to an extent, but the physical reality of the temple and successful economic production are not ends in themselves for Haggai. They are symbolic of a larger issue: the preservation of the community against, to borrow from Klein, "persecutory anxiety," or the threat of annihilation. This "threat" for a collective refers not—although it can include —to physical destruction but to the loss of an identity that is culturally significant and verifiable. 9 In Haggai, the symbolic meaning of the temple is found primarily in what the prophet views as the necessary function of stability within the remnant's identity. Consequently, the presence of Yahweh becomes a reality only when the temple is linked to the existence of the remnant community as an internally and externally recognizable community. Thus, the temple for Haggai represents a shared object, or "collective ego," upon which the collective identity of the community is based. Moreover, this collective ego mediates between the community's good and bad experiences. 10 7 Her theory on projective identification is explained at length in M. Klein, Enty and Gratitude, and OtherWorks, 1946—1963 (New York: Vintage Digital, 2011). 8 Cf. J. Weinberg, The Citizen-Temple Community, trans. D.L. Smith-Christopher (JSOTsup, 151; Sheffield, England: JSOT Press, 1992), 92; C.E. Carter, The Emergence ofYehud in the Persian Period: A Social and Demographic Study (JSOTsup, 294; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999), 304—305; Meyers and Meyers, Haggai, Zechariah 1—8, 335—336; Kessler, Book of Haggai, 236—238; Assis, "The Temple in the Book of Haggai," 6; B. Glazier-McDonald, "Haggai," in C.A. Newsom, and S.H. Ringe (eds), Women's Bible Commentary, Expanded Edition With Apocrypha (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1998), 243-244. 9 Cf. Klein, Enty and Gratitude, 2, 4, 34. 10 This proposal goes beyond those that argue Haggai is primarily or solely concerned that the presence of Yahweh be recognized by the community (cf. Assis, "The Temple in the Book of Haggai," 9; Kessler, Book of Haggai, 252). It identifies Haggai's primary concern as being for a stabilized community identity and that Haggai's perception of Yahweh was framed by an idealized vision of collective identity. This proposal that Haggai's vision of the community was highly idealized finds agreement with Ackroyd (cf. Exile and Restoration, 163).

YAHWEH'S BREAST

5

In Klein's psychoanalytic theory, the ego is part of the psychic apparatus that mediates between the internal drives or motivations of the id and the demands of the social and physical environment. 11 We may consider the collective ego in these terms as well if we accept that group cohesion is preserved as long as individuals maintain among themselves the primacy of a shared object. This collective ego, to be clear, functions as an instrument that mediates between the internal motivations or drives of the group as a social organism and the demands of a corresponding social physical environment. This primacy must transcend for the duration of the group the individual ego. 12 In other words, the shared object takes on the responsibility of integrating the experiences of the community and categorizing them in a fashion that effectively integrates good and bad experiences within the collective worldview. 13 By integrating bad experiences in this way, in a stabilising manner, the collective ego, symbolized by the shared object, reduces persecutory anxiety for the group and for the individual. 14 According to Klein, the "breast" represents on both symbolic and real levels the foundational object-relation wherein the ego learns the art of differentiation between good and bad experiences. 15 This is an act that demands awareness of not only separation but also distinction between "good" and "bad" as concepts that are internally consistent. In that sense, the Jerusalem temple for Haggai, like the breast for Klein, represents the primary stage in identity formation. As the object-relation that is foundational to the identity of the remnant community, the temple 11 Also note that object-relations theory, of which Klein was a practitioner, helped shift theoretical interest away from the notion of an ego in need of a cure and onto the agency of the individual repeating instinctual patterns. While according to Freud the ego was fractured and in need of repair, Klein viewed the ego as an instinctual mechanism, present at birth, through which good and bad objects were identified and relationships within them categorized. 12 Even Freud, the champion of the individual ego, proposed this in his 1921 study, Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego. See also R. D. Hinshelwood's discussion of the group ideal and the primary task of groups qua individuals ("Ideology and Identity: A Psychoanalytic Investigation of a Social Phenomenon," Psychoanalysis, Culture & Society 14.2 [2009], 140-141). 13 This same process of mobilization will also produce forms of collective representation such as nationalism (cf. R. Friedland, "Religious Nationalism and the Problem of Collective Representation," Annual Reviews in Sociology 27 [2001], 125). 14 This tendency to avoid distress, according to Hinshelwood ("Ideology and Identity," cf. pp. 144—145, see also 133—135), is what gives rise to the preservation of the ideological ideas that operate at the core of a group's identity. 15 Cf. Klein, Enty and Gratitude, 2, 5.

6

JEREMIAH W . CATALDO

preserves the collective identity of the community by functioning as the physical point of connection between Yahweh and the people. For Haggai, then, a perceived lack of concern for the temple on the part of the community threatens annihilation of the very identity of the community. To put it in other terms, an increasing anxiety triggered by the possible irrelevance of the community itself motivates Haggai's concern regarding the temple's absence. As we will make clear in the following discussion, this concern may be alleviated, according to the prophet, if the community preserves the temple as the primary, shared object—that is, the "breast," in the foundational object-relation of the community's identity formation. 16 All the while, Haggai's vision of this object-relation and the identity constructed upon it remain idealized in direct response to the imminent threat of social irrelevance. IDEALIZATION AS A DEFENSIVE MECHANISM

Idealization is used as a defence against persecutory anxiety and its corollary. 17 As a defensive mechanism, idealization may effectively stave off persecutory anxieties of annihilation if it has been linked effectively to a community's primary shared object. 18 Idealization, as Klein argues, is the corollary of persecutory anxiety that "springs from the power of the instinctual desires which aim at unlimited gratification and therefore create the picture of an inexhaustible and always bountiful breast—an ideal breast." 19 In other words, the shared object, upon which the identity of the community is symbolically based, makes idealization, as a force for social cohesion, accessible to the whole of the community. 20 For Haggai, the 16 Based on Hag 2:11—14, Ackroyd asserts that the occasion for the oracle to rebuild was a priestly torn (Exile and Restoration, 167). The prophet's concern, he concludes, had less to do with any political motivation and more with a concern for the "spiritual" wellbeing of the community. It was that "wellbeing" that the prophet viewed to be the basis for the community's "new" identity (see ibid., 166— 170). His conclusion shares fundamental points with the one being made in this article. However, his argument stops at "spiritual wellbeing" as being the primary motivation for the prophet's concern. It is difficult to maintain that the prophet's concern focused mainly on spiritual wellbeing and not on immanent social-political or social-psychological concerns (the latter which are still typically motivated by the former). 17 Klein, Envy and Gratitude, 46. 18 See again Hinshelwood, "Ideology and Identity," 144—145. 19 Klein, Envy and Gratitude, 7. 20 For further reference, as Friedland ("Religious Nationalism," 125) notes, a shared object may be a public good, desire (such as that of survival), hope, agenda,

YAHWEH'S BREAST

7

"always bountiful breast" means more than bountiful provision in surplus production. Should that prospect be the prophet's solitary goal, there would have been no reason for his expressed concern over the unbuilt temple despite the people's "paneled" houses (Hag 1:4)—such houses suggest that at least some from among his audience were doing well economically. As Klein argues, the breast, as the primary object in the individual's objectrelation, provides a basis upon which identity is built by categorizing experiences as good or bad and forming a corollary relationship between those experiences and the persecuting anxiety of annihilation. 21 Likewise, the temple, which is meaningful for the collective over the individual, is interpreted by Haggai as the primary object in the formation of the remnant community's collective identity as a "restored" community in response to the community's possible dissolution. Haggai's idealization of collective identity offers a defensive mechanism against the threat of irrelevance related to the identity of a community, and not merely the livelihood of the individuals. According to the text, the people were integrating themselves into the functioning social-political environment, which if the prophet's concern was for individual livelihood his concern would have been mitigated. Yet this integration threatened the need or stability of a specific, desired collective identity—one centered on the prophet's vision of a restored society in which the Jerusalem temple functioned as the primary shared object (cf. Hag 2:10—14).22 Individual assimilation into preexisting cultural groups threatened the livelihood of Haggai's idealized community. Shared objects—and here we are referring only to those that are foundational to a collective identity—take on for a group the force of a collective will that enforces obedience among group members. 23 To be clear, this "force" may take the form of active enforcement, such as what Thomas Hobbes argued in leviathan, or a subconscious, even "moral," motivation, such as is identified in Harry Triandis's "collectivist culture." 24 Along these lines, Jean-Philippe Platteau points out that moral norms are or faith in a set of values or ideals. 21 Cf. Klein, Enty and Gratitude, 64. 22 Kessler's assertion that the book of Haggai views the "community in Yehud as the legitimate successor of the pre-exilic Israelite community and heir to its traditions and institutions" (Book of Haggai, 264—265) similarly understands the implication of Haggai's rhetoric. 23 Cf. H. Triandis, "Cross-Cultural Studies of Individualism and Collectivism," Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1989 37 (1990), 42. 24 Triandis's understanding of "collectivist culture" (see, for example, ibid) departs from pure neoclassical theory and maintains that people are motivated by concerns other than material self-interest.

8

JEREMIAH W . CATALDO

internalized rules within a collective that are followed for the sake of the group even if they conflict with the immediate or direct interests of the individual agent. 25 For Haggai, the force of collective will is not distinctly one of the two possibilities introduced. Haggai instead seems to view collective will as both an active enforcement and a moral (religious) obligation. This can be seen in his argument that in the absence of the temple, material surplus production will cease; thus, there is a physical threat. It can also be seen in his employment of the religious tradition and obligation to Yahweh. Whereas the former invokes as its method of enforcement a fear of physical annihilation, the latter appeals to the cognitive stability of group affiliation and loyalty as a moral obligation. Through its role as a foundational shared object, the temple connects Yahweh's restorative plan to the community. 26 The construction of the temple mirrors the "restoration" of the community. As a critical component in this synergy, the temple represents, what Klein would term, a "gratifying object." Klein's employment of that phrase refers to the object in an object-relation that is associated with the positive forces of attraction (and so also preservation). 27 The "breast," for example, that provides milk is a gratifying object because it alleviates in the infant the persecutory fears of annihilation. For Haggai, the temple fulfills a similar function for the remnant community. By connecting Yahweh's planned restoration to the identity of the community, Haggai envisions preservation of the remnant identity from irrelevance. To put it differently, the physical construction of the temple out of a previous state of annihilation symbolizes the "restoration" of a collective identity—an identity that, as Haggai implies, had previously been made irrelevant through the process of exile. It is important to note again that it is not only the absence of the physical temple that heightens persecutory fear, for the prophet, but so do also possible object-relations that lure the people toward basing their identities in individual successes or in alternative social communities (cf. Hag 1:2—6).

25 See J. Platteau, "Behind the Market Stage Where Real Societies Exist—Part II: The Role of Moral Norms," ]ournal of Development Studies 30 (1994), 766. For further reference, see R. Ball's summary (in "Individualism, Collectivism, and Economic Development," Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 573 [2001], 64-68). 26 For further reference, see R.J. Coggins, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987), 12—13; D. Edelman, The Origins of the 'Second' Temple: Persian Imperial Policy and the Rebuilding of Jerusalem (London: Equinox Publishing, 2005), 106. 27 For more on the role of the gratifying object, see Klein, Envy and Gratitude, 63.

YAHWEH'S BREAST

9

THE CONSTRUCTIVE VALUE OF THE TEMPLE IN HAGGAI'S OBJECTRELATION

According to Klein, object-relations are molded by "an interaction between internal and external objects and situations," which are interpreted as good or bad experiences based on their perceived or real benefit or threat to the individual or group. 28 In turn, individuals and groups perceive of themselves, rather, they recognize the definitive qualities, or "uniquenesses," of their own identities, in relation to something distinctly different. 29 Moreover, it is the individual's or group's relationship to the foundational object within her identity that provides the paradigmatic pattern for subsequent object-relations. 30 With that in mind, one cannot escape that Haggai's proffered perception of the object-relation between the temple and the community is not the continuation of a traditional identity. It is something new, something ideal, for which the rebuilt temple is the paradigmatic shared object. While it appeals in some ways to traditions of the past, its intent is the construction of a framework for a new mobilized identity. The restoration that is called for in Haggai-Zech 1—8 is based upon this fundamental object-relation. 31 Likewise, the call-andresponse of Hag 1:12—13, which addresses the formation of a new collective identity, describes the prophet's idealized response as a necessary preliminary step leading to the rebuilding of the temple, and thus the formation of a shared object for the community that has made a public declaration of itself. 32 Ibid., 2. Cf. T. Eagleton, Why Marx Was Right (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2011), 135. 30 As argued by Klein in Enty and Gratitude, 2. 31 As Meyers & Meyers (Haggai, Zechariah 1—8, xliv) point out, Haggai, along with Zechatiah, deal with the reorganization of national life and institutions in the "restoration period." Similarly, P. Redditt ("Themes in Haggai-Zechariah-Malachi," Int 61.2 [2007], 184) argues that Haggai and Zech 1 - 8 "predict the restitution of Judah and Israel and the reestablishment of the pre-exilic institutions of the temple in Jerusalem and the monarchy in Judah." In addition, A. R. Petterson ("The Shape of the Davidic Hope Across the Book of the Twelve," ]SOT 35 [2010]: 225-246) argues that the hope of Davidic restoration is a theme that unites, in fact, the entire Book of the Twelve. 32 Kessler's conclusion (Book of Haggai, 262—265) that Haggai was intentional in "covering over" any differences that may have existed among the people in the province is partly correct but fails to account for why such a revision was necessary. 28

29

10

JEREMIAH W . CATALDO

Haggai describes that in the wake of economic hardship, the community's fear of annihilation is heightened. "You have sown much, and harvested little; you eat, but you never have enough; you drink, but you never have your fill; you clothe yourselves, but no one is warm; and you that earn wages earn wages to put them into a bag with holes" (Hag 1:6). It is at what seems to be for the prophet the height of anxiety that he delivers his message as a constructivist call. That is, the prophet articulates a new collective identity, one that depends not on preexisting systems and relations but is built entirely upon the goodwill (and bountiful provision) of Yahweh. The prophet's connection of the remnant with the exodus tradition (2:5) and his argument that Yahweh's blessing comes only through a "restored" relation refer at once to the "birth" of an Israelite people and a re-articulation of that (traditional) identity as the full expression of the remnant community. It can therefore be said that Haggai's articulated idealization of the temple as a "good object" is a projective identification. This projective identification is constructive in that it is part of the initial process of identity formation. As Klein has shown, this type of projection is driven by responses to affective forces—of production or otherwise—in the surrounding social-political environment. 33 In Haggai, the prophet responds to growing anxiety over the looming irrelevance of the remnant community's collective identity. The community had returned (1:1). The temple remained unbuilt (1:2). Perhaps more importantly, individuals who were part of the community were looking outside the community for avenues through which to engage forces of production (cf. 2:18—19). And that, for the prophet, was the equivalent of death. It was a fear of this "death," or irrelevance, that framed Haggai's vision of the temple as a shared object capable of mediating between good and bad experiences. For as Klein argued, projection of good and bad experiences is driven by an individual's, or collective's, "death instinct." 34 As the shared object, the temple, as Haggai idealized it, mediated between good and bad experiences, categorizing them in a fashion that maintained the stability of the remnant's collective identity. 35 Was, for example, the economy in decline? That, According to him, Haggai's intentional "inclusivity" was done for two reasons: (1) the prophet was interested in showing the success of his words and presented a social-religious portrait in which all people who heard responded appropriately, and (2) that the prophet wanted to portray that the Jerusalem temple took a more "world-wide," central role. 33 Klein, Envy and Gratitude, 2, 6, 22, 56, 64, 71,144. 34 Ibid., 5. 35 Kessler's suggestion (cf. Book of Haggai, 262) that the returnees constituted an

YAHWEH'S BREAST

11

according to the prophet, was due not merely to the lack of a temple but to the lack of a clearly identified community whose identity was based on the presence and authority of Yahweh. Thus, as a shared object, the Jerusalem temple provides for Haggai a defense against irrelevance (cf. 2:6—9), where irrelevance in the socialpolitical sphere results in the loss of collective identity. 36 To be sure, this loss, or "annihilation," is not a physical loss of individuals but of the shared object and its attendant identity. Within that sense, the temple symbolized Haggai's idealized vision of a collective identity based in the authority of Yahweh rather than in any preexisting social-political authority in Yehud. It is in part for that reason that both the religious and political authorities, Joshua and Zerubbabel, respectively (cf. Hag 2:2), are included in the audience of Haggai's message. In this case, the prophet identified the distributed relations of authority not in preexisting social-political institutions and systems but in the people's relationship to Yahweh, a relationship that was mediated through the temple (cf. Hag 1:12; 2:2). This proposal is consistent with the general prophetic view regarding postexilic restoration: that a "restored" Israel would be (reconstituted out of a remnant (cf. Jer 23:3—4; Ezek 11:14—21; Zech 8:6—8). Moreover, Haggai's inclusion together with Zech 1—8 as part of a temple-building, dedication text makes this point all the more poignant in that the construction of the temple necessitates the simultaneous existence of a remnant community defined in direct relation to it. 37 "elite charter group" implies that the distribution of power in Yehud was balanced toward the external community of Judeans in Babylonia. Yet in making that argument, and by removing the force of identity-threatening conflicts as consequences to struggles over power distribution, he cannot help but reduce the threat to the community's identity to being primarily an issue of religious fidelity. Thus, he writes, for example, "In 1:1—11, Haggai has two objectives: (1) the rehabilitation of the cult site to be a fitting dwelling place for Yahweh, and (2) the restoration of the relationship between Yahweh and his people. The changes he advocates ... can be accomplished within the framework of the existing social and political structure, and not imply major upheavals" {ibid., 270). 36 Compare with Assis, "The Temple in the Book of Haggai," 10. 37 If, as Meyers & Meyers argue {Haggai, Zechariah 1—8, lxviii.), the prophetic discourse of Haggai was offered for presentation at the time of the rededication of the temple in 515 BCE ("as part of a composite work with Zech 1—8"), the text, as both prophetic and dedicatory, supports the proposal that it was written to "bring about" a desired reality (i.e. restoration). Temple building accounts in the ANE usual follow a typical quid pro quo pattern (cf. Edelman, The Origins of the 'Second' Temple, 131; V. Hurowitz, I Have Built You an Exalted House: Temple Building in the Bible in the Tight of Mesopotamian and Northwest Semitic Writings, [Sheffield: Sheffield

12

JEREMIAH W . CATALDO

Haggai articulates a new collective identity, but one, to be sure, that depends not on preexisting systems of relations but is built instead entirely upon the goodwill of Yahweh. The prophet's connection of the remnant with the exodus tradition, together with his argument that Yahweh's blessing comes only with a "restored" relationship, refer at once to the "birth" of an Israelite people and a re-articulation of that identity. It can be said more fundamentally, and in terms more akin to Klein's vocabulary, that the idealization of the "good object" of the temple is a projective identification that is driven by the innate, or instinctual, impulses of attraction and repulsion. These impulses lie at the base of an organism's (in this case, the remnant community) general framework for, or attitude toward, engaging the surrounding world—impulses upon which inter- and intra-personal relationships are formed and mechanisms of defense created. 38 Moreover, these impulses can be identified by, as Klein puts it, the ego's 39 libidinal need to express itself either, or sometimes both, through the projection or introjection of experiences that result in either pleasure (resulting in forces of attraction) or pain (resulting in forces of repulsion). For the collective, these experiences are largely assimilated into identity according to whether they create or ease the anxiety that is associated with the collective's "death insinct." 40 In the text of Haggai, the Jerusalem temple fulfills that function. It mediates between the "bad experiences" of displacement together with the community's disadvantaged position in Yehud and the "good experiences" associated with return and, for Haggai, the promise of restoration. By associating the identity of the community with the divine power symbolized in the temple, the temple provides a material and a symbolic defense against the possible "annihilation" of the community's collective

Academic Press, 1992], passim.): human agents build the temple and as a "reward" the divine bestows blessing, often in the form of surplus. This "blessing" was directly correlative with the role and function of temples as storehouses (cf. L.S. Fried, The Priest and the Great King: Temple-Palace Relations in the Persian Empire, Biblical and Judaic Studies [Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2004], 24, 29-30; J.N. Postgate, Early Mesopotamia: Society and Economy At the Dawn of History [New York: Routledge, 1992], 135; J. Schaper, "The Jerusalem Temple as an Instrument of the Achaemenid Fiscal Administration," F T 4 5 [1995], 539). 38 Regarding such impulses, see Klein, Enty and Gratitude, 2, 6, 22, 56, 64, 71, 144. 39 Or, "shared object." Again, note that we have identified a relative parallel in function between the individual ego and the collective ego, or shared object. 40 Ibid, 5.

YAHWEH'S BREAST

13

identity. 41 To be clear, this annihilation refers to the sense that the shared object that draws individuals into a distinct group no longer functions in that capacity. The result is the loss of any distinct group identity. 42 The temple symbolizes Haggai's idealized vision of a collective identity constructed in relation to the authority of Yahweh rather than that of any preexisting social-political authority in Yehud. Hence, and we must emphasize this again, both the political and religious authorities, Zerubbabel and Joshua, respectively (cf. Hag 2:2), are included with the audience of Haggai's message. In other words, the identity of the community must include the subservience of (possible) political authority, symbolized by Zerubbabel, to the expressed reality of Yahweh. The outward expression of the community, within Haggai's idealized vision, must clearly point to the prominence in Yehud of the authority of Yahweh. In the absence of a temple, which is also the absence of a centralizing, shared object, the people had taken on "alternative" identities, incorporating themselves into a social-political environment in which a Yahwistic identity was neither authoritative nor necessary. 43 Zechariah, for example, describes such people as "shepherd-less sheep" (cf. Zech 10:2).44 Within Haggai, this seems to generate an anxiety that was itself a result from a failure to effectively synthesize dangers that threaten the shared object, or temple, and that threaten correspondingly the identity of the remnant. It is clear that in Haggai the promised benefit of the rebuilt temple was a corresponding lifestyle that was not threatened by any economic oscillations in surplus production. 45

41 In this sense, Assis's position (cf. "The Temple in the Book of Haggai," 10) that Haggai's major problem was not the moral path of the people but their loss of national and religious identity, while it makes an unjustified link between Yahweh and God in the universal and absolute sense, is on the right track. 42 According to Hinshelwood ("Ideology and Identity," 133), it is also possible for groups to continue in existence while suffering under the loss of a centralizing, and so moralizing, symbol. His term for this is "destructive group." A destructive group, as he describes it, appears to maintain its identity primarily through a gross homogenization of its agent members. 43 Contra Kessler (see again Book of Haggai, 270), who argues that the socialpolitical environment facilitated the formation of the community's monotheistic identity. 44 See also Petterson, "The Shape of the Davidic Hope," 237. 45 This is a commonly-held interpretation. For reference, see Assis, "The Temple in the Book of Haggai," 6; Boda, "Messengers of Hope," 117; Redditt, "Themes in Haggai-Zechariah-Malachi," 194; Ackroyd, Exile and Restoration, 159.

14

JEREMIAH W . CATALDO

THE INFLUENCE OF "DEPRESSIVE ANXIETY" UPON THE SHARED OBJECT

Klein's assertion that depressive anxiety is the "synthesis between destructive impulses and feelings of love towards one object," and that it is closely bound up with guilt and the desire to make reparation to the "injured" loved object,46 may help clarify somewhat Haggai's frustration with the people's reluctance regarding the temple by how it identifies the negative. That is, there is no expressed desire on the part of the people to make reparation with Yahweh—which would have been necessary following the "punishment" of the exile, including a corresponding expression of guilt—through the medium of the temple. Rejection of the temple, as Haggai interprets the people's reluctance, which is simultaneously a rejection of a social-political reality dependent upon the acknowledged authority of Yahweh in the province, results in economic hardship (cf. Hag 1:9—10).47 This "emptying" of the temple of its "source of satisfaction" is an urge, in Klein's terms, that results from greed. 48 Greed, according to her, is a desire-response stimulated by fear, which preserves for the individual a source of pleasure or satisfaction.49 In that sense, one may interpret Haggai's condemnation of the people as "emptying" the temple of its symbolic power by finding material satisfaction, ephemeral at best, according to the prophet, elsewhere in acts of "greed." These "acts," according to the prophet, were satisfied in sources other than the temple and a corresponding relationship with Yahweh. According to Klein, greed is offset by "love," in which feelings of satisfaction deriving from the "good" object are internalized or projected upon the object itself. 50 Consequently, "love" is the posture or framed openness—to be fully open is to be at risk of annihilation—toward objects that defines the parameters of object-relations. For Haggai, this is nothing short of idealized religious-legal obedience.51 And so it is that the remnant community is identifiable by its collective response to the religious law Klein, Enty and Gratitude, 34—35. See also Glazier-McDonald ("Haggai," 244) who offers the same conclusion although from what seems an opposite perspective to my own, "Renewed prosperity could result only from a rebuilt Temple, the seat of Yahweh's life-giving, community-sustaining presence." 48 Klein, Enty and Gratitude, 254. 49 Ibid., 95,254. 50 Cf. Ibid, 63-64. 51 M. Jaffee alludes to this conclusion but doesn't articulate it fully. See "One God, One Revelation, One People: On the Symbolic Structure of Elective Monotheism,1" JAAR 69, no. 4 (2001), 760. 46 47

YAHWEH'S BREAST

15

i n t e n d e d to preserve the identity of the r e m n a n t c o m m u n i t y a n d the authority of Y a h w e h . THE SHARED OBJECT AS MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOOD AND BAD EXPERIENCES B a s e d o n w h a t has b e e n said a b o v e , w e can p r o p o s e that for H a g g a i the " g o o d e x p e r i e n c e " w a s generally identifiable as Y a h w e h ' s material provision for the r e m n a n t c o m m u n i t y t h r o u g h the m e d i u m of the t e m p l e as a shared object. 5 2 W h a t for H a g g a i qualifies as a " g o o d e x p e r i e n c e " is restricted to the object-relation that exists b e t w e e n the c o m m u n i t y a n d the temple. T h a t relationship, a c c o r d i n g to the p r o p h e t , is that w h i c h will p r o v i d e for a n d sustain the p e o p l e as the people of Yahweh. C o n s e q u e n t l y , w i t h i n the text of H a g g a i a " g o o d e x p e r i e n c e " can be u n d e r s t o o d as that w h i c h distinguishes internally a n d externally the c o m m u n i t y as the social b o d y t h r o u g h w h i c h a " n a t i o n a l " restoration of Israel w o u l d occur. 5 3 Identity, then, in the sense w i t h w h i c h w e h a v e b e e n using it, is less a p r o d u c t or imprint in a final sense as m u c h as it is an act of mobilization. 5 4 Mobilization, to be clear, is the act of orienting, b o t h 52 Glazier-McDonald (see "Haggai," 244) argues for a similar conclusion regarding the collective importance of the Jerusalem temple but emphasizes priestly influence, though Haggai was not a priest, on Haggai's perception of the community's sin and the people's lack of well-being. Her argument assumes that the Yahwistic religious experience, as shaped by priests who had returned from Babylonia, was a dominant force or experience in which individuals engaged the dominant social-political normative. Note also Ackroyd, who states regarding Hag 2:7—9, "The consequences of the presence of God are made clear. The centrality of the Temple as his dwelling is absolute, for all nations bring as tribute their 'precious things.' In reality all this wealth belongs to him, but now he claims it as his own, and so it can be used as it properly should for the glorification of his dwelling. His presence will make possible that fullness of life, salom, prosperity in the full sense of the word, which flows out from him (Exile and Restoration, 161—162).

See also Kessler (Book of Haggai, 271—275), who argues that Haggai used religious and literary traditions to emphasize that the "postexilic community constituted a legitimate functional equivalent of the Israelite nation of tradition and history" (ibid., 274). 54 Note, for example, K. Cerulo ("Identity Construction: New Issues, New Directions," Annual Review of Sociology 23 [1997]: 385—409), who reviews the recent shift in sociological studies from viewing the identity as a product to viewing it as a source of mobilization. Compare with J. Howard ("Social Psychology of Identities," Annual Reviews in Sociology 26 [2000], 368—369), whose understanding of "social aspect," as a prescription for social action parallels Cerulo's definition of mobilization. 53

16

JEREMIAH W . CATALDO

individual and collective, around a shared object, of fulfilling the function of socially determined or assigned roles for the benefit of the collective (thus preserving the "good experience"), and of preserving boundaries between insider and outsider by expressing through actions the needs or desires of the community. Understood in this way, identity is both descriptive and constructive in nature. Haggai's focus, to be sure, is on the constructive function of identity. His is an attempt through rhetoric and prophecy to help fashion an idealized community through which a Utopian restoration could occur. 55 Because identities are linked to mobilization, they determine the parameters with which groups engage external individuals and groups. These parameters are further determined by the range of good and bad experiences that form the basis of the urges of attraction and repulsion toward different, secondary object-relations that help construct the complexity of an established identity. In that regard, identities must be flexible enough to cope with the changes that occur in social contexts, lest the individual or collective suffers increased anxiety. 56 Increased anxiety, and this can be seen in Haggai, may be the result of a shifting "pace of change" for the social group when it stresses the group's mechanism, rooted in the shared object, for effectively categorizing between good and bad experiences. 57 In Haggai, this occurred largely following the exilic events and the remnant community's attempt to integrate itself within the social-political environment in Yehud. Change upends stability, or is often perceived to do so, which disrupts the categories a group may use to distribute, or categorize, its experiences. Consequently, change may be considered an external threat or danger by social groups and may increase the group's sense of internal danger as it relates to the stability of its own self-identity. Haggai's vision of the temple as a shared object fulfilling this role expects that the remnant-temple object-relation would become the authoritative paradigm for social-political authority. Because restoration 55 M. Smith's description of "defensive structuring" (see Palestinian Parties and Politics That Shaped the Old Testament, 2nd, corr. ed. [London: SCM, 1987], 69), for example, on the part of the remnant community is consistent with identity as a source of mobilization. In that sense, mobilization can be a defense against the external threat of irrelevance. 56 As Howard notes in "Social Psychology of Identities," 367. 57 Group identity must be internally capable of dealing with external conflict while providing support for the group's member (cf. A.A. Stein, "Conflict and Cohesion: A Review of the Literature," ]ournal of Conflict Resolution 20 [1976], 165, cited in H. Tajfel, "Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations," Annual Review of Psychology 33, no. 1 [1982], 2).

YAHWEH'S BREAST

17

depends upon the legitimated existence, internally and externally, of the remnant as something distinct from the productive forces already at work within the province, its collective identity is inextricably linked to the authority of Yahweh. 58 Haggai's interpretation of the temple is as simultaneously a symbolic representation of Yahweh's presence in Yehud and the externalized, and also physical, representation of the prophet's idealized vision of the remnant's collective identity. The "power" of the temple's physical presence insures for the prophet the stability of the remnant's identity, and so also the stability of a redirected surplus production, one that is redirected to the benefit of the community. 59 The connection between power and presence is confirmed in the temple's role, historical and intended or imagined, as the symbolic mediation of the relations of production, reproduction, and distribution of religious goods. These relations tend to reproduce the relations of force or power between groups. 60 Thus, there exists in Haggai an inseparable relation between identity, authority, and surplus production. 61 Klein argues that anxiety is enhanced or produced initially by a need for adaptation, or the ability to integrate bad experiences into one's worldview in such a way as to consider such experiences as nonthreatening. 62 Sometimes this entails projection of a bad experience upon an "other," while at other times it may entail internalizing a good experience

58 The presence, and so irrefutable authority, of Yahweh directly correlates, Ackroyd argues (in Exile and Restoration, 160), with blessing, which is a removal of impurity, and the possibly effusive presence of holiness. 59 In a general sense, authority over the environment upon which social-political interaction and relations depend preserves the stability of a community's identity (cf. R.B. Hall, "Moral Authority as a Power Resource," International Organisation 51 [1997], 2364; see also E. Abrahamian, Khomeinism: Essays on the Islamic Republic [Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993], 44). 60 Cf. P. Bourdieu, "Genesis and Structure of the Religious Field," Comparative Social Research 13 (1991), 31. 61 Ackroyd comments (see Ackroyd, Exile and Restoration, 156.) that according to Haggai the entire land of Yehud was sacred because Yahweh dwelled there. The centrality of the Jerusalem temple does not, he maintains, restrict the glory and sacredness of Yahweh to a narrow locality but to the whole land. Yahweh dwells in Jerusalem because he dwells in the midst of his people. This observation is consistent with a direct (ideological) correlation between identity, authority, and surplus production. In other words, in the case of Haggai, emphasis upon the ideals of sacredness and the divine authority of Yahweh, presumably, was thought to preempt any material claims to authority. 62 Klein, Enty and Gratitude, 94.

18

JEREMIAH W . CATALDO

in a defensive fashion gained from a primary object-relation. 63 Haggai's response, which contrasts with the one taken by Ezra-Nehemiah, was the latter; the temple was the gateway through which the benefits of a relationship with Yahweh were mediated. Klein's theory helps clarify that Haggai's emphasis upon the temple may be due less to any unverifiable, collective reluctance or "sapeiential reasoning" regarding the socialeconomic situation, 64 and more to the prophet's growing fear that a collective identity based on the authority of Yahweh and the Jerusalem temple was quickly becoming irrelevant. 65 Should that threat come true, the prophet's idealized restoration and its corresponding monotheistic community would never come to pass. 66

Cf. Ibid., 95-96. Kessler ("Building the Second Temple," 249) argues that the community used "sapiential reasoning" to conclude that its circumstances constituted sufficient grounds for putting off reconstruction of the temple. For further discussion regarding the "reluctance" of the people, see for example, Meyers and Meyers, Hqggai, Zechariah 1—8, xli. 65 In this sense, Ackroyd is on the right track when he identifies the tension between the people's "paneled houses" of Hag 1:4 and the "desolation" (hrk, see 1:9) of the land and temple (see Exile and Restoration, 155—156) 66 Ackroyd, again, comes close to this conclusion when he writes {ibid., 156— 167), "|T]n the Haggai context, the failure to rebuild is much more than a matter of reconstruction of a building. It is the reordering of a Temple so that it is a fit place for worship. Rebuilding is therefore linked to the condition of the people for the service of God." 63 64

YAHWEH'S BREAST

19

Abrahamian, Ervand. Khomeinism: Essays on the Islamic Republic. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993. Ackroyd, Peter R. Exile and Restoration: A Study of Hebrew Thought of the Sixth Century BC The Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1968. Assis, Elie. "The Temple in the Book of Haggai r Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 8, Article 19 (2008). Ball, Richard. "Individualism, Collectivism, and Economic Development." Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 573 (2001): 57-84. Baskauskas, Liucija. "The Lithuanian Refugee Experience and Grief." International Migration Review 15 (1981): 276—291. Boda, Mark J. "Messensgers of Hope in Haggai-Malachi." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 32 (2007): 113-131. Bourdieu, Pierre. "Genesis and Structure of the Religious Field." Comparative Social Research 13 (1991): 1-44. Carter, Charles E. The Emergence of Yehud in the Persian Period: A Social and Demographic Study. Vol. 294, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999. Cataldo, Jeremiah W. A Theocratic Yehud? Issues of Government in Yehud. Vol. 498, Library of Hebrew Bible/ Old Testament Studies. London: T & T Clark, 2009. Cerulo, Karen A. "Identity Construction: New Issues, New Directions." Annual Review of Sociology 23 (1997): 385-409. Coggins, R . J . Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987. Eagleton, Terry. Why Marx Was Right. Digital ed. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2011. Edelman, Diana. The Origins of the 'Second' Temple: Persian Imperial Policy and the Rebuilding of Jerusalem. London: Equinox Publishing Limited, 2005. Fried, Lisbeth S. The Priest and the Great King: Temple-Palace Relations in the Persian Empire. Biblical and Judaic Studies. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2004. Friedland, Roger. "Religious Nationalism and the Problem of Collective Representation." Annual Reviews in Sociology 27 (2001): 125—152. Glazier-McDonald, Beth. "Haggai." In Women's Bible Commentary, Expanded Edition With Apocrypha, edited by Carol A. Newsom, and Sharon H. Ringe, 243-244. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1998. Hall, Rodney Bruce. "Moral Authority as a Power Resource." International Organisation 51 (1997): 591-622.

20

JEREMIAH W . CATALDO

Hinshelwood, R. D. "Ideology and Identity: A Psychoanalytic Investigation of a Social Phenomenon." Psychoanalysis, Culture & Society 14.2 (2009): 131-148. Howard, Judith A. "Social Psychology of Identities." Annual Reviews in Sociology 26 (2000): 367-393. Hurowitz, Victor. I Have Built You an Exalted House: Temple Building in the Bible in the Ught of Mesopotamian and Northwest Semitic Writings. Journalfor the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992. Jaffee, Martin S. "One God, One Revelation, One People: On the Symbolic Structure of Elective Monotheism." Journal of the American Academy of Religion 69, no. 4 (2001): 753 - 775. Kessler, John. "Building the Second Temple: Questions of Time, Text, and History in Haggai 1.1—15." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 27 (2002): 243-256. Kessler, John. The Book of Haggai: Prophecy and Society in Early Persian Yehud. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2007. Klein, Melanie. Envy and Gratitude, and Other Works, 1946-1963. Free Press ed. New York: Vintage Digital, 2011. Krisciunas, Raymond G. 1983. The Emigrant experience: The Decision of Lithuanian Refugees to Emigrate, 1945—1950. http: / / www.lituanus .org/1983_2 / 83_2_03 .htm Meyers, Carol L., and Eric M. Meyers. Haggai, Zechariah 1-8. Vol. 25B, Anchor Bible Dictionary. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1987. Petterson, A. R. "The Shape of the Davidic Hope Across the Book of the Twelve." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 35, no. 2 (2010): 225— 246. Platteau, Jean-Philippe. "Behind the Market Stage Where Real Societies Exist—Part II: The Role of Moral Norms." Journal of Development Studies 30 (1994): 753-817. Postgate, J. Nicholas. Early Mesopotamia: Society and Economy At the Dawn of History. New York: Routledge, 1992. Redditt, Paul. "Themes in Haggai-Zechariah-Malachi." Interpretation 61.2 (2007): 184-197. Schaper, Joachim. "The Jerusalem Temple as an Instrument of the Achaemenid Fiscal Administration." Vetus Testamentum 45 (1995): 528— 539. Smith, Morton. Palestinian Parties and Politics That Shaped the Old Testament. 2nd, corr. ed. London: SCM, 1987. Stein, A. A. "Conflict and Cohesion: A Review of the Literature." Journal of Conflict Resolution 20 (1976): 143-172.

YAHWEH'S BREAST

21

Tajfel, Henri. "Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations." Annual Review of Triandis, Harry. "Cross-Cultural Studies of Individualism and Collectivism." Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1989 37 (1990): 41—133. Weinberg, Joel. The Citizen-Temple Community. Translated by Daniel L. SmithChristopher. Vol. 151, Journalfor the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series. Sheffield, England: JSOT Press, 1992.

THE QUMRAN SCROLLS OF THE BOOK OF JUDGES: LITERARY FORMATION, TEXTUAL CRITICISM, AND HISTORICAL LINGUISTICS^

ROBERT REZETKO, RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN & UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY

1. INTRODUCTION

In this article I discuss several fragmentary scrolls of the book of Judges found in the caves near Qumran (lQJudg, 4QJudg% 4QJudg b ) in order to illustrate some of the difficulties which language scholars face when seeking to identify and explain specific linguistic changes in Biblical Hebrew (BH) or trying to formulate and write a general history of the language. The main focus of the article is a discussion of the language of the plus of Judg 6:7—10 in the Masoretic Text (MT) compared to 4QJudg a . Other linguistic variants in Judges 6 (4Q]udg a ), 9 (lQJudg), and 21 (4QJudg b ), and the frequency of language variation in general, are also evaluated. In-depth treatments of the literary and textual issues of the book of Judges precede the analysis of the linguistic data, since historical linguistic conclusions cannot be reached independent of an evaluation of the literary and textual envelopes in which the language phenomena are embedded. The main conclusion of the article is that the integration of literary criticism, textual analysis, and historical linguistics often gives results which are more persuasive than historical

1 I thank Graeme Auld, Julio Trebolle, Ian Young, and several anonymous reviewers for JHS for their corrections and suggestions and for providing me with (references to) several relevant articles of theirs and others. Needless to say, all opinions and errors are my own responsibility.

23

ROBERT REZETKO

24

linguistic research w h i c h is g r o u n d e d m a i n l y or only on the M T a n d w h i c h discounts or d o w n p l a y s the literary a n d textual aspects of the f o r m a t i o n of the H e b r e w Bible. 2. BACKGROUND OF THE PRESENT STUDY In order to fully appreciate the significance of the f o l l o w i n g discussion it is necessary to h a v e in m i n d a basic u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the p r e d o m i n a n t a p p r o a c h in the history of research to the general topic at hand. T h e standard perspective is articulated m o s t clearly b y H u r v i t z in his b o o k o n the relationship b e t w e e n the l a n g u a g e of the Priestly source of the P e n t a t e u c h a n d the l a n g u a g e of the b o o k of Ezekiel. H e says: I Textual Criticism Our study is based upon MT ( =Massoretic Text) as we have it today. This procedure is not followed out of an axiomatic belief in the supremacy of MT, nor does it imply that it has reached us in exactly the same form in which it left the hands of the ancient writers. On the contrary, we are aware of the fact that MT is far from perfect, and that it was subject to mistakes and corruptions in the long course of its transmission. This is a frequent phenomenon in all ancient literatures affected by the process of constant copying, and it is but natural that even the extreme holiness and outstanding care which accompanied the Book of Books could not completely prevent textual accidents. However, at the same time it seems to us that a linguistic study whose central purpose is to seek facts and avoid conjectures should base itself on actual texts—difficult though they may be—rather than depend on reconstructed texts. These latter are indeed free of difficulties and easy to work with; but we can never be absolutely certain that they ever existed in reality. Our adherence to MT is not determined, therefore, by a dogmatic position but, rather, by methodological principles to which this study is subject. II Source-Critical Analysis As in the case of the above reservation, here too we avoid basing our discussion on reconstructed texts, whose late "shell" has been whittled down in an attempt to arrive at the "original" form.... To sum up: in the framework of this discussion we seek to deal exclusively with biblical texts in the way in which they have crystallized and in the form in which they now stand—regardless of textual

THE QUMRAN SCROLLS OF THE BOOK OF JUDGES

25

alterations, literary developments and editorial activities which they may or may not have undergone during their long transmission.... 2 I could be accused of singling out Hurvitz for criticism if it w e r e not for the fact that his w o r d s and ideas have b e e n cited and followed in m a n y other articles, dissertations, and b o o k s in the field.3 A n d while Hurvitz and other historical linguists of B H m a k e allowance for occasional difficulties, errors, and glosses in the M T , and s o m e t i m e s even argue that sporadic "late" linguistic elements in "early" writings indicate editorial additions, it is accurate to say that historical linguistic research o n B H has b e e n based almost exclusively on medieval manuscripts of the H e b r e w Bible (MT). 4 This a p p r o a c h has not g o n e uncriticized. In previous publications I and others h a v e discussed h o w the literary complexity and textual fluidity of biblical writings create difficulties for linguistic dating and historical linguistic a r g u m e n t s and theories w h i c h are based mainly or exclusively o n the M T . 5 A n d in a f o r t h c o m i n g b o o k 6 Y o u n g and I thoroughly discuss the 2 A. Hurvitz, A Linguistic Study of the Relationship Between the Priestly Source and the Book of E^ekiel: A New Approach to an Old Problem (CahRB, 20; Paris: J. Gabalda, 1982), 19—21 (emphasis original). Hurvitz expressed these thoughts more briefly in earlier publications, for example, in The Transition Period in Biblical Hebrew: A Study in Post-Exilic Hebrew and Its Impilcations [sic] for the Dating of Psalms (Hebrew; Jerusalem: Bialik, 1972), 67. Subsequent publications by Hurvitz repeat the same ideas. 3 The following large-scale contributions are several of many possible examples: R. L. Bergey, "The Book of Esther: Its Place in the Linguistic Milieu of Post-Exilic Biblical Hebrew Prose: A Study in Late Biblical Hebrew" (Ph.D. dissertation, Dropsie College for Hebrew and Cognate Learning, 1983), 21; G. A. Rendsburg, Linguistic Evidence for the Northern Origin of Selected Psalms (SBLMS, 43; Atlanta: Scholars, 1990), 16—17; M. F. Rooker, Biblical Hebrew in Transition: The Language of the Book of E^ekiel (JSOTSup, 90; Sheffield: JSOT, 1990), 57; R. M. Wright, "Linguistic Evidence for the Pre-exilic Date of the Yahwistic Source (LHBOTS, 419; London: T&T Clark International, 2005), 13-15. 4 Rooker's words are unequivocal: "Another premise adopted by modern researchers in diachronic study is the accepted postulate that the Massoretic Text be accepted in toto in this kind of linguistic analysis" (Rooker, Biblical Hebrew in Transition, 57; he cites Hurvitz, Transition Period in Biblical Hebrew, 67). 5 See especially I. Young, R. Rezetko, and M. Ehrensvard, Unguistic Dating of Biblical Texts, Volume 1: An Introduction to Approaches and Problems, Volume 2: A Survey of Scholarship, a New Synthesis and a Comprehensive Bibliography (BibleWorld; London: Equinox, 2008; LDBT), I, 341-360 (cf. many other publications cited in that chapter, and also I, 16—18, 60—64). Other recent publications on the topic by me or Young are listed in a forthcoming book (see n. 6). The significance of the textcritical issues is recognized in the recent monograph by D.-H. Kim, Early Biblical Hebrew, Late Biblical Hebrew, and Linguistic Variability: A Sociolinguistic Evaluation of the

26

ROBERT REZETKO

theoretical issues from the angle of general historical linguistic methodology 7 and we illustrate the substantial degree of linguistic fluidity in Unguistic Dating of Biblical Texts (VTSup, 156; Leiden: Brill, 2013), which argues from a sociolinguistic variationist approach that linguistic change and diffusion in Biblical Hebrew are detectable but that linguistic dating is impossible. He admits: "This conclusion of ours, of course, is based on the discussion that has chosen not to consider text-critical issues [i.e. the study is based on the MT only]. Considering them, no doubt, would work further against the validity of linguistic dating" (Kim, Early Biblical Hebrew, 157 n. 6). I briefly discuss later (section 5) several recent responses to our arguments in the publications cited above. 6 R. Rezetko and I. Young, Historical Linguistics and Biblical Hebrew: Steps Toward an Integrated Approach (expected publication data: SBLANEM/MACO; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, in preparation; HLBH). 1 In this context, the following quote, which should be contrasted with the words of Hurvitz cited above, makes the point well enough: The hypotheses of the historical linguist depend crucially on the interpretation of the data. It is not just a matter of the amount of data available but primarily of their quality. To evaluate the quality of old texts, we have to find out as much as possible about their extralinguistic context (such as the author, scribe, purpose, and location of a text, etc.), and about the textual tradition, including the original form and date of composition and copying This is the task of the philologist, for whom auxiliary disciplines such as history and paleography, the study of ancient writing, are of major importance. Only very few old texts are in the author's own hand, and even these may show various kinds of textual errors. Mostly they are the result of multiple copying by different scribes in different regions and over a long period of time. Some texts are compilations by a specific author from linguistically divergent, possibly orally transmitted original sources, as with Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, or the Rigpeda, the oldest collection of religious texts written in Sanskrit. Such textual history may result in linguistically composite texts with a mixed language, full of scribal errors due to negligence or insufficient competence in the language(s) or varieties of the original These different linguistic layers, whether dialectal or diachronic, must be disentangled and scribal errors detected before the text can be used as data for forming hypotheses about specific stages of a language.... (H. Schendl, Historical Linguistics [Oxford Introductions to Language Study; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001], 14-15 [emphasis added]).

In other words, historical linguists of BH go against the grain of general historical linguistic methodology when for motives of objectivity, pragmatism, dogmatism, or other reasons, they base their research and conclusions chiefly or exclusively on the final MT form of the Bible without considering other facets of diachronic change—literary, textual, etc.—in biblical writings. These various sorts

T H E QUMRAN SCROLLS OF THE B O O K OF J U D G E S

27

manuscripts of biblical writings through a comprehensive study of linguistic variants between M T Samuel and the four Qumran scrolls of Samuel. Within this framework, therefore, I suggest that this article is best understood as an affirmation of our argument in our previous publications— that it is essential to integrate linguistic, textual, and literary data and approaches in diaclironic research on B H — a n d as a modest illustration of what such integration might mean for the linguistic dating of biblical writings and the historical linguistics of BH. 3. LITERARY AND TEXTUAL ISSUES OF THE BOOK OF JUDGES 3.1. LITERARY CRITICISM OF

THEBOOKOFJUDGES

H i e book of Judges has been a playground of sorts for scholars whose approaches focus on the editorial shaping of biblical writings and also in more recent decades for scholars whose methods center on holistic or finalform readings of biblical books. The different kinds of viewpoints and arguments of those who analyze the book from mainly a diaclironic or synchronic standpoint are illustrated later in the discussion of the plus of 6:7—10 in the M T compared to 4QJudg a (section 3.3). It is unnecessary to give here a review of the history of scholarship on the book of Judges since a number of in-depth surveys have been published elsewhere. 8 Despite of diaclirony are inextricably linked. 8 In addition to introductions and commentaries see, for reviews of scholarship until the early 1990s, R. Bartelmus, "Forschung am Richterbuch seit Martin Notli," TRJI 56 (1991), 221-259; R. G. Boling, "Judges, Book of," in D. N. Freedman (ed), Anchor Bible Dictionary (6 vols; New York: Doubleday, 1992), III, 1107-1117; M. A. O'Brien, "Judges and the Deuteronomistic History," in S. L. McKenzie and M. P. Graham (eds), The History of Israel's Traditions: The Heritage of Martin Noth (JSOTSup, 182; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994), 235-259; R. H. O'Connell, The Rhetoric of the Book of Judges (VTSup, 63; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1996), 345-368; for surveys of scholarship until the early 2000s see T. K. Beal and D. M. Gunn, "Judges, Book of," i n j . H. Hayes (ed), Dictionary of Biblical Interpretation (2 vols; Nashville: Abingdon, 1999), I, 637-647; K. M. Craig, Jr., "Judges in Recent Research," CBR 1 (2003), 159-185; K. Spronk, "Het Boek Rechters: Een Overzicht van het Recente Onderzoek," ACEBT 19 (2001), 1-36; for reviews of scholarship until the present day see T. C. Butler, Judges (WBC, 8; Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2009), xliii-li, 491-495; V. H. Matthews, "Judges, Book of," in K. D. Sakenfeld (ed), The New Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (5 vols; Nashville: Abingdon, 2008), III, 446—457; G. Mobley, "Judges," in M. D. Coogan (ed), The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Books of the Bible (2 vols; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), I, 516-531; "Book of Judges," Oxford Bibliographies Online: Biblical Studies

28

ROBERT REZETKO

c o m m e n t a r i e s a n d m o n o g r a p h s w h i c h read the M T b o o k of J u d g e s as a n authorial or compositional unity, 9 the review of the literature substantiates that a considerable majority of biblical scholars u n d e r s t a n d the b o o k to h a v e b e e n f o r m e d t h r o u g h a c o m p l e x editorial process over an extensive span of time, b e g i n n i n g in the preexilic period, a n d lasting at least into the exilic period a n d p r o b a b l y into the postexilic period a n d possibly even as late as the H a s m o n e a n era. In the f r a m e w o r k of the so-called D e u t e r o n o m i s t i c History, the b o o k consists of p r e - D e u t e r o n o m i s t i c sources, D e u t e r o n o m i s t i c editing, a n d p o s t - D e u t e r o n o m i s t i c additions, 1 0 or in Niditcli's conceptualization, the (http://www.oxfordbibHographies.com/view/document/obo-9780195393361/ obo-9780195393361-0115.xml); L. G. Stone, "Judges, Book of," in B. T. Arnold and H. G. M. Williamson (eds), Dictionary of the Old Testament: Historical Books (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2005), 592-606 (594-597); B. G. Webb, The Book of Judges (NICOT; Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 2012), 20-32, 35-53; G. T. K. Wong, Compositional Strategy of the Book of Judges: A.n Inductive, BJjetorica! Study (VTSup, 111; Leiden: Brill, 2006), 1-26. 9 I share Knoppers' general assessment of approaches which read the MT books of Deuteronomy—Kings exclusively as authorial wholes: "To this literary evidence can be added textual evidence. The differences between the Masoretic Text, the Septuagint, the Old Latin, and the Dead Sea Scrolls (where available) in Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings are substantial and should not be ignored....The differences between these various textual witnesses suggest a certain instability and history of development within the text before the Common Era. In short, ignoring or defying evidence for diaclironic development in the Deuteronomistic History can lead to superficial or forced arguments for synchronic unity" (G. N. Knoppers, "Is There a Future for the Deuteronomistic History?," in T. C. Römer [ed], The Future of the Deuteronomistic History [BETL, 147; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2000], 119-134 [125-126]). I have attempted to negotiate the diaclironicsynclironic "divide" by way of a "textual-exegetical" approach in R. Rezetko, Source and Revision in the Narratives of David's Transfer of the A.rk: Text, Language and Story in 2 Samuel 6 and 1 Chronicles 13, 15—16 (LHBOTS, 470; London: T&T Clark International, 2007); see especially 43—85 on the theoretical and empirical framework and the methodology. 10 For example, in Notli's original formulation, most of Judges 3—12 was from two pre-Deuteronomistic complexes of traditions, stories of the tribal heroes and a list of the lesser judges (2:17; 3:15b-30a, 31; 4:1b, 3b-4a; 5 : l - 3 1 a ; 6:2-6a; 6:118:27a; 8:29; 9:1-10:5; 10:17-12:15); the exilic Deuteronomist contributed various parts of 2:6-13:1 (2:6-11, 14-16, 18-19; 3.7-15a, 30b; 4.1a, 2-3a, 4b; 5.31b; 6.1, 6b-10; 8.27b-28, 30-35; 10.6-16; 13.1); and most of the prologue, the story of Samson, and the appendices were post-Deuteronomistic additions (1:1—2:5; 2.12— 13; 2:20-3:6; 13.2-21:25). See A. F. Campbell, "Martin Notli and the Deuteronomistic History," in S. L. McKenzie and M. P. Graham (eds), The History

THE QUMRAN SCROLLS OF THE BOOK OF JUDGES

29

epic-bardic voice, the voice of the theologian, and the voice of the humanist. 1 1 It is generally held that chapters 3—16 contain the oldest materials in the book, w h i c h originally were stories of Israelite deliverers f r o m the northern k i n g d o m (with the exception of the p r o g r a m m a t i c story of Othniel in 3:7—11, the only southern deliverer in the book), w h e r e a s the prologue (chapters 1—2) and " a p p e n d i c e s " (chapters 17—21) are widely thought to b e the y o u n g e s t parts of the book. 1 2 H o w e v e r , s o m e scholars also assign relatively later dates to other parts of the book. 1 3 For example, N o t h argued that the story of S a m s o n (13:2—16:31) w a s a postDeuteronomistic insertion, 1 4 and A u l d argued that the story of G i d e o n of Israel's Traditions: The Heritage of Martin Noth (JSOTSup, 182; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994), 31-62 (59); cf. O'Brien, "Judges and the Deuteronomistic History," 235-239. 11 S. Niditch, Judges: A Commentary (OTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2008), 8-13. Niditch's "voices" largely correspond to Noth's ideas, the major difference being that for Niditch the story of Samson (chapters 13—16) is preDeuteronomistic. 12 Some manuscript evidence supports the literary arguments that the "bookends" of Judges were added when the book became a bridge between the separate books of Genesis—Joshua and Samuel—Kings. See J. Trebolle Barrera, "Samuel / Kings and Chronicles: Book Division and Text Composition," in P. W. Flint, E. Tov, and J. C. VanderKam (eds), Studies in the Hebrew Bible, Qumran, and the Septuagint Presented to Eugene Ulrich (VTSup, 101; Leiden: Brill, 2006), 96-108 (97100; discussion of the book of Judges in the section "Divisions between the Books: Multiple Endings and Beginnings"). See the briefer discussions of the beginning of the book of Judges in E. Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible (3rd ed; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2012), 297-298; D. M. Carr, The Formation of the Hebrew Bible: A New 'Reconstruction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 282-285; cf. 171— 172, 244-245, 290-291, 345-346. In the next section I discuss the textual history of the book of Judges (section 3.2). 13 In addition to the following two examples, others are discussed in K. Spronk, "The Book of Judges as a Late Construct," in L. Jonker (ed), Historiography and Identity: (Re)¥ormulation in Second Temple Historiographical Uterature (LHBOTS, 534; London: T&T Clark International, 2010), 15-28; LDBT, II, 25-27. 14 M. Noth, XJberlieferungsgeschichtliche Studien. I. Die sammelnden und bearbeitenden Geschichtswerke im Alten Testament (Schriften der Königsberger Gelehrten Gesellschaft, 18; Halle: Max Niemeyer, 1943), 61. O'Brien shares Noth's view that the story of Samson was added by later editors but in his opinion the story had a preexilic origin (M. A. O'Brien, The Deuteronomistic History Hypothesis: A Reassessment [OBO, 92; Freiburg: Universitätsveriag; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1989], 287). Finally, Margalith, Nauerth, and Yadin argue that the story of Samson has its setting in a Greek cultural context. See O. Margalith, "Samson's Foxes," VT 35 (1985), 224-229; "Samson's Riddle and Samson's Magic Locks," VT 36 (1986),

30

ROBERT REZETKO

(chapters 6—8) w a s a d d e d after the addition of the appendices. 1 5 I return later to the literary analysis of the story of G i d e o n (section 3.3).

3.2. TEXTUAL WITNESSES OF THE BOOK OF JUDGES F e r n á n d e z M a r c o s gives in his recently published B H Q edition a concise s u m m a r y of the textual witnesses of the b o o k of J u d g e s . 1 6 H e discusses the H e b r e w , G r e e k , Latin, Syriac, a n d A r a m a i c texts, a n d he cites m o s t of the i m p o r t a n t editions a n d studies of each one. His overall a s s e s s m e n t is that the H e b r e w text u n d e r l y i n g these versions is closely related to the M T , that is, all the n o n - M T witnesses of the b o o k of J u d g e s are typologically similar to the M T . 1 7 I s u m m a r i z e here his v i e w s on only the Septuagint a n d Q u m r a n scrolls, since b e c a u s e of space I cannot interact w i t h the other versions to a n y substantive degree in this article. F e r n á n d e z says the textual history of the G r e e k b o o k of J u d g e s is extremely complicated, but it can be traced b a c k to a single translation. T h e r e are four principal textual groups: G B (includes m a n u s c r i p t B); GL (the A n t i o c h e n e or L u c i a n i c recension); G M (includes m a n u s c r i p t s M a n d N); a n d G ° (includes m a n u s c r i p t A ; the Origenian or H e x a p l a r i c recension). H e says: In Judges it is very difficult to restore the Old Greek. The text history has been exposed to a strong influence of the Origenian or Hexaplaric recension. It can be said that no group of manuscripts is free from this 225-234; "More Samson Legends," VT 36 (1986), 397-405; "The Legends of Samson/Heracles," VT 37 (1987), 63-70; C. Nauerth, "Simsons Taten: Motivgeschichtliche Überlegungen," DBAT 21 (1985), 94-120; A. Yadin, "Samson's Hida," VT52 (2002), 407-426. 15 A. G. Auld, "Gideon: Hacking at the Heart of the Old Testament," VT 39 (1989), 257-267. 16 N. Fernandez Marcos, Judges (Biblia Hebraica Quinta, 7; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2011), 5*—15* (introduction), 123*—141* (bibliography). See also his "The Hebrew and Greek Texts of Judges," in A. Schenker and M. K. H. Peters (eds), The Earliest Text of the Hebrew Bible: The Relationship between the Masoretic Text and the Hebrew Base of the Septuagint Reconsidered (SBLSCS, 52; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003), 1-16; "L'histoire textuelle: les livres historiques (Juges)," in A. Schenker and Ph. Hugo (eds), L'enfance de la Bible hébraïque: histoire du texte de 1'Ancien Testament à la lumière des recherches récentes (Le monde de la Bible, 54; Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2005), 148-169; "The Genuine Text of Judges," in Y. A. P. Goldman, A. van der Kooij, and R. D. Weis (eds), Sôfer Mahîr: Essays in Honour of Adrian Schenker Offered bj Editors of Biblia Hebraica Quinta (VTSup, 110; Leiden: Brill, 2006), 33-45. 17 Fernandez Marcos, "Hebrew and Greek Texts of Judges," 9, 15—16; "Genuine Text of Judges," 40-41, 43.

THE QUMRAN SCROLLS OF THE BOOK OF JUDGES

31

influence....All scholars agree in emphasizing the importance of the group GL and in particular of the subgroup GU [K Z 54 59 75 (82) 314] for the restoration of the Old Greek of Judges. The agreements between the Antiochene or Lucianic text and La [Old Latin] take us back to the Old Greek before it was contaminated by Hexaplaric readings. Moreover, in some places La may preserve the Old Greek better than any Greek manuscript.18 Following a synopsis of the other three textual groups (G B , G°, and G1*1) he states the main outcome of his study of the Greek witnesses of the book of Judges: "Only in a few cases...can it be argued that the reading of the Vor/age of G was superior to that of M, except in the special case of Judges 5, and the omissions by homoioteleuton in M of 16:13—14 and 19:30." 19 Fernández summarizes the Qumran fragments of the book of Judges in this way: XJudges "is identical to the Masoretic text, including its orthography"; " l Q J u d g usually follows M"; "[t]he preserved fragments of 4QJudg b are very close to M"; and regarding 4QJudg% he states that the minus of 6:7—10 compared to the MT could be seen as an earlier literary form of the book, but that the verses could also have been inadvertently lost or intentionally omitted; the other variants can also be explained as omissions; and "the scarcity of the fragments precludes from drawing any conclusion on the type of text present in 4QJudg a ." 20 In summary: "The fragments of Qumran are scarce. Most of them prove to be secondary in relation to M." 21 XJudges is unimportant for this article since it is identical to the MT with the exception of one orthographic variant. 22 However, the other three Qumran scrolls of Judges are relevant for two reasons: (1) the language of the plus of 6:7—10 in the MT; (2) the linguistic variants between the M T and the Qumran scrolls. 23 l Q J u d g (1Q6; first century CE) was published by Barthélemy in DJD I.24 The scroll preserves parts of Judges 6, 8(P), and 9. In Tov's Fernández Marcos, Judges, 7*—8*. Fernández Marcos, Judges, 8*. 20 Fernández Marcos, Judges, 6*. 21 Fernández Marcos, Judges, 5*. 22 See Fernández Marcos, Judges, 5*—6*, for the relevant bibliography and a brief discussion. My exclusion of XJudges from the following discussion does not mean to suggest that the scroll is unimportant. At the very least it is an early proto-MT manuscript of the book of Judges which does not have any linguistic or other nonorthographic variants from the MT. 23 Later I discuss specific linguistic aspects of the scrolls (section 4). 24 D. Barthélemy, "Juges," in D. Barthélemy and J. T. Milik (edsQumran Cave 1 18 19

32

ROBERT REZETKO

j u d g m e n t the "text is too short for analysis." 2 5 Trebolle Barrera remarks that the text "presents t w o unique readings and agrees three times with the Septuagint against the M a s o r e t i c Text, in t w o of t h e m w i t h support of the Vulgate." 2 6 4 Q J u d g a (4Q49; c. 5 0 - 2 5 B C E ) and 4QJudgb (4Q50; c. 3 0 - 1 BCE) were published by Trebolle in DJD X I V . 2 7 4 Q J u d g a preserves parts of J u d g e s 6. A c c o r d i n g to T o v the text is "manifestly non-aligned, and actually i n d e p e n d e n t " and " m a y reflect a different literary edition." 2 8 Trebolle says: This manuscript offers new data for a better understanding of the textual history and the literary development of Judges. It represents a form of the text independent from any other known text type. In six instances of a total of ten variant readings, the manuscript goes its own way, disagreeing with the Masoretic Text and the Greek tradition....It is the only extant witness that does not include Judges 6.7—10, although

(DJD, 1; Oxford: Clarendon, 1955), 62-64 + Plate XI. 25 E. Tov, "The Significance of the Texts from the Judean Desert for the History of the Text of the Hebrew Bible: A New Synthesis," in F. H. Cryer and T. L. Thompson (eds), Qumran Between the Old and New Testaments (JSOTSup, 290; Copenhagen International Seminar, 6; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), 277-309 (305). 26 J. Trebolle Barrera, "Judges, Book of," in L. H. Schiffman and J. C. VanderKam (eds), Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls (2 vols; New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), I, 455. 27 J. Trebolle Barrera, "4QJudg a " and "4QJudg b ," in E. C. Ulrich et al. (eds), Qumran Cave 4: IX: Deuteronomy, ]oshua, Judges, Kings (DJD, 14; Oxford: Clarendon, 1995), 161-164 + Plate XXXVI (4QJudg a ), 165-169 + Plate XXXVI (4QJudg b ). Preliminary publications of the scrolls were made in his "Textual Variants in 4QJud¿ and the Textual and Editorial History of the Book of Judges," RevQ 14 (1989), 229-245 = "La aportación de 4QJueces a al estudio de la historia textual y literaria del libro de los Jueces," MEAH 40 (1991), 5-20; "Édition préliminaire de 4QJugesb\ contribution des manuscrits qumrâniens des Juges à l'étude textuelle et littéraire du livre," RevQ 15 (1991), 79-100. 28 E. Tov, "The Biblical Texts from the Judaean Desert — An Overview and Analysis of the Published Texts," in E. D. Herbert and E. Tov (eds), The Bible as Book: The Hebrew Bible and the]udaean Desert Discoveries (London: The British Library; New Castle, DE: Oak Knoll, 2002), 139-166 (156); reprinted in his Hebrew Bible, Greek Bible, and Qumran: Collected Essays (TSAJ, 121; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008), 128-154 (149, 152); cf. "Significance of the Texts," 298, 305, 307; E. Tigchelaar, "The Dead Sea Scrolls," in J. J. Collins and D. C. Harlow (eds), The Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism (Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 2010), 163—180 (167).

THE QUMRAN SCROLLS OF THE BOOK OF JUDGES

33

two Hebrew medieval manuscripts and the Septuagint B text also omit verse 7a. 29

And: "4QJudg a can confidently be seen as an earlier literary form of the book than our traditional texts." 30 4QJudg b preserves parts of Judges 19 and 21. Tov notes that the textual character of the scroll is "MT." 31 Trebolle concurs: "The preserved readings of 4QJudg b are very close to 9Jt. The reconstruction of its lines shows, however, that 4QJudg b possibly knew a variant shorter text or presented a text arrangement different from that of 9Jt." 32 Furthermore, as discussed below, there are some significant linguistic variants between the MT and 4QJudg b (section 4.3.3). There is an obvious difference of opinion between Fernández and Trebolle regarding the character and significance of 4QJudg a and 4QJudg b , especially over the plus of 6:7—10 in the MT compared to 4QJudg a . The decisive factor separating between their evaluations is the attention given to literary criticism in the evaluation of the shorter and longer texts. 3.3. EVALUATION OF THE MINUS OFJUDGES IN 4QJUD&

6:7-10

Biblical scholars have long recognized the story of Gideon in Judges 6—8, like the larger whole in which it is embedded, 33 as a composite story which gradually evolved into its current form. 34 From the perspective of the socalled Deuteronomistic History, the literary complex is argued to include pre-Deuteronomistic, Deuteronomistic, and post-Deuteronomistic elements. In particular, chapter 6, verses 7—10,35 were considered an Trebolle Barrera, "Judges, Book of," 455. Trebolle Barrera, "4QJudg a ," 162. 31 Tov, "Biblical Texts from the Judaean Desert" (2002), 158; "Significance of the Texts," 305. 32 Trebolle Barrera, "4QJudg b ," 167. 33 See section 3.1 and the bibliography cited in n. 8. 34 For example (one of many potential quotes; cf. all the standard critical commentaries): "Judg. 6—9, the story of Gideon's deliverance of Israel from Midian, with the appendix on Abimelech, is the result of a complex literary history which has brought together into a very uneasy relationship a wide variety of clearly quite independent materials. Some of these represent traditions of varying age and origin, others are compositions intended to unite those traditions....The Gideon tradition in Judg. 6 - 8 is in itself complex" (A. D. H. Mayes, Judges [OTG; Sheffield: JSOT, 1985], 24-25). 35 Judg 6:1-13 (NRSV): "1 The Israelites did what was evil in the sight of the LORD, and the LORD gave them into the hand of Midian seven years. 2 The hand 29

30

34

ROBERT REZETKO

editorial addition to the story, on the basis of literary-critical arguments only, long before the discovery of Qumran cave 4 (1952) and the first major published discussion of the minus in 4QJudg a by Boling. 36 It seems that Wellhausen was among the first to publish this view. 37 Most scholars prior to Noth attributed the verses to an Elohistic hand or school. 38 Noth himself of Midian prevailed over Israel; and because of Midian the Israelites provided for themselves hiding places in the mountains, caves and strongholds. 3 For whenever the Israelites put in seed, the Midianites and the Amalekites and the people of the east would come up against them. 4 They would encamp against them and destroy the produce of the land, as far as the neighborhood of Gaza, and leave no sustenance in Israel, and no sheep or ox or donkey. 5 For they and their livestock would come up, and they would even bring their tents, as thick as locusts; neither they nor their camels could be counted; so they wasted the land as they came in. 6 Thus Israel was greatly impoverished because of Midian; and the Israelites cried out to the LORD for help. 7 When the Israelites cried to the LORD on account of the Midianites, 8 the LORD sent a prophet to the Israelites; and he said to them, Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel: "I led you up from Egypt, and brought you out of the house of slavery; 9 and I delivered you from the hand of the Egyptians, andfrom the hand of all who oppressedyou, and drove them out before you, and gave you their land; 10 and I said to you, 'I am the LORD your God;you shall notpay reverence to the gods of the Amontes, in whose land you live.' But you have not given heed to my voice.'" 11 Now the angel of the LORD came and sat under the oak at Ophrah, which belonged to Joash the Abiezrite, as his son Gideon was beating out wheat in the wine press, to hide it from the Midianites. 12 The angel of the LORD appeared to him and said to him, 'The LORD is with you, you mighty warrior.' 13 Gideon answered him, 'But sir, if the LORD is with us, why then has all this happened to us? And where are all his wonderful deeds that our ancestors recounted to us, saying, "Did not the LORD bring us up from Egypt?" But now the LORD has cast us off, and given us into the hand of Midian.'" 36 R. G. Boling, Judges: Introdudion, Translation, and Commentary (AB, 6A; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1975), 39-40, 125. 37 J. Wellhausen, Prolegomena %ur Geschichte Israels (2nd edn; Berlin: G. Reimer, 1883), 244: "...der anonyme Prophet, der in dem Einsätze der letzten Bearbeitung 6,7—10..." I have not seen the first 1878 edition of this book which apparently has the same remark. 38 E. Bertheau, Das Buch der Richter und Ruth (2nd edn; KEHAT, 6; Leipzig: S. Herzel, 1883), 133; K. Budde, Die Bücher Richter und Samuel: Ihre Quellen und ihr Aufbau (Giessen: J. Ricker, 1890), 107-108, 122; Das Buch der Richter (KHAT, 7; Freiburg: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1897), 52-53; C. F. Burney, The Book of Judges (London: Rivingtons, 1918), 176—177; G. A. Cooke, The Book of Judges (Cambridge Bible; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1913), 69, 72; S. R. Driver, An Introdudion to the Literature of the Old Testament (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1891), 158; O. Eissfeldt, Die Quellen des Richterbuches (Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs, 1925), 36; M. J. Lagrange, Le livre de Juges (EBib; Victor Lecoffre, 1903),

THE QUMRAN SCROLLS OF THE BOOK OF JUDGES

35

assigned the insertion to the Deuteronomist. 39 And many have followed suit, usually without reference to the minus in 4QJudg a . 40 Below I discuss the literary reasons given for considering 6:7—10 an insertion between w . 6 and 11. In short, above and beyond the minus in 4QJudg% there is nearly universal agreement among literary critics that 6:7—10 is a secondary 119—120; G. F. Moore, Critical and Exegetical Commentaiy on Judges (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1895), 181; The Book of Judges: A New English Translation Printed in Colors Exhibiting the Composite Structure of the Book (Stuttgart: Deutsche VerlagsAnstalt, 1898), 67 ("It is ascribed in the text to E, or rather to the secondary stratum of E [E2]; it may, perhaps, equally well be attributed to a postDeuteronomistic editor [D2]."); cf. A. B. Ehrlich, Randglossen %ur Hebräischen Bibel: Textkritisches, Sprachliches und Sachliches. Dritter Band: Josua, Richter, I. u. II. Samuelis (Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs, 1910), 90 ("Das ganze Stück von hier [v. 7] an bis Ende V. 10, das der Sprache nach von dem Vorherg. und dem Folgenden sich stark abhebt, fliesst aus einer andern Quelle."). Many other early critical scholars recognized that the verses were an editorial addition, e.g. C. H. Cornill, R. Kittel, A. Kuenen, B. Stade. 39 Noth, Uberlieferungsgeschichtliche Studien, 51. See n. 10 for Noth's breakdown of the layers of the story of Gideon. 40 U. Becker, Richter^eit und Königtum: Redaktionsgeschichtliche Studien %um Richterbuch (BZAW, 192; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1990), 144-145 (DtrN, perhaps post-Dtr); Boling, Judges, 30, 36,passim (Dtr1); A. F. Campbell and M. A. O'Brien, Unfolding the Deuteronomistic History: Origins, Upgrades, Present Text (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2000), 183 (post-Dtr); W. Dietrich, Prophetie und Geschichte: Eine redaktionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung %um deuteronomistischen Geschichtswerk (FRLANT, 108; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1972), 133 (DtrN); J. Gray, Joshua, Judges and Ruth (NCB; Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 1986), 206, 283-284 (Dtr); W. Gross, Richter (HTKAT; Freiburg: Herder, 2009), 369-370, 389, 396 (post-Dtr); J. D. Martin, The Book of Judges (CBC; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975), 81 (Dtr); A. D. H. Mayes, The Story of Israel between Settlement and Exile: A Rdidactional Study of the Deuteronomistic History (London: SCM, 1983), 163 n. 31, 164 n. 41 (DtrG); J. M. Myers, "The Book of Judges: Introduction and Exegesis," in G. A. Buttrick et al. (eds), The Interpreter's Bible (12 vols; Nashville: Abingdon, 1953), II, 675-826 (730) (Dtr); R. D. Nelson, The Double Redaction of the Deuteronomistic Histo/y (JSOTSup, 18; Sheffield: JSOT, 1981), 43, 47-53 (Dtr2); Niditch, Judges, 90 (Dtr); O'Brien, Deuteronomistic History Hypothesis, 88 n. 21, 91 n. 34, 93, 282 (DtrN); W. Richter, Die Bearbeitungen des 'Retterbuches" in der Deuteronomischen Epoche (BBB, 21; Bonn: P. Hanstein, 1964), 97—109 (DtrN); R. Smend, Die Entstehung des Alten Testaments (Theologische Wissenschaft, 1; Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1989), 116 (DtrN); J. A. Soggin, Judges: A Commentary (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1981), 112 (Dtr); T. Veijola, Das Königtum in der Beurteilung der deuteronomistischen Historiographie: eine redaktionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung (ASSF, series B, 198; Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, 1977), 43-48 (DtrN).

ROBERT REZETKO

36

insertion in the i n t r o d u c t i o n of the story of G i d e o n . T h e r e f o r e the questions b e c o m e : w h e n w e r e the verses written a n d w h e n w e r e they inserted in the b o o k of J u d g e s ? Naturally w e expect that the dissenters to the redactionalinsertional v i e w of 6:7—10 w o u l d generally b e synchronic-oriented scholars w h o interpret the b o o k in its final M T f o r m . I n d e e d this is the case for s o m e interpreters w h o g i v e no hint at all that these verses m i g h t not b e "original" to the story. 4 1 Y e t surprisingly just as m a n y scholars of this persuasion argue that the verses are a well-integrated editorial addition w h i c h a d v a n c e s the a r g u m e n t of the book. 4 2 O n l y several scholars c o n t e n d that the verses are not a n insertion into pre-existing source material. 4 3

41 W. Bluedorn, Yahweh versus Baalism: A Theological Reading of the Gideon-Abimelech Narrative (JSOTSup, 329; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), 61-70; E. J. Hamlin, At Risk in the Promised Land: A Commentaiy on the Book of Judges (ITC; Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 1990), 92; L. R. Klein, The Triumph of Irony in the Book of Judges (JSOTSup, 68; Sheffield: Almond, 1989), 49-52; R. Polzin, Moses and the Deuteronomist: A Uterary Study of the Deuteronomic History. Part One: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges (Indiana Studies in Biblical Literature; Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1980), 168-176; R. Ryan, Judges (Readings: A New Biblical Commentary; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2007), 46-48; J. T. Tanner, "Textual Patterning in Biblical Hebrew Narrative: A Case Study in Judges 6—8" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas at Austin, 1990), 148-149, 165-167, 192-194; B. G. Webb, The Book of the Judges: An Integrated Reading (JSOTSup, 46; Sheffield: JSOT, 1987), 144-145; but cf. 213 n. 5; K. L. Younger, Jr., Judges/Ruth (The NIV Application Commentary; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002), 169-171.

Here I would include the following scholars, who usually refer to a redactor, compiler, Deuteronomist, Deuteronomistic Historian, etc.: Y. Amit, Book of Judges: The Art of Editing (Biblical Interpretation, 38; Leiden: E . J . Brill, 1999), 249-251; D. I. Block, Judges, Ruth (NAC, 6; Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 1999), 253-256 (cf. his "Will the Real Gideon Please Stand Up? Narrative Style and Intention in Judges 6 - 9 "JETS 40 [1997], 353-366: "Judges 6:7-10 in particular appears to be secondary" [354 n. 3; cf. 355 n. 13]); Butler, Judges, 185; J. L. McCann, Judges (Interpretation; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002), 62-63; cf. 8-12; O'Connell, Rhetoric of the Book of Judges, 40-43, 147-150; T. J. Schneider, Judges (Berit Olam; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical, 2000), 101-102; Webb, Book of Judges, 223-226. Martin is aware of the issues but says: "My purpose here is not to employ the intrusive nature of Judges 6:7—10 as an argument either for or against the compositional unity of the Gideon cycle; but rather my goal is to explore the literary theological dimensions of the text in its present form" (L. R. Martin, "The Intrusive Prophet: The Narrative Function of the Nameless Prophet in Judges 6," JournalforSemitics 16 [2007]: 113-140 [115]). 42

43

This minority view seems to be held by Assis and Wong. E. Assis,

Self-interest

THE QUMRAN SCROLLS OF THE BOOK OF JUDGES

37

Such final-form readings have been largely successful at making good sense of 6:7—10 in its present location. There are at least seven arguments in support of the authorial or editorial originality of the verses. 44 (1) Connection: 6:7—10 is closely connected to 6:1—6 through causality, sequentiality, and content, and to 6:11—13 especially because the prophet's words in 6:8—10 contextualize and counteract Gideon's words in 6:13. (2) Chiasm: 6:1—6 and 6:7—10 form a chiasm or palistrophe of sorts that has its axis between 6:6 and 6:7 and infidelity to Yahweh at its limits (6:1,10). (3) Concentricity. There is a concentric or symmetric structure in the story of Gideon in Judges 6-8, including between the prologue (6:1-10) and epilogue (8:22-32), more specifically between 6:7-10 and 8:22-27, and especially between the idolatry in 6:10 and 8:24—27. These passages and others (see point 6, below) emphasize the theme of unfaithfulness to Yahweh. (4) Cycles-. There are seven cycles of sin, punishment, crying out, salvation, and quiet in the book of Judges, and the crying out in 6:6—7 has an equivalent in the stories of four of the other deliverers: Othniel (3:9), Ehud (3:15), Deborah and Barak (4:3), and Jephthah (10:10,12, 14).45 (5) Prophet and prophetess-. The unnamed prophet in 6:7—10 and the prophetess Deborah in 4:3—4 appear at precisely the same point in the plot of their respective stories, immediately after the Israelites cry to Yahweh (4:3; 6:7). Furthermore, only these passages in the Bible share the similar phrases "a woman a prophetess" (¡"IN'QJ 4:4) and "a man a prophet" (N'QJ U^N; 6:8). However, the prophetess Deborah and the unnamed prophet function differently in their respective stories. The prophetess functions within the cyclical pattern, fulfilling the role of deliverer, but the or Communal Interest: An Ideology of Leadership in the Gideon, Abimelech and ]ephthah Narratives (Judg 6—12) (VTSup, 106; Leiden: Brill, 2005), 21-26, especially 22 n. 17: "However, I will show subsequently in this work that there is a strong connection between Gideon's complaint to the Angel of God and the prophecy in w . 7—10. This connection proves that one author is responsible for the two passages w . 7— 10 and 11—13." Wong, Compositional Strategy of the Book of Judges, 181—185, especially 182—183 and n. 118: "Thus, until further evidence can be found to clarify the matter, Judg. 6:7—10, which, after all, does seem to have direct literary connection and relevance to its immediate context..., will be treated as an integral part of the text." 44 See the literature cited in nn. 41-43, especially Martin, "Intrusive Prophet." 45 See the table in Amit, Book of Judges, 45. There is no "crying out" in the stories of Tola (8:33-10:5) and Samson (13:1-16:31).

38

ROBERT REZETKO

prophet interrupts the cyclical pattern, rebuking Israel and then disappearing. (6) Confrontations-. 6:7—10, together with 2:1—5 and 10:10—16, comprise a series of confrontations between Yahweh and Israel. The passages share the language and themes of deliverance from Egypt and other enemies (2:1; 6:8-9; 10:11-12), the gift of the land (2:1-2; 6:9-10), and cultic disloyalty (2:2—3; 6:10; 10:10, 13).46 The confrontations also represent a gradual breakdown of the standard cycle (see point 4, above), including Israel's progressive deterioration and Yahweh's increasing frustration. Israel's repentance in 2:4—5 and 10:10, 15—16 is contrasted with her non-response in 6:1—10, but whereas at first the messenger of Yahweh confronts Israel (2:1, 4), and then a prophet confronts her (6:8; and also the messenger of Yahweh [6:11—12], unlike the prophetess alone earlier [4:4]; see point 5, above), finally Yahweh himself confronts the Israelites (10:11). (7) Rhetoric. The "interruption" created by 6:7—10 plays a rhetorically forceful role in the story of Gideon. There are various perspectives on this issue. The verses are a narrative pause or postponement, a plot-delaying complication, a delaying force, a suspense builder, or a breakdown in the cycle. The verses kindle despair and hopelessness in the storyline, stress Israel's sinfulness and ungratefulness, caution against Israel's presumption that crying to Yahweh always gets a favorable response, highlight the undeservedness of Yahweh's intervention, create doubt about Yahweh's willingness to send another deliverer, and so on. Consequently, on the basis of these observations concerning context, structure, theme, and rhetoric, it is claimed that 6:7—10 was written by the original author of the story of Gideon or, more likely, it was written and so well integrated in the story/book by the early editor of the book that it could not be a later addition. 47 Synchronic-oriented scholars have reached this literary conclusion about the early origin of 6:7—10 usually without mentioning or discussing the plus of these verses in the MT compared to 4QJudg a . 48 Instead, three 46 Note ''VpS OfiynU^NVl in 2:2 and 'Vip? OrWDU? NVI in 6:10. The only other similar phrase in the book is •,t71pE7 1J7DU? nV| in 2:20. 47 For example, Amit concludes: "Therefore, these verses should not be seen as a late insertion, nor as an arbitrary combination of sources, but as part of the systematic and tendentious shaping of the editing of the cycle and its incorporation within the book" (Amit, Book of Judges, 251). However, as indicated below, Amit has since changed her mind. 48 The exceptions are Amit, Book of Judges, 224 n. 3; Assis, Self-interest or Communal Interest, 22 n. 17 (citing Hess); Block, Judges, Huth, 72, 254; Butler, Judges,

THE QUMRAN SCROLLS OF THE BOOK OF JUDGES

39

scholars in particular have taken up the textual phenomena in support of this literary conclusion, namely Hess, Fernández, and Rofé. Because of space I can only summarize their arguments. I refer the reader to their articles for longer presentations of their views. Hess's often-cited article is short and straightforward. 49 His objective is to counter Trebolle's claims that 4QJudg a is a variant literary edition of the book of Judges (see section 3.2) and that the minus of 6:7—10 in the manuscript represents a late pre-Deuteronomistic form of the story of Gideon, that is, the MT plus is an example of late Deuteronomistic editing. Hess argues that it is unlikely that the minus in 4QJudg a is related either to inadvertent loss due to haplography or intentional omission for theological reasons. 50 Then, after stating that "[t]he strongest argument in favour of reserving judgment on this is the [small] size of the fragment," 51 he suggests that "the omission of 4QJudg a follows a tendency to insert, omit and change sections or paragraphs of biblical text at what would become the Masoretic parashoth divisions of text," 52 and, "the fragment is part of a larger manuscript that...may have been a collection of biblical texts serving a particular liturgical purpose for the community who read it." 53 I summarized above Fernández's views on the Qumran fragments of the book of Judges (section 3.2). He has discussed 4QJudg a and its minus of 6:7—10 and argued against Trebolle's claims (see the previous paragraph) in several publications. 54 The first of these, "The Hebrew and Greek Texts xli, 185 (citing Fernández and Hess); Martin, "Intrusive Prophet," 114 n. 2 (citing Hess); O'Connell, Rhetoric of the Book of Judges, 147 n. 178, 467 n. 56; Webb, Book of the Judges, 213 n. 5; The Book of Judges, 69, 223; Wong, Compositional Strategy of the Book of Judges, 183 n. 118 (citing Hess). Of these, only O'Connell attempts to argue against the originality of the minus in 4QJudg a , saying that "[i]t is perhaps not surprising that a scribe may have been motivated deliberately to omit 6:7—10" since "[s]uch a prophetic condemnation from YHWH is hardly flattering to the scribe's nation" (O'Connell, Rhetoric of the Book of Judges, 147 n. 178). 49 R. S. Hess, "The Dead Sea Scrolls and Higher Criticism of the Hebrew Bible: The Case of 4QJudg a ," in S. E. Porter and C. A. Evans (eds), The Scrolls and the Scriptures: Qumran F i f t y Years After (JSPSup, 26; Roehampton Institute London Papers, 3; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997), 122-128. 50 Hess, "Dead Sea Scrolls and Higher Criticism," 123-124. 51 Hess, "Dead Sea Scrolls and Higher Criticism," 124; cf. 127. 52 In MT 6:2—13 there are two parashoth, after v. 6 and v. 10, corresponding precisely with the minus of 6:7—10 in 4QJudg a . 53 Hess, "Dead Sea Scrolls and Higher Criticism," 124; cf. 125-126. Hess also discusses parashoth divisions related to other Qumran scrolls of the Former Prophets (4QJosh a , 4QJosh b , 4QJudg b , 4QSam a , and 4QI U7QU7H nmtQ. (4) The directive HOin the MT was consciously, or perhaps somewhat unconsciously, written in the text under the influence of the large number of final hes in 21:19 (on 9 of 20 graphic units in total) or, more probably, because the directive noappears also on the preceding temporal construction (HQ^QJ and on the other nearby geographical phrases (¡"I3i£)£Q, ¡"IQDU7; cf. runV?)- In other words, the addition of the directive ¡TO- to an earlier U7QU7H mtO may seek to "round out" the text. The absence of the directive ¡TO- on VljtTTS is no obstacle to this possibility since it is preceded by b and because in any case VntPS (X73) never occurs with the afformative even when it easily could have had it (e.g. nny^il nnNI VkTIU nby nnK Qudg 20:31]). Another element of this verse may support the hypothesis that the directive ¡TO- was added to miO: VkTIUV nJiS^P (immediately before nnntQ), "on the north of Beth-el."229 MT'SVKTIUV nji3£0 is strikingly odd for several reasons. The form ¡"I3i£)£Q occurs only twice in BH (Josh 15:10; Judg 21:19).230 The preposition JQ on a word with directive ¡TO- is uncommon.231 In particular, the sequence JO + noun + directive ¡TO- + -b appears only here and in Ezek 40:40, 44. What is expected in 21:19 is -b (Josh 8:11, 13; 15:6; 17:9; 24:30; Judg 2:9; Ezek 8:5). It seems 'then that the directive ¡TO- may have been added to both J122JQ and mtQ for aesthetic reasons.232 4.3.3.3. TV/R.-NNILK; 4QJUDO>: [ D J I R N U K (21:22)

BH has two different third masculine plural pronominal suffixes for feminine plural nouns ending in ni- and masculine plural nouns which take the feminine plural ending ni-: Dili- and •¡THi-.233 Hurvitz gives the traditional diachronic view of the distribution of these forms in ancient Hebrew writings:

4 Q J u d g b has unfortunately not been preserved here. 230 M T J o s h 15:10 has its own problems, including the obvious gloss jiVop N^n after HJiSSD. Contrast 34 examples of fiSVP: Joshua x l 2 ; Judges x2 (2:9; 7:1); Samuel x l ; Isaiah x3; Jeremiah xlO; Ezekiel x2; Amos x l ; Psalms x l ; J o b x l ; Daniel 229

xl.

See the examples cited in n. 213. Hoftijzer also highlights the "remarkable" concentration of " s o m e instances of what could be called a less common use of -¿-morphemes," referring to HJiSSD (his " p N h " ) and nniTD(his " N h x N " ) in M T J u d g 21:19 (Hoftijzer, Search 'for 231

232

Method, 245; cf. 225, 231). 233 LDBT, II, 173 (#63 in table).

84

ROBERT REZETKO

Now the interchange of the two morphemes involved is not simply a free stylistic variation. Underlying this shift is a gradual—but consistent—linguistic process, in which one grammatical form [e.g. Dni3N] is replaced by another [e.g. Dn'T)'QN]....the distribution of the otheyhem [sic] ending clearly characterizes the late literature, both in the Bible and outside it. 234

With this idea in mind some will immediately suggest that the "later" form in 4QJudg a is merely a linguistic updating of the "earlier" form in the MT. But such a suggestion is unpersuasive when the complete data for all •riland Drvni- forms are evaluated.235 For example, contrary to common Hurvitz, Linguistic Study of the Relationship, 25; cf. 24—27. Owing to the large quantity of data it is impossible to give all the details here. I will publish my full study some other time. However here are a few other preliminary remarks in addition to those that follow above. The consensus seems to be that Dili- is the older form whereas the double plural form DrPni- is younger (against the suggestion in U)BT, II, 156). In Blau's thinking, for example, "[t]he form D1TQN 'their fathers' stems from < ^•'abotahum. It alternates with the secondary formation DH'TI'QN < *,abdtayhum, which was influenced by DITtOD < *mar^ayihim" (J. Blau, Phonology and Morphology of Biblical Hebrew: An Introduction [LSAWS, 2; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2010], 175 [§4.2.3.8.1n]). However, this does not have to be a chronologically late form considering the double pluralization of feminine plural nouns with suffixes in general, and according to some it could not be a chronologically late form given DrPfnDD in Gen 49:5 which is usually classified as Archaic Biblical Hebrew. (Of course the assumptions are that the poem is ancient and that the word and its form are original.) Moving to the other end of the continuum, past the DSS, Bar-Asher states that "[ajlmost all who have dealt with this question have erred, some more some less, in presenting and analyzing the data" (citing Hurvitz and others, and Qimron as the exception) and he gives his own impression of the evidence: "I believe, however, that jni- never ceased to exist in Hebrew and survived through the Mishnaic period" (M. Bar-Asher, "The Study of Mishnaic Hebrew Based on Written Sources: Achievements, Problems, and Tasks', in M. Bar-Asher and S. E. Fassberg [eds], Studies in Mishnaic Hebrew [ScrHier, 37; Jerusalem: Magnes/Hebrew University, 1998], 9 - 4 2 [18-19]). BH lies between these early and late endpoints. There is clearly a different ratio of occurrence of these forms in core EBH and core LBH writings, Genesis—Kings preferring Dfliforms and Esther-Chronicles preferring DITni- forms (LDBT, I, 76). But this observation has been used in historical linguistic discussions is misleading ways. What is needed—and I will eventually get around to publishing it—is a full study that pays attention to at least the following factors: (1) consideration of nonchronological linguistic issues such as euphony (cf. JM, 265 [§94g]); (2) a full 234

235

THE QUMRAN SCROLLS OF THE BOOK OF JUDGES

85

opinion, in Q H " f o r m s like •D'QK occur s o m e 70 times, as o p p o s e d to 15 times for f o r m s like DrPJTQN. This is s o m e w h a t surprising, since the short f o r m is older." 2 3 6 In particular, the specific n o u n plus suffix f o r m •iTn'QN is f o u n d less frequently in Q H than niTON. T h e biblical scrolls have DiTrTDN for M T ' s DJÏQN only twice and elsewhere both the scrolls and the M T have • n n K five times. 2 3 7 T h e sectarian scrolls have niTON five times and •¡TITON four times. 2 3 8 T h e absence of a trend in the direction of replacement w e a k e n s any claim that 4 Q J u d g a ' s DiTJTQN is simply a linguistic modernization. It has also g o n e unnoticed that M T J u d g e s has c o m p a r a b l e n u m b e r s of examples of both "early" Drii- and "late" •H'Tli-. •¡mi-

DiliT DJTQN ("their fathers"): 2:12, 17,

•rrniniptQ ("their altars"): 2:2

19, 20, 22; 3:4; 21:22

DrTTliJS

•niVp?3Q ("their courses"): 5:20

3:6,6

DniirVn ("their e q u i p m e n t " [?]):

•rPnn?iU7 ("their horns"): 7:8

("their

daughters"):

sociolinguistic vatiationist analysis that accurately and clearly displays all c. 582 total occurrences of the c. 118 distinct lexemes with these suffixes; all published discussions tend to rely heavily on occurrences of the single lexeme 3N!; (3) attention to patterns of particular lexemes and expressions with one or the other or both suffixes; (4) attention to individual sources and books rather than broad sweeping statements about large groups of books, usually Genesis—Kings vs. Esther—Chronicles, which characterize all published discussions; for example, all published studies neglect to point out facts such as 2 lexemes/2 occurrences of Dni- compared to 4 lexemes/4 occurrences of Drpni- in MT Samuel. These criticisms and others apply as well to the sociolinguistic variationist analysis in Kim, Early Biblical Hebrew, 99—107. When all is said and done the traditional historical linguistic view—and even more so the use of these variants in linguistic dating discussions—will have to be severely modified or completely abandoned. 236 Qimron, Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls, 63 (§322.182). He adds: "The fact, unnoticed by Hurvitz, that the short form predominates in DSS Hebrew and is not absent from MH (contra Hurvitz), shows that both forms were in use in pre-exilic Hebrew, in post-exilic Hebrew and perhaps in MH as well" (Qimron, Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls, 63 n. 81 [§322.182]). 237 DrrnnN for nnnN: Deut 10:11 (2Q12); Judg 21:22 (4QJudg b ); DnnN in both: Num 4:2 (4Q23), 46 (4Q23); 17:17 (4Q27); Deut 29:24 (4Q29); Isa 14:21 (lQIsa 3 ). 238 nnnN: 4Q177:1-4,11; 4Q365:35ii4; 4Q368:5,3; 4Q383:A,3; 4Q434:lii3; orrnnN: 4Q385a:18ia-b,9; 4Q390:1,7; 11Q19:59,12; PAM43.679:7,4.

ROBERT REZETKO

86

14:19 •nteipQ ("their ends"): 18:2 4 distinct lexemes with 10 occurrences

3 distinct lexemes with 4 occurrences

Given the pattern of distribution of DJinK and DrvrTDN in the current received text of the Bible (MT), 239 including six occurrences of •ri'QK elsewhere in M T Judges, and with no substantiated motive to avoid •iTriiin Judges or DrinK in the DSS, it seems likely to me that M T ' s DnHK in J u d g 21:22 is an assimilation of 4QJudg a 's DiTTI'QN to the standard usage in the M T book of Judges. This cannot be proved, or disproved, but it makes more sense than an inference based on a broad sweeping historical linguistic generalization which in any case is ill-conceived. 2 4 0

4.3.3.4. MT:niVpharnp;4QJUD&:

[ n i ^ n O n O (21:23)

The difference here is the assimilation of the nun of JO before the noun 2 4 1 with the definite article in 4 Q J u d g b versus its non-assimilation in the MT. 2 4 2 The general MT figures are: D1TQN (xl07): Exodus x2; Leviticus x2; Numbers x38; Deuteronomy x3; Joshua x6; Judges x7; Kings x9; I Isaiah xl; Jeremiah x l l ; Ezekiel x4; Amos xl; Malachi xl; Psalms x3; Proverbs xl; Job x3; Ezra x2; Nehemiah xl; synoptic Chronicles xl; non-synoptic Chronicles x l l ; DrPrinN (x32): Kings xl (MT plus); Jeremiah x3 (MT plus xl); Ezra xl; Nehemiah x2; non-synoptic Chronicles x23; synoptic Chronicles (= DfinN in Kings) x2. 240 Trebolle seems to suggest that 4QJudg b 's DrPfTDN has been assimilated to the following DHTIN when he says "the same form of the pronoun is found in the noun that follows, DHTIN IN" (Trebolle Barrera, "4QJudg b ," 169; cf. "Édition préliminaire de 4QJugesb" 88), but in my mind this suggestion, if that is what it is, moves (literally) in the wrong direction. Burney brings another issue to bear when he mentions the problem of gender incongruence (I return to this below) and suggests emending the MT to jniSN and irtTIN "in place of the erroneous masc. suffixes" (Burney, Book of Judges, 293). Another view is offered by Boling who says "[t]he pronouns are masculine, and probably originated in misunderstood dual forms, as in 19:24" (Boling, Judges, 293), but Webb rightly points out that in 21:22, unlike 19:24, more than 200 women are in view (Webb, Book, of Judges, 504). In any case, whatever the relationship between MT's D1TQN and 4QJudg b 's DHTinN, it is not clear that either reading represents the "original" text. 241 The article plus participle nibbilQn is functioning as a noun. 242 This issue as a whole has received relatively little attention compared to the assimilation/non-assimilation of the nun of JD before a noun without the definite 239

THE QUMRAN SCROLLS OF THE BOOK OF JUDGES

87

T h e r e is n o obvious chronological explanation for the distribution of these assimilated and unassimilated f o r m s in the M T Bible. 2 4 3 Against this disagreement b e t w e e n the M T and 4 Q J u d g b the received and Q u m r a n texts of the b o o k agree twice elsewhere o n -il |Q: M T / l Q J u d g 9:43; M T / 4 Q J u d g b 21:21. In this case of disagreement it is m u c h m o r e likely that the M T ' s unassimilated nun of |Q in niVphiprrfQ w a s revised f r o m the assimilated f o r m attested in 4 Q J u d g b . T h e s e are the reasons: (1) -il |Q appears just several verses earlier (21:21), and all things being equal scribes tend to assimilate rather than dissimilate linguistic forms; (2) -il |Q (x32) is preferred over -HQ (x6) in M T Judges, 2 4 4 and this is an additional motivation for the revision in the MT 2 4 5 ; cf. the discussion above of M T ' s DrinK; (3) the Q u m r a n sectarian scrolls greatly prefer the unassimilated form, 2 4 6 as here in the M T , w h i c h m a k e s it highly unlikely that a Q u m r a n scribe w o u l d adjust the text to the assimilated f o r m ; (4) remarkably, only here in the article. The anarthrous form with the unassimilated nun (e.g. 'VIS'IP vs. 'USD) is commonly considered LBH (LDBT, II, 176 [#76 in table]), but this view has its own problems, text-critical and otherwise. See Rezetko, "Dating Biblical Hebrew," 230-231; I. Young, "Notes on the Language of 4QCant b ," JJS 52 (2001), 122-131 (122-123); "Late Biblical Hebrew and Hebrew Inscriptions," in I. Young (ed), Biblical Hebrew: Studies in Chronology and Typology (JSOTSup, 369; London: T&T Clark International, 2003), 276-311 (289, 295, 310); "Late Biblical Hebrew and the Qumran Pesher Habakkuk," JHS, vol. 8, article 25 (2008), 9-10, 31, 34 (http://www.jhsonline.org/Articles/atticle_102.pdf); "Patterns of Linguistic Forms in the Masoretic Text: The Preposition JD 'From,'" forthcoming; U)BT, I, 349, passim. 243 For a thorough study including references, statistics, and text-critical observations with a focus on the manuscripts of the book of Samuel, see Young, "Patterns of Linguistic Forms in the Masoretic Text." MT Samuel has more than a third of all -H D + noun forms in the Bible (34 of 94), and the most even distribution of the two forms of any biblical book, 38 -H JD + noun vs. 34 -H D + noun. Young argues that these peculiarities of the book of Samuel are best explained by scribal intervention in textual transmission. 244 -n JD (x32): 1:24; 2:1, 17, 21; 3:19, 27; 6:21, 38; 7:3, 5; 8:13, 26, 26; 9:15, 35, 43; 10:11; 11:22; 12:9; 13:5, 7; 15:13; 19:16; 20:14, 21, 25, 31, 32, 38, 40; 21:21, 23; n p (x6): 1:36; 14:14; 17:8; 20:15, 31, 42. 245 Of course we do not know how many of these unassimilated forms are revisions in the MT given that, unfortunately, the Qumran scrolls of the book give us access only to the three forms mentioned above. 246 There are 296 min + ha forms in the sectarian scrolls, of which 285 have the unassimilated nun and only 11 have the assimilated nun\ CD13,3; 3Q15:10,3; 4 Q 3 9 6 : l - 2 i i i l l ; 4Q397:14-21,12; 11Q19:31,11, 12, 12, 13; 37,2; 66,5 (vs. 32 unassimilated forms in 11Q19); Iybv->3

^ u r i r f ? m s i r a n Nub jiya

pV rrn

According to Van der Merwe, Naudé and Rroeze (1999: 146), the precative qatal appears approximately 20 times in the Hebrew Bible. This constitutes 0,1 % of all cases. 11 All relevant verbal forms (in Hebrew or other languages) as well as their translation are given here in bold type. Translations of biblical texts follow NRSV, with some modifications. 10

130

ALEXANDER ANDRASON

Be my rock of refuge, to which I can always go; command

to save me, for you are my rock and

my fortress d. Ps 3:8 • w - ) •>3$ ^rb u^-Va-nK rran-r?

^ynyin i rnrr naip rTr a> t f• -

Arise, O LORD! Deliver me, O my God!

Strike

[for you must strike] all my enemies on the jaw; break the teeth of the wicked e. Ps 7:7 m s oa^Q

rniyi n-rte

KU7|n ^ N } irnrr naip

Arise, O LORD, in your anger; rise up against the rage of my enemies. Awake, my God; decree justice Sometimes, the precative qatal is also headed by a deontic modal yiqtok (2)

Ps 31:5-6 VK rnrr ^niK n n n s » n n

TT;?--- ^ y i n

Free me (you shall free me) . . .

Into your hand I

commit my spirit; m a y you redeem me! O Lord, faithful God However, in some very sporadic and still controversial examples, the precative qatal is not immediately headed by any overt modal optative or deontic form. In these cases, the precative reading of the qatal forms is assumed because of the meaning of the whole situation. This use could be labeled an "independent" precative qatal. In example (3.a), the interpretation of the qatal in a precative manner may be justified by the fact that the entire situation is an oration and/or imploration directed to God (see the overt "exclamatory" expression ¡"IliT nriyi "O now, Lord" in 1 Chr 17:23, 26 and 27). It can also be supported by a modal sense of thcjiqtol form and the imperative in 1 Chr 17:23 QQ^I and nU7i)1 respectively), and by the three cases where the lexeme nriy is used in order to emphasize the present-ness of a desired event (see, 1 Chr 17:23, 24 and 27). An analogical interpretation may be offered in example (3.b) since the enunciator invokes God, explaining how

THE PRECATIVE QATAL

131

he will repay the Lord for all his goodness. In this case, the precative qatalis accompanied by various yiqtol forms with a future value (e.g., and eVu^K in Ps 116:12 and 13, respectively) and, just like in previously mentioned cases, it is introduced by an overt exclamation, i.e., ¡"HiT nriyi "O now, Lord". Also, the situation in example (3.b) is an invocation or prayer to God which very naturally allows an understanding of the qatal as an optative. The precative interpretation may additionally be substantiated by the fact that the qatal form is preceded (although not immediately) by an imperative HirP ¡"IK") "See, O Lord!" in Lam 1:20, and that it is directly followed by a yiqtol with a modal future or even optative sense T'iTI "so that they be/let them be." (3)

a. IChr 17:23-27 |qk? ina-Vyi y ^ y - b y

~i:nn nirr nnyi ririsT

ntyyi o V i j n y

And now, Lord, let the promise you have made concerning your

servant

and

his

house

be

established

forever. Do as you promised, ^H'VK n i i u v rnrr -IDNV o V i j n y ^ntf V r n ¡ p ^ i r^?*? |iDj Tina THTIUI Vtat??1? crrf™ Vtatp? so that it will be established and that your name will be great forever. Then men will say "The Lord Almighty, the God over Israel, is Israel's God!" And the house of your servant David will be established before you. fTZiy K^Q 13-Vy r r s iV riiJ^V iprzu? im-nK n,l?a

nrm p?

You, my God, have revealed to your servant that you will build a house for him. So your servant has found courage to pray to you :nmn ruton ^ l y b y "aupi DTftgn NirrnnN nirr nnyi O Lord, you are God! You have promised these good things to your servant. JT3tin TQ'? r 6 « i n nnyi So now may you agree (may you be willing) to bless the house of your servant

132

ALEXANDER ANDRASON

b.Ps 116:16 :noioV Finns ^DON'I? T p y ' J N ^ipy ^n" 1 ? nirr n|K O Lord, I am your servant; I am your servant, the child of your serving girl. May you lose my bonds! c. Lam 1:21 rp i&u; •>ny-j lypu? u ^ - V a "b anjip pa

•>? ¡iy)p

:7iCD VITI nK-jip-nv m a n JTUW nnK They heard how I was groaning, with no one to comfort me. All my enemies heard of my trouble; they are glad that you have done it. Bring on / may you bring the day you have announced, and let them be as I amiz As is clearly indicated by all the examples quoted above, the precative qatal is typically directed to a second person singular, and usually to the person of God himself. However, and although this phenomenon is infrequent, it may also be occasionally addressed to a third person singular or plural. In such instances, which commonly occur when the 2nd person is involved, the form is headed by overt modal deontic formations, such as, e.g., a series of various deontic (jussive) jiqtols (e.g., U3IT [Ps 67:2], Tl"TV [Ps 67:4], inDtfT [Ps 67:5] and ^VTV [Ps 67:6] in 4.a, below), an imperative (e.g. N^in [Isa 43:8] in 4.b) or a sequence combining both an imperative and a deontic jiqtol (e.g., Uttniri and ~QU7 [Ps 10:15] in 4.c). The 3rd person subject may be explicitly specified, for example by means of a noun. (4)

a. Ps 67:2-7 u n a r j a -IN; u?-i:ri uan; crrftN May God be gracious to us and bless us and make his face shine upon us r^iyiu?; nmrVpa ^ m p K ? ny-rV that your ways may be known on earth, your salvation among all nations. :oVa D,i3y ^ITP crrf™ lavay ^ n v

12 It can be observed that the precative qatal is followed by a weqatal in the same line, as well as by a we-yiqtol form with a final or jussive force, itself followed by a deonticji^/o/in the next verse (Lam 1:22).

T H E PKECATIVE

133

GATAL

May the peoples praise you, O God; may all the peoples praise you. I

-riu^a D^ay

d^kV IjjTI inntp: nn^ri

May the nations be glad and sing for joy, for you rule the peoples justly and guide the nations of the earth. :DVS D,i3y ^ITP crrf™ lo^ay ^ n v May the peoples praise you, O God; may all the peoples praise you. t i r r f ^ crrftN

PIVIT nana yIN

May the earth yield her produce, and God, our God, will bless us. b. Isa 43:8-9 -AN) nnmi t r u n m W n ^ y i "IUTDP Nrsin Lead out those who have eyes but are blind, who have ears but are deaf. traKV lapi^i HIT n a p i n^n-Va All the nations gather together, and the peoples assemble c. Ps 10:15-16 i y ^ - i - ^ n i r i j n i y u n y n r imp Break the arm of the wicked and evil man; call him to account for his wickedness that would not be found out ijnKQ m a t l y i oViy ^Va rnrr The LORD is King for ever and ever; the nations may perish from his land With respect to formal behavior, it should also be noted that in a majority of cases the qatal appears under a syntactic variety x-qatal. The heading entity may be a subject (as is seen in 4.a and 4.b), an object (l.d and l.e) or a prepositional phrase (l.a and l.b). Sometimes, the pre-posed unit is a particle in l.d) or an adverb (nFIUI in 3.a). However, the "bare" qatal pattern may also be found (e.g., in l.c, 2, 3.b and 4.c).13 13

In addition to the examples presented in this section, which are regarded here

134

ALEXANDER ANDRASON

2.2. COMPARATIVE EVIDENCE The use of the suffix conjugation in real factual optative or deontic functions (i.e., as an expression of wishes or commands) is not restricted to Biblical Hebrew; quite the opposite, it is widespread in Semitic languages. This fact has been widely recognized, and scholars agree that the optative use of the cognates of the BH qatal goes back to the origin of this formation, which was initially employed as a nominal predication (see the following section below). It may be found in the eastern branch (Akkadian), in various North-West idioms (Amarna Akkadian, Phoenician-Punic, Ugaritic, Syriac or Mandaic), in Arabic and Old Southern Arabian, as well as in Ethiopian languages (Ge'ez). Generally speaking, it is recognizable among virtually all members of the Semitic family (cf. Gai 2000). The optative value of the Semitic suffix conjugation is extensively documented in Akkadian by a cognate construction of the BH qatal, viz. the parsaku. The parsaku is a prototypical resultative proper gram. As such, it expresses static situations acquired due to the activities that have been previously performed (Huehnergard 2005: 219—23 and Kienast 2001: 296). This "stationary" character may clearly be observed in cases where the formation is derived from adjectival roots, thus denoting current or permanent qualities. It is possible to argue that the Akkadian parsaku is a resultative formation which is significantly less advanced than its cognate expressions in other Semitic tongues, for it still mainly functions as a resultative proper or a stative. 14 Hence, in contrast with the BH qatal or the as the most evident and convincing, some scholars also identify the following cases of precative qatal-. Isa 26:15; Ps 10:16; 57:7; Job 21:16; 21:18; Lam 3:57-61 (vide Ewald 1855). Another possible instance is Mic 1:10 (Dempsey 1991: 212-4). Overall, as observed by Van der Merwe, Naude and Kroeze (1999), the total number approximates more or less twenty cases that may be viewed as providing solid evidence. 14 The advancement of original resultative proper formations follows the direction traced by a typologically universal rule (or general tendency) labeled the "resultative path." Its most common formative sub-cline, the so-called anterior path, states that resultative proper grams regularly develop into dynamic present perfects (inclusive, resultative, iterative, experiential and indefinite), and next into past tenses (first immediate, hodiernal, hesternal and recent, and then general and remote). During the transformation into a definite past tense, the gram may also acquire an overt aspectual marking, functioning as a perfective. Later, such perfective pasts transmute into simple (aspectually neutral) past tenses. For a far more detailed treatment of the anterior path and its relation to the resultative trajectory with all its sub-tracks, see Bybee, Perkins and Pagliuca (1994), Dahl (2000b), Cook (2002) and especially Andrason (2011a: 35-45) and (2011b: 10-16).

THE PRECATIVE QATAL

135

Arabic qatala, it did not reach the stage of a perfect, perfective or simple past category or usage. 15 Besides these typical resultative uses, the Akkadian parsäku quite commonly introduces real factual wishes or commands, constituting a Stative and, partially, verbless counterpart to the fientive injunctive pattern (the precative liprus). In such instances, the parsäku is regularly preceded by an optative particle /» and expresses positive wishes or orders—it is still possible for a desired or required activity to be performed, and this possibility is fully feasible (vide infra 5.a—b; Huehnergard 2005: 223). Furthermore, the gram may also be headed by a negative optative entity, viz. the particle lä or e, thus introducing negative desires and commands (i.e., that something may not or will not occur) and corresponding to two fientive formations: the prohibitive (lä iparras) and the vetitive ( a y y i p r u s ) respectively (vide infra 5.c—e; Von Soden 1952: 106 and Huehnergard 2005: 146-7): (5)

a.

lü dannätunu Be strong/May you be strong (Huehnergard 2005: 223)

b.

lü tardü May they be on their way/let them be on their way (i.e., be sent!; ibid.)

c.

kaspum lä nadin The silver may not be given/the silver must not be given (ibid.)

d.

lä enseta Do not be weak/you may not be weak/you must not be weak (ibid.)

e.

e nas'äti Du mögest nicht bringen (Von Soden 1952: 107)

The two remaining sub-tracks of the resultative path—i.e., the simultaneous and evidential clines—will be briefly discussed in section 3.1 below. 15 However, it is already possible to identify uses where the gram provides more dynamic functions that are typical for other Semitic idioms, e.g., perfect (resultative passive perfect, resultative active perfect or inclusive resultative perfect). Moreover, the locution is exceptionally used as a substitute of the iptaras and iprus in narrative sections, approximating in such instances a present perfect or an indefinite past (Loesov 2005: 133—4; for a detailed review of the values offered by the parsdku, see Andrason 2011a: 197).

136

ALEXANDER ANDRASON

Also the suffix conjugation in Amarna Akkadian (besides functioning as a resultative, a stative and a perfect) may be employed with a real factual optative force.16 (6)

ma-at-ti ma-gal / a-na ka-tas IR-ka a-na-ku I would readily die (may I die) for you, your servant am I (Rainey 1996: 364)

Similarly, Phoenician-Punic (7.a) and Ugaritic (7.b—d) languages document an optative usage of the suffix conjugation (vide "perfect of wishes" in Segert 1964: 90, "optative" in Gordon 1965: 115 and "Wunschperfect" in Kienast 2001: 313). Also, other North—West Semitic languages, such as Syriac (Ungnad 1932: 53), Mandaic (Noldeke 1964 [1875]: 369) and the Aramaic of the Babylonian Talmud (Buttenwieser 1925: 65) maintain the qatal in expressions of real factual wishes or commands. For instance, in Syriac, the gram (especially the perfect of the verb hwa with a following participle or adjective) may appear in optative clauses with the meaning of "may (you) be + adjective" (5.e; Noldeke 1904: 206, 216 and Ungnad 1932: 53). (7)

a.

brk B ' l . . . 'jt PN Es segne Ba'al den PN (Kienast 2001: 313)

b.

lyrt May you descend (Segert 1984: 90)

c.

hwt'aht (1.10 1,20) May you live, my sister! (Gordon 1965: 115)

d.

'm 'lm hyt (1.4 IV,42) May you live forever! (Sivan 2001: 98)

e.

hwyt hlym Farewell! (Noldeke 1904: 205)

Arabic does not differ from this tendency, so that the suffix conjugation— besides being used as a prototypical present perfect, a stative, a perfective and a simple (even narrative) past formation {vide Wright 1964: 1—18, Danecki 1994: 153-4, Kienast 2001: 332 and Andrason 2011a: 213-23)— may likewise be employed with a real factual optative force. In such instances, the gram introduces present-future and entirely feasible wishes. 16 According to Rainey (1996: 366), this usage originated in strong affirmations, from where it expanded to injunctive functions.

T h e P r e c a t i v e

QATAL

137

Put differently, by using the qatala form—a cognate of the BH qatal—the speaker can convey a mild or strong wish that something may or shall occur. This usage is particularly common in supplications, oaths, prayers and curses (see examples 8.a—c; vide Wright 1964: 2-3, Danecki 1994: 154 and Kienast 2001: 332). Moreover, the formation appears in negative contexts, thus denoting negative wishes that refer to a real (i.e., presentfuture) situation, where the accomplishment of the wish is possible. In such cases, the gram is preceded by the particle läxl and introduces the desire that something may not or shall not occur (8.d): (8)

a.

JUs M May God (who is exalted above all) have mercy on him! (Wright 1964: 2)

b.

M Js li May God overcome the disease! (Danecki 1994: 154)

C.

j,JL.j 4-1P M

JU»

May God bless him and save him! (Haywood and Nahmad 1965: 271) d.

¿Ls aUI jijW S (Danecki 1994:154) May God not bless you!

Finally, Old Southern Arabic and Ethiopian (vide Dillmann 1974 [1907]: 551) languages provide further evidence regarding the real factual optative sense of the suffix conjugation. For example, in Old Southern Arabic, the perfect is used as an optative form, which is then commonly headed by the particle /and expresses real and feasible wishes (Höfter 1943: 67—68): (9)

wlhmrhmw Und er möge sie beschenken (ibid.: 68)

To conclude, we may affirm the following: comparative evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates that the Semitic suffix conjugation regularly contains in its semantic potential an optative or deontic real factual value. This is especially valid for positive wishes and commands, although the negative optative function has also been documented.

17

The "indicative" qatala is normally negated by means of the particle ma.

138

ALEXANDER ANDRASON

2.3. DIACHRONIC EVIDENCE

Once we have accounted for the precative use of the BH qatal and cognate forms in other Semitic languages, the following question arises: How is the real factual optative or deontic sense of the suffix conjugation related to its origin? Or, in other words, was this value integral to the original expression from which the qatal and its cognates have developed? It is important to acknowledge that the Proto-Semitic input expression *qatal-P (i.e., qatal- + a pronoun), 18 from which suffix conjugations emerged, was not inherently modal. Nor was it its participial or verbal adjectival source. The BH qatal and its Semitic homologues are successors of a resultative verbal adjective employed in a predicative function (Huehnergard 1987: 221—3, Andersen 2000: 31, Lambdin and Huehnergard 1998, Lipinski 2001: 336-7, 341, Cook 2002: 209-19 and Andrason 2011a). 19 In other words, the suffix conjugation traces its origin to a resultative proper gram that was not an overt and explicit modal (e.g., optative or deontic) formation. However, the gram—supposedly already in its very origin—could be employed in various modal contexts, especially in optative ones. In such cases, the optative value stems from contextual factors, i.e., from elements external to the locution itself. As is documented in Akkadian as well as in other Semitic languages, one of the most typical and productive contextual environments where the PS *qatal-P could have acquired an optative value corresponds to cases where the expression appeared in the proximity of determined particles. These include the optative voluntative */»/lau la (Brockelmann 1961 [1913]: 30-31, 642, 645, Bauer and Leander 1992 [1922]: 74, 632, O'Leary 1969: 275-6, Gray 1971: 73 and Huehnergard 1983: 592), the precative, assertive, emphatic and exclamatory */« (Brockelmann 1961 [1913]: 110, 181, Huehnergard 1983: 592 and Kienast 2001: 397), the prohibitive ~>*'ald (Akk. ld\ vide Brockelmann 1961 [1913]: 182 Gray 1971: 73 and Kienast 2001: 398-9), or the vetitive *'ajle (Akk. ay/&, vide Kienast 2001: 399). 21 The gram also appeared in other modal 18 The abbreviation P stands for "pronoun," used in the 1st and 2nd person singular, plural and dual. 19 The resultative value of this original analytic resultative proper formation (viz. * qatal- P) clearly derived—as is still documented by Akkadian—from the resultative stative value of the verbal adjective or resultative participle itself (Huehnergard 1987: 223). 20 This usage with a real factual sense is documented in Akkadian. On the use of the suffix conjugation with successors of the particle lit in a counterfactual modal function, see Andrason (2013). 21 Additionally, as indicated by Akkadian, Hebrew, Arabic and all Semitic

THE PKECATÎVE QATAL

139

environments overtly specified by modal lexemes or morphemes. 22 In certain cases, the proximity of voluntative or deontic verbal forms (i.e., imperative, prohibitive or injunctive forms) or the general pragmatic milieu itself (the context of a prayer, imploration or curse; see the Arabic example, above) could clarify that the enunciator desired to express an optative sense by employing the suffix conjugation. In all such cases, however, the optative value stemmed from external settings and was contextually induced. As a result, the real factual optative sense available in Biblical Hebrew and in other Semitic languages must have arisen under the influence of contextual factors, and thus constitutes a type of modal contamination of a non-modal Proto-Semitic input. 2.4. TYPOLOGICAL EVIDENCE

Having hypothesized that the precative sense has been incorporated into the BH qatal (a successor of a PS resultative proper locution) because of its regular use in an overtly modal environment, two closely related questions may be posed. Can the transformation of an original resultative proper input (which is not overtly and explicitly marked for the feature of modality) be cognitively plausible and justifiable? And can morphologies that otherwise express resultative, perfect, perfective and past senses be used as (more or less stable) vehicles for a real factual optative and deontic value? In the present section, we will provide typological evidence showing that both queries may be answered affirmatively.

2.4.1. Moods from Indicatives Firstly, it should be noted that although modal formations (grammatical moods) commonly derive from semantically transparent explicit agentive modal expressions of ability, obligation, desire and intention (Bybee, Perkins and Pagliuca 1994: 240), they may likewise originate in "old" indicative constructions. In other words, from a typological perspective, indicative or modally neutral inputs can perfectly develop into genuine idioms, the PS * qatal- P could possibly be used in verbless conditional phrases with a hypothetical factual sense (see the use of the Akkadian parsdku with summa\ Von Soden 1956: 212-5). 22 As documented by Akkadian examples, when accompanied by the w o r d p t q a t 'perhaps' the parsdku expresses weak doubts or optative nuances (Wasserman 2012: 18, 20—21, 32). With wuddi "certainly, really," it conveyed the idea of certainty and promissory (ibid.: 66—73, 74), and with tusa, it introduces counter-assertions and refuters (ibid.: 94, 102). More-over, the counterfactual sense may be found in conditional sequences (both in protases with summa and in apodoses) where the Akkadian formation is accompanied by the lexeme man (Wasserman 2012: 121—4).

140

ALEXANDER ANDRASON

moods. This typically occurs in relation with a constant use of such original indicatives in marked modal contexts. The process inducing the acquisition of modal properties or, in an extreme case, the transmutation of an indicative into genuine moods is referred to as a "modal contamination path" (Andrason 2011c: 6—8)—an instance of a process variously referred to as "conventionalization of implicature" (Dahl 1985: 11 and Bybee, Perkins and Pagliuca 1994: 25—26, 296), "context-induced reinterpretation" (Heine, Claudi and Hiinnemeyer 1991: 71—72), and "semanticisation" (Hopper and Traugott 2003: 82). Let us explain this development in more detail. At the beginning of this process, an original non-modal gram is employed in certain explicit modal contexts that are imposed by modal lexemes, syntactical patters or pragmatic factors. In such usages, the otherwise non-modal formation provides a given modal sense which is induced by determined contextual settings (stage 1; vide the English expression Maybe he is sick). Next, because of its systematic usage in a specific modal environment, the gram gradually assumes a modal—initially contextual—reading as its own, generalizing it to the degree that, in this precise milieu, only the modal interpretation is possible. This implies that temporal and aspectual senses usually become secondary, or are reinterpreted in purely modal terms (see the following paragraph below). This phase (stage 2) is illustrated by the use of the imparfait in French si j'avais de I'argent "If I had money," where the aspectual-temporal (imperfective past) reading is replaced by a counterfactual real hypothetical modal interpretation. Subsequently, the initially indicative form becomes entirely identified with a modal value generated by its own environment, and consequently ceases to be employed in non-modal milieus and with a non-modal force (stage 3; vide the Spanish past subjunctive hiciera "[that] I might/could/would do," which derives from the Latin pluperfect indicative and which in Modern Spanish is usually employed as an explicit real counterfactual mood). During this phase, since other non-modal uses of the formation are no longer acceptable, the locution is reanalyzed as a genuine mood. Later, this "new" mood can become free from its explicit modal environments, and be transposed to other contexts, maintaining, however, the modal sense that has already been incorporated into the semantics of the gram (stage 4). This means that, for instance, a syntactically determined mood becomes acceptable in main clauses where, although it is not accompanied by overt modal lexemes or morphemes, it preserves the modal value acquired previously (Dahl 1985: 11, Hopper and Traugott 2003: 82 and Bybee, Perkins and Pagliuca 1994: 25-26, 235-6, 296).

THE P r e c a t i v e ^ T ^ L

141

In the course of the modalization of an original indicative—i.e., when evolving from stage 1 into stage 2—a change may be detected whereby the temporal and aspectual load of the underlying gram is modified for modal purposes. During this process, it is possible to observe that a) present indicatives quite regularly develop into or acquire a sense of real factual modality; b) dynamic present perfects transmute into real factual perfect modality; c) past tenses develop into counterfactual real modality; and d) pluperfects develop into counterfactual unreal modality (vide the modalization of the French present, imperfective past and pluperfect in conditional protases: si tu viens and si tu es venu—real factual; si tu venais— counterfactual real and si tu étais venu—counterfactual unreal). In an optative context of wishes, implorations or curses, the correspondence between the tense-aspect, on the one hand, and the mood, on the other, is analogical with the distinction that, this time, the concrete modal nuance is optative (Fig. 1 below). 23 indicative grams

present present perfect - • past

modal senses (stage 2)

> > >

real factual optative real factual perfect optative real counterfactual optative

Figure 1: Optative modalization of indicative "tenses' 14.2.

SPLITRESULTATIVE-OPTATIVEMORPHOLOGIES

In keeping with the evolutionary tendency explained in section 2.4.1 above, in various languages resultatives—although failing to be originally modal 23 At later stages of the development, this neat correspondence may be slightly disrupted due to analogical and other morphological processes (see, Bybee, Perkins and Pagliuca 1994: 230—40). For instance, in contemporary Spanish the original Fatin pluperfect is used as a real counterfactual mood (amará) which matches a similar simple past form (amo), while the unreal counterfactuality is expressed by a new analytical formation (hubiera amado) which matches the new pluperfect había amado). This means in fact that the chart maintains its validity because the Spanish modal system was reshaped in accordance with the underlying indicative forms: the synthetic simple past {pretérito) is understood as the basis for the real counterfactual mood {pretérito subjuntivo), while the analytical pluperfect is perceived as the foundation of the unreal counterfactual mood.

142

ALEXANDER ANDRASON

expressions—develop certain modal functions or are transformed into genuine moods. This means that we encounter languages where the same morphology expresses both prototypical post-resultative senses (perfect, perfective and past) and modal values. Particularly relevant for this study are idioms which offer a functional "schizophrenia," whereby a typical perfect, perfective or past gram likewise functions as a real factual optative or deontic category. Typological studies teach us that such an indicative-postresultative 24 and real-factual-optative split of a given morphological pattern is not rare and, thus, that the behavior of the BH qatal (and its Semitic homologues) is not unique. Quite the reverse is true, as the indicativeoptative schizophrenia of post-resultative grams is a well-know and relatively common phenomenon. It may be documented by the Semitic form *yaqtul (Akkadian -iprus or Arabic jaqtut), the Mandinka YE gram, the Classical (Middle) Egyptian perfective sdm.f anA the Polish perfective past inapisat) and impersonal past (napisano). The Akkadian morphological pattern -iprus—an advanced resultative diachrony (Andrason 2010b: 339-40 and 2011b: 36-37) that typically conveys the sense of a perfect, perfective and past (12.a)—may also be encountered in various modal formations. Namely, under the shape of the l-iprus ("precative"; Huehnergard 2005: 146—7), it expresses jussive, cohortative and desiderative values. Doing so, it constitutes a suppletive imperative form of the first and third persons, as it is able to introduce real factual orders and desires (12.b). The inflectional pattern iprus may also appear under the form of the ayy-iprus ("vetitive," ibid.). In this case, it introduces negative desires and mild prohibitions—again, real and factual (12.c). It should be emphasized that both the liprus and ayyiprus— functioning as fully synthetic grams—derive from old analytical periphrases built on the verbal slot iprus and an originally independent modal particle (Huehnergard 1983, Testen 1998 and Kienast 2001). However, their modal values—originally induced by the context, viz. optative-prohibitive particles—were inseparable from the grams themselves in the Akkadian language. Likewise, the simple or "bare" iprus (which is, as has already been mentioned, a prototypical perfect, perfective and past) may sometimes be encountered with modal particles expressing unmistakably modal nuances. In particular, the iprus form of the verbs edum and isum is regularly used with the optative particle lu in order to provide the real factual deontic 24 Post-resultative senses or grams make reference to values that are located on the resultative path or to formations that develop following this evolutionary scenario. In harmony with the resultative cline, grams that are defined as postresultative constructions or that are said to provide post-resultative senses typically originate in resultative inputs.

T H E PKECATIVE

GATAL

143

(imperative and optative) sense (12.d; Huehnergard 2005: 282). Also, in marked conditional protases with summa " i f ' occurring in contexts where the apodosis is left unexpressed, the gram conveys an optative value. (12)

a.

Erib-Sin u Nur-Samas tapputam lpusu-ma ana bit Samas Trubu-ma temsunu ipusu-ma kaspam babtam amtam u wardam sa harranim u libbi alim mitharis izuzu Erib-Sin and Nur-Shamash entered into a partnership; they entered the Shamash temple and carried out their intention: they divided equally the silver, outstanding goods, (and) female and male slaves of (both) business trip(s) and within the city (Huehnergard 2005: 119)

b.

d UTU

u d AMAR.UTU da-ri-is u 4 -mi li-ba-al-li-tu-ka lu sa-

al-ma-ta lu ba-al-ta-ta g May Samas and Marduk preserve you forever, may you be well, may you be living (Testen 1998: 119) c.

ayyiprus May he not separate! (Lipinski 2001: 525)

d.

lu ti-di lu ti-di astap-ra-kum Do know (it)! Do know (it)! I have written to you! (Sallaberger 1999: 147)

In a similar vein, the Arabic yaqtul —a cognate of Akkadian iprus—regularly appears in typical perfect-perfective-past functions if it is accompanied by the lexemes lam and lammd (13.a; vide Wright 1964: 41, Haywood and Nahmad 1965: 129, Bahloul 2008: 45). On the other hand, the identical morphological pattern is recurrently used to convey modal senses, both deontic and hypothetical-conditional. Namely, the modal yaqtul is extensively employed as a real factual deontic formation: as a cohortative, when addressed to the first person (13.b), and as a jussive when directed to the third person. Thus, it is employed as a suppletive paradigm of the imperative in persons which do not have their proper imperative forms. It should also be noted that in such instances, thcjaqtul is often headed by an overt modal lexeme, e.g., the particle 1 J or, if there is a tight connection with the preceding sentence, fal js (Haywood and Nahmad 1965: 129). Finally, th cjaqtul is extensively used with a prohibitive force. That is to say,

144

ALEXANDER ANDRASON

when preceded by the particle la factual) orders (13.c). (13)

a.

^

it regularly introduces negative (real

^

He did not write (Haywood and Nahmad 1965: 129) b.

i^il Let me go to the market! (Haywood and Nahmad 1965: 128)

c. ¡Do not write! Another instructive example of the schizophrenic nature of perfects, perfectives and pasts is provided by the Mandinka language. 25 In Mandinka, the so-called YE gram most commonly functions as a present perfect or definite past tense (either perfective or aspectually neutral; for details, see Andrason 2012b). However, besides these typical indicative post-resultative values, the formation is extensively employed in various modal functions. The real factual usage is one the most prominent ones. In complete agreement with the situation observed in Akkadian and Arabic, the YE gram constitutes a suppletive or alternative form of the imperative. For instance, the YE construction may approximate a cohortative when a command is directed to the first person singular or plural (14.b). If an order or an advice is given to the third person, the construction functions as a jussive (14.b). Finally, when it is addressed to the second person—most commonly following a proper imperative construction or an optative future—the gram functions as an imperative (14.d). Moreover, in various cases the YE formation introduces real factual wishes instead of orders, approximating an optative mood rather than more deontic categories of imperative, cohortative and jussive. In those cases, the locution expresses desires or hopes as for the present-future situation (14.e-f).

25 Mandinka is one of the languages spoken in Gambia, Senegal and Guinea Bissau. As the Bambara and the Malinke, it is a regional variety of the Manding—a cluster of mutually intelligible dialects employed in Western Africa. Manding itself is a member of the Western branch of the Mande family, which constitutes a subgroup of the Niger-Congo realm (Wilson 2000: 109 and Lewis 2009).

THE PRECATIVE QATAL

(14)

a.

145

Serug

ate

ye

kewo

faa

last.year

he

YE

man

kill 26

Last year, he killed a man b.

Da

dug

suwo

kono!

I-YE

enter

house

in

Let me enter the house c.

A

ye

naa!

he

YE

come

Let him come! d.

Wuli,

i

stand.up

ye

taa!

you

YE

go

Stand up and go! e.

A

ye

faa!

he

YE

be.dead

May he die / May he be dead f.

A

ye

bambag!

he

YE

be.strong

May he be strong! Similarly, Classical (Middle) Egyptian includes in its verbal system a gram that shows an indicative (perfect-perfective-past) vs. optative (real and factual) schizophrenic behavior. In Middle Egyptian, one of the central verbal grams is the form sdm.f. There are two subtypes of this formation: one that is imperfective or durative, and another which is perfective or punctual (Buck 1952: 66—74). In positive sentences, the perfective sdm.f is sometimes employed as a narrative past tense, although the sdm.n.f is significantly more common. In negative phrases under the form of n(n) sdm.f, the perfective constitutes a regular and frequent counterpart of the affirmative perfect and narrative past tense sdm.n.f (15.a-b; vide Buck 1952: 71-74). However, despite this indicative perfect, perfective or past prototypicality, the locution is also extensively used in order to introduce real factual wishes

26 Since Mandinka is not a Semitic language, all Mandinka examples will be glossed here. Likewise, the Egyptian and Polish sentences will be accompanied by glosses.

146

ALEXANDER ANDRASON

or commands, functioning as a present optative (see example 15.c; ibid.: 71-72). (15)

a.

hsi

w(i)

praised

hm.f me

hr.s majesty.his

for.that

His Majesty praised me for that (Buck 1952: 71) b.

n

iw

spi

not

came

error.my

"Une faute de moi n'a pas apparu" (ibid.: 74) c.

ini.t.k

ni

sw

bring.you

to.me

it

May you bring it to me (ibid.) The phenomenon of schizophrenic morphologies which display modal (optative and/or deontic) functions alongside regular uses as indicatives (perfects, perfectives and pasts) may also be encountered in Indo-European languages, such as, for example, Polish. Polish possesses a gram ("/-past" napisal "he has written/he wrote") that typically functions as a present perfect and definite perfective past. It is a narrative past tense par excellence (16.a). However, the same construction may also be used with a deontic force introducing firm real factual commands (16.b).27 In Polish there exists another exemplary perfect vel. perfective past formation: the impersonal past in -no/to, e.g., napisano "one has written/wrote" (16.d). Once again, this gram, despite its perfect, perfective and past prototypicality, may be employed as a vehicle of strong orders that are fully feasible and refer to a present or future state of affairs (16.e—f): (16)

a.

Cezar

podbii

Galiç

w

58

Gaul

in

58

p.n.e. Cesear conquered BCE Caesar conquered Gaul in 58 BCE b.

Poszedi

st^d!

went

from.here

27 Some of these expressions are extensively used in the standard language, whereas others seem to be a colloquial phenomenon, e.g., Napisal mi ten lisft "Write (lit. wrote) this letter!"

T H E PKECATÎVE

147

QATAL

Go away from here! c.

Przyszedi

mi

tu

came

for.me here

teraz! now

Come here now! d.

Zamordowano

go

w

1945

one.killed

him

in

1945

He was murdered in 1945 e.

Napisano

mi

one.write

for.me this

to

teraz! now

Zrobiono

mi

przed

5!

one.did

for.me this

by

5

Write it now! f.

to

Do it by 5 pm!

3 . CONCLUSION

3.1. Chaining the Precative Qatal andits Place in the Network In the previous section, the most emblematic examples of the precative usage offered by a typically indicative present-perfect-past BH gram qatal (section 2.1) have been presented. It has also been shown that the real factual optative function of the suffix conjugation is well-established in the Semitic family (section 2.2), and that it must have emerged from a constant use of an original resultative non-modal gram in overtly optative environments (section 2.3). Next, we have demonstrated that such a "double-face" behavior of some perfects, perfectives and past is typologically common and stems from a cognitively plausible scenario, whereby certain resultative inputs acquire a modal (e.g., real factual) character due to their modal contamination (section 2.4). A gathering of all this evidence may now be employed in order to propose a map networking the precative and indicative (especially perfect-perfective-past) senses of the BH suffix qatal. Before mapping the precative qatal itself to the indicative core of the gram, the dynamic representation of the non-modal uses of the suffix conjugation must be explained. As demonstrated by Andrason (2011a: 281, 305-7, 2012a: 38-41, and partly by Cook 2002), the indicative potential of

148

ALEXANDER ANDRASON

the gram may be grasped in its integrity and viewed as a homogeneous and harmonious whole if one applies the chaining procedure based upon the resultative path and its three formative sub-clines. More specifically, present perfect (inclusive, performative, resultative, iterative and experiential) values, indefinite and definite past values, as well as perfective and simple past values cover stages that are located on the anterior path. Thus, the most prototypical PPP senses of the qatal have been defined as a portion of the anterior path, spanning from the inclusive perfect to the discursive past tense (vide Andrason 2011a: 281, as well as Van der Merwe and Naude forthcoming). Other values offered by the BH suffix conjugation are viewed as manifestations of two remaining sub-clines of the resultative trajectory. Namely, resultative-stative, stative and present values have been networked by means of the simultaneous path {vide Andrason 2011a: 282—3, 305—7), whereas exceptional cases, where the qatal provides an evidential sense, have been elucidated as expressions of the evidential path {vide Andrason 2010c: 623—4 and 2011a: 282; on the evidential path see Aikhenvald 2004 and Andrason 2010c: 604-9). Now, employing the chaining matrix that copies the modal contamination path of resultative inputs, it can be posited that the precative qatal corresponds to the second stage of this evolutionary scenario where an original indicative (or, in this case, resultative) gram is fully modalized in an overtly modal context. This means that in an explicitly modal environment, temporal and aspectual readings of the formation—which otherwise follows the resultative path, acquiring consecutive stages on the anterior, simultaneous and evidential clines—are reorganized in light of this modal context. As is consistent with the universal tendency, and as has previously been documented by Akkadian data, the present resultative proper use of the PS * qatal- P (the most prominent in the discourse and in the cognitivetemporal sphere of the enunciator) in modal contexts of prayers, wishes, invocations and curses has been transmuted into a real factual optative or deontic category. Since in most cases, the BH precative qatal is headed by overt modal deontic forms (i.e., by an imperative and/or modal jiqtol), it is clear that the gram—although fully identified with its modal milieu—has not yet reached the subsequent phase where it could entirely be freed from its modal settings. On the other hand, given that one may find infrequent instances where the formation seems to express wishes or orders without being accompanied by overt deontic or optative forms, it is possible to hypothesize that the development toward the stage of emancipation may already have begun. Furthermore, since there are no traces of morphological differentiation between the indicative qatal and its precative—or more generally modal—variety, the precative qatal cannot be

THE P r e c a t i v e ^ T ^ L

149

viewed as an independent gram. Quite the contrary, the two classes—the indicative and the modal—still jointly form the semantic potential of the category. No split—as for instance in Akkadian {iprus vs. liprus or ajjiprus) or partially in Arabic (lam(ma) yaqtul vs. yaqtul)—can definitely be posited. Accordingly, the entire semantic map of the qatal (where the real factual subtype is networked to the indicative counterpart and especially to the dominant perfect-perfective-past variety) may schematically be presented as follows (Fig. 2 below): anterior path —• perfect

perfective —^ past

[indicative] —

•

resultative stative

^ stative

— ^ present

simultaneous path PS * qatal- resultative proper present modal contamination in optative contexts [modal]

—•

real factual optative

Figure 2: The network ofthe BH qatal; optative vs. perfect-perfectivepast senses 28 The results of this study do not only explain the precative qatal, linking it to the dominant PPP domain without any type of derivation from an allegedly inherent invariant value; they also make its position in Biblical Hebrew significantly firmer and more credible. Since the precative value stands in a cognitive harmony with the indicative senses of the qatal (it is chained by means of a typologycally plausible matrix viz. the modal contamination path of resultative inputs); since such an indicative-modal split of the suffix conjugation is encountered in various Semitic idioms; and since schizophrenic indicative (perfect, perfective, past) and modal (real factual 28 In tliis chart, the networking of stative and evidential values as well as the chaining of prospective senses has deliberately not been taken into consideration. For a discussion of these features and their incorporation into the semantics of the qatal gram, see Andrason 2011a: 282—3, 305—7, 2011d: 41—43 and forthcoming).

150

ALEXANDER ANDRASON

optative) morphological patterns typologically constitute a well-documented phenomenon, the reading of certain qatal forms in contexts of wishes, prayers or supplications becomes all the more plausible. Cognitively, diachronically, comparatively and typologically, such forms make, therefore, perfect sense. Conversely, the "anti-precative" position appears to be problematic and more difficult to sustain. 3.2. A MODELLING OF THE PRECATIVE QATAL AS AN ILLUSTRATION OF THE ANTI-STRUCTURALIST COMPLEXITY MODEL IN VERBAL SEMANTICS

The result of the present study may also be viewed as exemplifying the "anti-structuralist" and complexity approach to the semantic analysis of verbal systems, in particular of Biblical Hebrew. As explained in section 1.3, our approach explores the idea according to which the meaning of a verbal form is understood as a modeled (i.e., organized into a map) aggregate of contextually induced senses. This point is characteristic of various post- or anti-structuralist theories, such as the panchronic model of grammaticalization chains (Heine, Claudi and Hünnemeyer 1991, as well as Dahl 2000b), cognitive semantics (Evans and Green 2006 and Van der Auwera and Gast 2011), construction grammar (cf. Hopper 1998 and Helasvuo 2009), emergent grammar (cf. Kay and Filmore 1999, Croft 2001 and Nikiforidou 2009), or usage-based and path approaches (Bybee 2010). The model employed in this article is entirely compatible with and, in effect, derived from the above-mentioned approaches. By doing so, it continues a "militant" anti-structuralist spirit which emerged in the 1980's, and which openly rejects an anachronistic hypothesis of invariant/inherent meanings (cf. Bybee 2010: 183—93). On the other hand, however, our approach goes beyond the above-mentioned frameworks, in that it relates additionally the cognitive, grammaticalization and typological "tradition" with another revolutionary trend in science, namely, the complexity theory. To be exact, it demonstrates that the verbal system of Biblical Hebrew constitutes a complex, open, dynamic, metastable, non-linear and emergent 29 body which 29 Complex systems involve an immense or infinite number of components and relations; open systems exchange material, energy or information with their environment; dynamic systems undergo a constant evolution; metastable systems appear as static and are usually viewed as "things" although they are processes; non-linear systems suffer important macroscopic modifications due to insignificant microscopic alterations; emergent properties fail to be qualitatively comparable with, and "additively" derivable from, the characteristics of more elemental constituents. For a detailed discussion of these properties, as well as of the thermodynamic model of the BH verbal system, see Andrason (2012d).

T H E PKECATIVE

GATAL

151

should be modeled by using a thermodynamic representation (Andrason 2012d). By emphasizing the importance of complexity, openness, dynamics, metastability, non-linearity and emergence in the functioning of the BH verbal system (and hence in its description and analysis), our model again straightforwardly contradicts the structuralist, Jakobsonian ideal of a static system comprising a limited amount of neat and clear-cut oppositions. The infinite complexity and time-dependence of realistic systems in our universe (regularly acknowledged in modern science), with all of their implications for real-world organizations, directly contradicts such idealized systems. Certainly, every model and every scientific description of the universe—the complex and thermodynamic one included—represents by necessity a simplification of the actual state of affairs (Futuyma 1998: 128). Nevertheless, what distinguishes all structuralist models is the fact that they simplify to a dangerous limit. They typically falsify reality—this falsification may best be observed in the manner they ignore or minimalize empirical evidence. In order to fit the form into a given label, structuralist scholars typically adopt two positions: either they ignore a portion of the empirical data (i.e., they focus on the data that corroborate their categorization), or they minimalize the importance of instances which contradict a proposed definition, regarding such cases as irregular (cf. Heine, Claudi and Hiinnemeyer 1991, Tyler and Evans 2003: 6-7, Bybee 2010: 183-9). Let us explain this point by discussing again the model of the BH qatal form. The BH qatal—a taxonomical specimen discussed in the present article—appears in the biblical material in a large variety of contexts, where different semantic content are activated and profiled. Accordingly, in determined semantic, syntactic or pragmatic environments, the qatal offers distinct senses compatible with the following semantic domains or semantic categories: present perfect (« 21%), pluperfect (« 21%), future (either perfect or simple « 2%), indefinite perfect/past (« 11%), definite past « 35% (either perfective 28%] or durative 7%]), gnomicity (« 0,5%), present (resultative, stative or simple « 6%), and performative 2%). Additionally, it may express a modal sense of unreal counterfactuality (in conditional protases and apodoses, as well as in wishes « 1%; cf. Andrason 2013) and a value of real factuality (« 0,5%,), as demonstrated in this article. 30 This is a total semantic potential of the BH qatal form—a scientific fact derived from empirical observations where each occurrence of the qatal form (limited to a finite corpus) has been "measured" with objective 30 These figures reflect provisional results obtained by the current research of the author, which consists in "measuring" the senses offered by qatal, l o n g j i q t o l , short jiqtol, wajyiqtol and weqatal in five books of the Hebrew Bible. The quoted percentages correspond to the data obtained in the analysis of Genesis.

152

ALEXANDER ANDRASON

"tools": in each usage, the exact sense was determined by means of the presence of certain explicit indicators, such as accompanying lexemes and particles, overt syntactic constructions, discourse types, and pragmatic factors—in total, the context. This empirical and objective study of the semantic properties of the qatal delivers a semantic space covered by this formation—its semantic potential or semantic compatibility. This empirical evidence—which constitutes the foundation of our model and, especially, of the corresponding mapping advanced—enables us to clearly demonstrate the weakness of any structuralist model. In light of the empirical research, it is evident that no relevant semantic domain is shared in all the uses of the qatal gram. The only domains which can be posited as being effectively shared correspond to values that are epistemologically unimportant and trivial (cf. also Bybee 2010: 183—93). As a result, such shared domains are unavoidably imprecise and irrelevant. The 1,5% of cases where the qatal has an evident modal (factual or counterfactual) force contradicts its classification as an indicative "realis" form. The usages of the qatal as a past durative, present stative and simple present, as well as the instances where it takes the value of an inclusive perfect and performative (in total approximately 18%), invalidate the definition of this construction as a perfective aspect. Likewise, the instances where it functions as a present or a future undermine the classification of the qatal as a past tense. Finally, various non-perfectal usages (i.e., the senses where the idea of anteriority is not evident) nullify the soundness of the definition of the gram as a perfect. To sum up, all one-domain labels are insufficient if one intends to grasp the entire semantic diversity of the qatal—its semantic potential as evinced by empirical studies. All such one-dimensional classifications are artificial constructs, which directly falsify, and collide with, the empirical evidence that is available. Our approach, on the contrary, has by definition no problem with empirical data, even in their most chaotic and superficially haphazard shape. Our model per vim tolerates all types of synchronic diversity: it respects and incorporates the entire empirical evidence—no examples need to be relegated and viewed as "irregular." In other words, while "flat" onedomain definitions are unsustainable because they are contradicted by too many empirical cases, our representation directly presupposes that a form has multiple, diverse, and even incompatible senses. In fact, the more distinct senses we can identify, the better it is. This stems from the following fact: since the map is posited by using typological evolutionary templates or paths, whose segments reflect different historical stages, wherever a certain extension of meaning has taken place, the structure of such a map is more easily recognizable—and more plausible—if more senses of this form can

T H E PKECATIVE

GATAL

153

be matched with stages that are typical for a cline. As a result, the extent and diversity of a given semantic potential ceases to be problematic at all— the problem in analyzing and explaining the semantics of a form now consists in providing the rationale behind a proposed chaining, and thus the posited organization of the corresponding map. As already mentioned, the entire semantic potential of the qatal form may be ordered by, and classified as, portions of the following evolutionary templates. (Of course, although the mapping is first derived from synchronic evidence and certain typological universals, it has also been contrasted with, and corroborated by, direct diachronic evidence.) First, all the indicative senses can be connected by means of the resultative path, and in particular of its two formative sub-trajectories: anterior (present perfect > indefinite perfect/past > definite past [first perfective, and next durative]) and simultaneous clines (resultative present > stative present > simple present). All the future senses (future perfect > immediate and general future, and future of certainty), the pluperfect senses, as well as the senses of a resultative-stative past, stative past and (in the case of static roots) durative past, can be mapped by means of the same dynamic patterns, but located in a future and a past time frame respectively (cf. Andrason 2011a and 2012a). Additionally, the counterfactual senses can be linked to the resultative path by means of a modal contamination path concomitant with the anterior path (i.e., applied to the stages of a past and pluperfect), and next by the optative path (cf. Andrason 2013). Finally, as was demonstrated in this article, the real factual modal senses can be related by means of the modal contamination path applied to resultative and present perfect values. As a result, the entire semantic potential is modeled as a consistent, logical and fully plausible map. This map accounts for the entire semantic diversity of the qatal. In addition to its evident explanatory power, such map also shows an important predictive capacity. Furthermore, it is no less important to note that, because of a difference in the frequency of determined senses, certain portions of each path are more prominent while others are less noticeable. This statistical prominence can be rendered in the model of the qatal by additionally "inflating" the stages of a present perfect, indefinite perfect, perfective past and pluperfect which correspond to the most common values. In this manner, the representation of the path incorporates not only the qualitative results of empirical studies, but also its quantitative ones (cf. Gries 2006: 5— 6). The empirical frequency and, once modeled, the prominence of certain portions of the cline (s) deliver, in turn, what is defined in cognitive-corpus studies as cognitive "prototypicality." These are the senses that are the most easily associated with the form, and thereby viewed as context-free

154

ALEXANDER ANDRASON

(Geeraerts 1988: 221-2, Stubb 2004 and Gilquin 2006: 180).31 Consequently, the model of the verbal meaning of the qatal equals the total semantic potential of this form, ordered into a solid map—typologically plausible and diachronically corroborated—where some regions, due to their frequent availability, are more prominent. Although our approach emphasizes the importance of context in the determination of a sense of the qatal form, the qatal—and any construction in general—should not be thought as a semantic vacuum uniquely depending on, and entirely shaped by, its environment. To be exact, in the same manner as the context influences the qatal, so does the qatal influence its context. In texts, and in language in general, everything is connected to everything; everything interacts with everything, at all levels and across all levels. The complexity of these connections and interrelations is humongous. Thus, as the qatal appears in a specific place in the Hebrew Bible, it is influenced by all possible contextual factors and, at the same time, influences all such elements, which, in turn, influence it back again, and so on recursively ad infinitum. It is at this point that complexity and, in a way, infinite circularity again becomes prominent for modeling the meaning of a verbal form. As explained above, the meaning of a form equals an ordered summation of all contextual senses conveyed by the form. But all these contextual specific senses are in fact applications of the previously ordered semantic potential to a concrete environment. 32 In other words, path-ordered semantic potentials of all the forms intermingle and cooperate in delivering the concrete atomic sense of each one of them. Thus, the meaning of a form as such (i.e., when it is envisaged in its totality) is an endless back-and-forth from the context (a given contextual sense) to the meaning (the ordered semantic potential), and back to the sense (since the semantic potential influences the contexts). And there is no exact starting point of this mutual interrelation—neither the verbal meaning nor the context comes first. Both are just given in the first place and have a mutual impact on each other. To conclude, our model represents the verbal meaning and the semantics of verbal systems as a phenomenon that is simultaneously dynamic and meta-stable (a synchronic state of a form is portrayed by making use of evolutionary principles, where time "organizes" available senses); multi-dimensional (with micro- and macroscopic levels and

31 Thus, the frequency of a sense has an important impact on the model and also on the perception of a form for speakers and for readers/students. 32 This new usage may subsequently modify this semantic potential, and thus expand the entire map of the meaning.

T H E PKECATIVE

GATAL

155

"zooming" descriptions); 33 emergent (for example, the time sensitivity and dynamics are emergent properties which can only be perceived at the macroscopic level, where all concrete atomic cases have been aggregated); and, finally, open and complex (the number of oppositions and relations underlying the system is infinite). 34 By doing so, our model is more adequate with the realistic universe and properties of real-world systems. In particular, it represents the BH verbal semantics with a lesser degree of approximation, and thus with more precision, than any possible structuralist description; it respects the empirical evidence, and acknowledges the inherent complexity of the reality studied. 3.3. A "BY-PRODUCT" OF THIS ARTICLE

Besides having explained the precative sense of the qatal and its cognitive relation to the remaining semantic potential of the gram, the present study offers an additional result. Based upon a typological tendency whereby indicative resultative proper inputs may acquire a real factual optative sense—thus giving rise to schizophrenic morphological patters that can function as an indicative perfect, perfective and past on the one hand, and as a real factual mood on the other—the present article provides further evidence for such an evolutionary possibility. By doing so, it supports a similar dynamic interpretation posited for the PS *yaqtul and its two BH successors: the wayyiqtol and the short yiqtol (Andrason 2011b: 44—46, and especially 2012c; see also section 2.4.2 above and the discussion of Akkadian iprus and Arabic yaqtul). In a recent study Andrason (2012c) proposed that—despite our lack of direct historical evidence—a case can be made for the view that the short yiqtol should be dynamically defined as an advanced portion of the modal contamination path of the original resultative input. More specifically, while the indicative PS *yaqtul—in the shape of an analytical On the one hand, a path (i.e., a dynamic definition of a gram) may be deconstructed into more specific sub-tracts and, on the other, a stage (a section of the path which symbolizes a sense of a gram) may be divided into more elementary stages (and thus senses) providing a gradually more atomic view of the meaning. Simply put, the model enables us to "zoom in" on the meaning of a form to the point that a stage-sense equals a single use of this form. Conversely, it also allows us to "zoom out," and therefore to provide macroscopic global descriptions. 34 Additionally, as an exemplary complexity model, our representation is both analytic-microscopic and synthetic-macroscopic, giving access to various levels of description of the system. Finally, by developing a micro- and macroscopic explanation, it shows how all such levels incessantly influence each other and collaborate in delivering the system with its individuals. 33

156

ALEXANDER ANDRASON

expression *wa-+}+yaqtul that was fused in BH to the wayyiqtol—developed regularly following the resultative cline (anterior and simultaneous clines), the "simple" *yaqtul was specialized as a modal gram, assuming the value that was imposed by certain modal environments in which it was employed. This means that the simple *yaqtul was entirely modalized: namely, the modal sense became an indissoluble semantic property of the gram, and the formation lost any resultative-path senses and connotations. Thus, the simple *yaqtul, which emerged from modal environments, separated itself— both semantically and morphologically—from the resultative input and its path. As the short yiqtol, it became an independent formation, while the successor of the indicative resultative input, having incorporated other markers, clearly developed into the wayyiqtol. Consequently, the trajectories of the two types of *yiqtolthe indicative and modal, split into two independent grams: the resultative-path wayyiqtol (which, cognitively, is directly consistent with the input expression), and the modally contaminated short yiqtol (which is cognitively consistent with the environment in which the resultative source was employed). The relation between the precative qatal (real factual optative) and the indicative qatal (perfect, perfective and past) constitutes a completely analogical process from the typological perfective.

T H E VRECATIVE

QATAL

157

Aikhenvald, A. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Andersen, D. 2000. The Evolution of the Hebrew Verbal System. Zeitschrift fur Alth ebraistik 13/1: 1—66. Andrason, A. 2010a. The Panchronic Yiqtol. Functionally Consistent and Cognitively Plausible. Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 10/10: 1—63. . 2010b. The Akkadian Iprus from the Unidirectional Perspective. Journal of Semitic Studies 55 /2: 325—45. . 2010c. The "Guessing" QATAL: The BH Suffix Conjugation as a Manifestation of the Evidential Trajectory. Journal for Semitics 19/2: 603-27. . 2011a. Qatal, yiqtol, w e q a t a l j wayyiqtol. Modelo pancrónico del sistema verbal de la lengua hebrea biblica con el anàlisis adicional de los sistemas verbales de las lenguas acadia y àrabe. Madrid: Publicaciones de la Universidad Complutense. . 2011b. The Biblical Hebrew Wayyiqtol. A Dynamic Definition. Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 11/7: 1—50. . 2011c. The BH Weqatal. A Homogenous Form with No Haphazard Functions. Part 1.Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 37/2: 1—25. . 201 Id. The Biblical Hebrew Verbal System in Light of Grammaticalization: The Second Generation. Hebrew Studies 52: 351— 83. . 2012a. Making it Sound: Performative Qatal and its Explanation. Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 12/8: 1—58. . 2012b. The Meaning of the YE Forms in Basse Mandinka. Philologia 10: 21-38. . 2012c. The Dynamic Short Yiqtol. Journalfor Semitics 21/2: 308—39. . 2012d. Thermodynamic Model of the Biblical Hebrew Verbal System. Pp. 146—63 in Grammaticalisation in Semitic. (Journal of Semitic Studies Supplement Series, 29). Ed. D. Eades. Oxford: Oxford University Press. . 2013. Against Floccinaucìnihìlìpìlìficatìon of the Counterfactual Sense of the BH Suffix Conjugation — Or an Explanation of Why the "Indicative" Qatal Expresses Conditions, Hypotheses and Wishes. Old Testament Essays 27/1: 20—56. . forthcoming. Future Values of the Qatal are "Logical" — How to Chain Future Senses of the Qatal to Its Semantic Network? Hebrew Studies 54: 261-292. Bahloul, M. 2008. Structure and Function of the Arabic Verb. London: Routledge. Barnes, O. L. 1965. A New Approach to the Vroblem of the Hebrew Tenses. Oxford: Thornton.

158

ALEXANDER ANDRASON

Bauer, H. and P. Leander. 1962 [1922], Historische Grammatik der hebräischen Sprache des Alten Testamentes. Hildesheim: Georg Olms. Bergsträsser, G. 1918 and 1929. Hebräische Grammatik. 2 Vols. Leipzig: Vogel. Blau, J. 1971. Marginalia Semitica 6: The Problem of Tenses in Biblical Hebrew. Israel Oriental Studies 1: 1—35. Brockelmann, C. 1961 [1913]. Syntax. Vol. 2: Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der semitischen Sprachen. Hildesheim: Georg Olms. Buck, A. de. 1952. Grammaire élémentaire du moyen égyptien. Leiden: Brill. Buttenwieser, M. 1925. The Importance of the Tenses for the Interpretation of the Psalms. Pp. 89—111 in Hebrew Union College Annual Jubilee Volume. Ed. D. Philipson et al. Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College. . 1938. The Psalms: Chronologically Treated with a New Translation. Chicago: University of Chicago. Bybee, J., R. Perkins and W. Pagliuca. 1994. The Involution of Grammar. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press. Bybee, J. 2010. Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cohen, M. 1924. Te systèrne verbal sémitique et I'expression du temps. Paris: Ernest Leroux. Cook, J. 2002. The Biblical Hebrew Verbal System: A Grammaticali^ation Approach. PhD dissertation. Department of Hebrew and Semitic Studies, University of Wisconsin-Madison. Couper-Kuhlen, E. and M. Selting, 2001. Introducing Interactional Linguistics. Pp. 1—22 in Studies in Interactional Linguistics. Ed. M. Selting and E. Couper-Kuhlen. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Croft, A. 2001. Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Croft, W. and A. Cruse. 2004. Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dahl, Ö. 1985. Tense and Aspect Systems. Oxford: Blackwell. . 2000a. The Tense and Aspect Systems of European Languages in a Typological Perspective. Pp. 3—25 in Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe. Ed. Ö. Dahl. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. (ed). 2000b. Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Dahood, M. 1966. Psalms I, 1-50 (Anchor Bible). Garden City: Doubleday. Danecki, J. 1994. Gramatyka j?%yka arabskiego. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Akademickie Dialog. Davidson, A. B. 1902. Hebrew Syntax. Edinburgh: T & T Clark.

T H E PKECATIVE

GATAL

159

DeCaen, V. 1999. Ewald and Driver on Biblical Hebrew 'Aspect'. Zeitschrift firAlthebraistik 9: 129—51. Dempsey, D. 1991. A Note on Isaiah XLIII 9. Vetus Testamentum 41: 212—5. Dillmann, A. 1974 [1907]. Ethiopic Grammar (enl. and improved by C. Bezold; trans. J. A. Crichton). London: Williams & Norgate. Driver, G. R. 1936. Problems of the Hebrew Verbal System. Edinburgh: T & T Clark. Driver, S. R. 1892. A Treatise on the Use of the Tenses in Hebrew and Some Other Syntactical Problems. Oxford: Clarendon. Evans, V. and M. Green. 2006. Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Ewald, H. 1879. Syntax of the Hebrew Language of the Old Testament (trans. J. Kennedy). Edinburgh: T & T Clark. . 1855. Ausführliches Lehrbuch der hebräischen Sprache (6th ed.). Leipzig: Hahn. . 1870. Ausführliches Lehrbuch der hebräischen Sprache (8th ed.). Göttingen: Verlag der dieterischen Buchhandlung. Gai, A 2000. The Connection between Past and Optative in the Classical Semitic Languages. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 150:17-28. Geeraerts, D. 1988. Where does Prototypicality Come from? Pp. 207—29 in Topics in Cognitive Linguistics. Ed. B. Rudzka-Ostyn. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Gesenius, W. 1813—1842. Hebräische Grammatik. Halle: Renger. Gesenius, W., E. Kautsch and A. E. Cowley. 1909. Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Gilquin, G. 2006. The Place of Prototypicality in Corpus Linguistics. Pp. 159—91 in Corpora in Congnitive Linguistics. Ed. S. Gries and A. Stefanowitsch. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Ginsberg, H. L. 1936. The Rebelion and Death of Ba'lu. Orientalia 5: 16198. Gordon, C. 1965. Ugaritic Textbook. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute. Gray, L. 1971. Introduction to Semitic Comparative Linguistics. Amsterdam: Philo Press. Gries, S. 2006. Introduction. Pp. 1—17 in Corpora in Congnitive Linguistics. Ed. S. Gries and A. Stefanowitsch. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Hatav, G. 1997. The Semantics of Aspect and Modality. Evidence from English and Biblical Hebrew. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Haywood, J. and H. M. Nahmad. 1965. A New Arabic Grammar. London: Lund Humphries.

160

ALEXANDER ANDRASON

Heine, B., U. Claudi and F. Hünnemeyer. 1991. Grammaticali^ation. A Conceptual Framework. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Helasvuo, M-L. 2009. Emergent Grammar. Pp. 66—73 in Grammar, Meaning and Pragmatics. Ed. F. Brisard, J-O. Ostman and J. Verschueren. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Hopper, P. 1998. Emergent Grammar. Pp. 155—75 in The New Psychology of Tanguage. Ed. M. Tomasello. Mahwan: Erlbaum. Hopper, P. and E. Traugott. 2003. Grammaticali^ation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Höfter, M. 1943. Altsüdarabische Grammatik. Leipzig: Otto Harrasowitz. Huehnergard, J. 1983. Assertive *la and Hypothetical * lu/law in Semitic. Journal of American Oriental Society 103/3: 569—93. . 1987. Stative, Predicative Form, Pseudo-Verb. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 46/3: 215-32. . 2005. A Grammar of Akkadian. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. Hughes, J. 1970. Another Look at the Hebrew Tenses. Journal of Near Tastern Studies 29/1: 12—24. Joosten, J. 1999. The Long Form of the Prefix Conjugation Referring to the Past in Biblical Hebrew Prose. Hebrew Studies 40: 15-26. Joüon, P. 1923. Grammaire de l'hébreu biblique. Roma: Institute Biblique Pontifical. Joüon, P. and T. Muraoka. 2009. A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. Roma: Gregorian & Biblical Press. Kay, P. and C. Fillmore. 1999. Grammatical Constructions and Linguistic Generalizations: The What's X Doing Y? Construction. Tanguage 75: 1-33. Kienast, B. 2001. Historische semitische Sprachwissenschaft. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. Kurylowicz, J. 1972. Studies in Semitic Grammar and Metrie. Wroclaw: Zaklad Ossolinskich PAN. Lambdin, T. O. and J. Huehnergard. 1998. The Historical Grammar of Classical Hebrew: An Outline. Cambridge: Unpublished course hand-out. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, B. 2007. Polysemy, Prototypes, and Radical Categories. Pp. 139—69 in Handbook of Cognitive Tinguistics. Ed. D. Geeraerts and H. Cuyckens. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lipinski, E. 2001. Semitic Tanguages Outline of a Comparative Grammar. Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters en Departement Oosterse Studies. Loesov, S. 2005. T-Perfect in Old Babylonian: The Debate and a Thesis. Pp. 83—181 in Babel and Bibel. Ed. L. Kogan. Moscow: Russian State University for the Humanities.

T H E PKECATIVE

GATAL

161

Loprieno, A. 1986. Das Verbalsystem im Ägyptischen und Semitischen: Zur Grundlegung einer Aspekttheorie. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. McFall, L. 1982. The Enigma of the Hebrew Verbal System. Sheffield: Almond Press. Moran, W. L. 1961. The Hebrew Language in Its Northwest Semitic Background. Pp. 54—72 in The Bible and the Anaent Near East: Essays in Honor of William Foxwell Albright. Ed. G. E. Wright. New York: Doubleday. Nikiforidou, K. 2009. Constructional Analysis. Pp. 16—32 in Grammar, Meaning and Pragmatics. Ed. F. Brisard, J-O. Ostman and J. Verschueren. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Nöldeke, T. 2001 [1904]. Compendious Syriac Grammar. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. . 1964 [1875]. Mandäische Grammatik. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. O'Leary, De L. 1969. Comparative Grammar of the Semitic languages. Amsterdam: Philo Press. Rainey, A. F. 1996. Canaanite in the Amama Tablets: Morphosyntactic Analysis of the Verbal System. Leiden: Brill. Rattray, S. 1992. The Tense-Mood-Aspect System of Biblical Hebrew with Speaal Emphasis on 1 and 2 Samuel. PhD dissertation. University of California, Berkeley. Sallaberger, W. 1999. "Wenn Du mein Bruder bist, ...". Interaktion und Textgestaltung in altbabylonischen Alltagsbrifen. Groningen: Styx. Segert, S. 1964. A Basic Grammar of the Ugaritic Language. Berkley: University of California Press. Stubb, M. 2004. On Very Frequent Phrases in English: Distributions, Functions and Structures. Talk at the 25th Conference of the International Computer Archive for Modern and Medieval English. Verona, Italy, 19-23 May 2004. Testen, D. 1998. Parallels in Semitic Linguistics: The Development of Arabic la- and Related Semitic Particles. Leiden: Brill. Tyler, A. and V. Evans. 2003. The Semantics of English Prepositions: Spatial Scenes, Embodied Meaning and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Van der Auwera, J. and V. and Gast. 2011. Categories and Prototypes. Pp. 166-89 in The Oxford Handbook of Typology. Ed. J. J. Song. Oxford: Blackwell. Van der Merwe, C. H. J., J. Naude and J. Kroeze. 1999. Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.

162

ALEXANDER ANDRASON

Van der Merwe, C. H. J. and J. Naude. forthcoming. A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar (revised ed). Von Soden, W. 1952. Grundriss der akkadishcen Grammatik. Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum. Ungnad, A. 1932. Syrische Grammatik. München: C. H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung. Waltke, B. K. and K. O'Connor. 1990. An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. Wasserman, N. 2012. Most Probably. Epistemic Modality in Old Babylonian. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. Watts, J. W. 1951. A Survey of Syntax in Hebrew Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. Weingreen, J. 1939. A Practical Grammar of Classical Hebrew. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Wright, W. 1964. A Grammar of the Arabic Language. Vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Zevit, Z. 1998. Talking Funny in Biblical Hebrew and Solving a Problem of the Yaqtül Past Tense. Hebrew Studies 29: 25—33. Zuber, B. 1986. Das Tempussystem des biblischen Hebräisch. Berlin: de Gruyter.

"IT IS NOT RIGHT FOR A MAN WHO WORSHIPS GOD TO REPAY HIS NEIGHBOR EVIL FOR EVIL": CHRISTIAN ETHICS IN JOSEPH AND ASENETH (CHAPTERS 2 2 - 2 9 )

RIVKA NIR OPEN UNIVERSITY OF ISRAEL

1. INTRODUCTION T h e pseudepigraphic w o r k Joseph and Aseneth consists of t w o m a i n stories. T h e first part of the w o r k , w h i c h is also the longest (chs. 1—21), relates the love story b e t w e e n the t w o protagonists, A s e n e t h ' s conversion, and her marriage with J o s e p h . It is followed b y a shorter story (chs. 22—29) narrating the unsuccessful attempt b y P h a r a o h ' s s o n — w h o is assisted by s o m e of J o s e p h ' s b r o t h e r s — t o abduct A s e n e t h and m a k e her his wife. 1 T h e 1 It is agreed that the story was originally composed in Greek. There are 16 Greek manuscripts, dating from the 10th to the 19th centuries, which can be divided into two groups: a shorter text, published by M. Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth: Introdudion, texte critique, tradudion et notes (StPB, 13; Leiden: Brill, 1968), on which D. Cook based the English translation "Joseph and Aseneth," in H. F. D. Sparks (ed), The Apocryphal Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984), 473-503; and a longer text published by C. Burchard, Untersuchungen Joseph und Aseneth: Überlieferung — Ortsbestimmung (WFJNT, 8; Tübingen: Mohr, 1965), and idem, Joseph und Aseneth (Leiden: Brill, 2003). The English citations in the present article are adapted from Cook, "Joseph and Aseneth," based on the group of short texts, and C. Burchard, "Joseph and Aseneth," in J. H. Chariesworth (ed), The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (2 vols.; Garden City, N.Y.: Double-day, 1985), 2:202-47, here 211-2, based on the group of long texts. Schol-ars have debated whether the earliest text is represented by the long text (b), as argued by Burchard (C. Burchard, "The Text of Joseph and Ase-neth Reconsidered," JSP 14 (2005), 83-96, or by the short text (d), as held by Philonenko. I do not deny that there are differences between the two

163

164

RIVKANIR

beginning of the second account coincides with the transition from the seven years of plenty to the seven years of famine, as well as with Jacob's arrival in Egypt and his settlement in the land of Goshen. Aseneth determines to accompany Joseph in order to meet Jacob. On their way home from the encounter, they are seen by Pharaoh's eldest son. Captivated by Aseneth's beauty, the latter summons Simeon and Levi to secure their help in killing Joseph, so that he can marry her. He offers them gold and silver, menservants and maidservants, houses and estates, and threatens to kill them if they decline. Furthermore, Pharaoh's son sends for the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah—the maidservants of Jacob's wives, Leah and Rachel— after learning that the latter dislike and envy Joseph and Aseneth, and that they will do what he wants. Jacob's sons come by night and promise to collaborate in the plan to ambush Aseneth and her escorts, abduct her and then kill Joseph and his children, before Pharaoh's son would marry her. Their plot almost comes through. Aseneth's escorts are killed, she flees in her chariot and is about to fall into the hands of Pharaoh's son when Levi comes with his brothers to her rescue. Benjamin takes a stone and hurls it at Pharaoh's son, wounding him severely. The sons of Bilhah and Zilpah are still determined to kill Aseneth, but their swords turn to ashes, following which it dawns upon them that God stands by Aseneth. Consequently, they plead for her mercy and ask her to be spared from their brothers' vengeance. Aseneth comforts them and gives them the assurance that they would be saved, and her promise is indeed fulfilled. Thanks to Levi's intervention, even Pharaoh's son is treated with compassion; he is brought to his father's house and dies there. Upon Pharaoh's death, Joseph becomes king of Egypt and then passes on the crown to Pharaoh's grandson. What is the meaning of this story, to whom was it addressed, and why was it written? In this article I will argue that the story in chs. 22—29 was composed by a Christian author, and with a Christian audience in view. At the center of the story is a call for Christians to adopt an ethics characterized by nonretaliation and the love of enemies as a means to obtain salvation in the Church, itself personified by Aseneth. I am not the first scholar to advance such a claim. In particular, W. Klassen and G. M. Zerbe already remarked how the story promotes values such as nonretaliation, the respect of enemies and the importance of versions which affect the question of Joseph and Aseneth's theological identity. Yet despite these differences, both texts reflect in my view a Christian outlook and theology. The following article resorts first and foremost to the short text, which, following the detailed demonstration by Kraemer, I regard as the oldest version; see R. S. Kraemer, When Aseneth Met Joseph: A l^ate Antique Tale of the Biblical Patriarch and His Egyptian Wife, Reconsidered (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), 6—9.

CHRISTIAN ETHICS IN JOSEPH AND ASENETH

165

showing kindness to them, as well as the need to pacify relations between brothers and avoid inner-brotherly vengeance. 2 Yet, still accepting the common opinion about the Jewish origin of Joseph and Aseneth, these scholars explain the ethical message in the second story (chs. 22—29) as an expression of Jewish ethics. Despite plain parallels in the New Testament, they reject the possibility that it was composed by a Christian and/or that it reflects a distinctively Christian ethics. Accordingly, Klassen dismisses possible Christian interpolations, "for nothing is found in this story which is unique to Christian sources; indeed it would be hard to find anything here which is clearly stated in the New Testament." 3 Similarly, Zerbe concludes that, "the ethic of non-retaliation in Joseph and Aseneth then, is inspired primarily by biblical texts and traditions." 4 Contrary to Zerbe, Klassen and the majority view, I maintain that the first part of Joseph and Aseneth (chs. 1—21) is a Christian work, composed by Christians in order to advance Christian views. Accordingly, Aseneth and Joseph may be viewed as symbolical and typological images: Aseneth symbolizes the Church, whereas Joseph is a prototype of Christ; their marriage represents the marriage of Christ and his Church. Besides being typological figures, Aseneth and Joseph also stand as models for the ideal Christian way of life, to be followed and imitated by other Christians. 5 As I G. M. Zerbe, Non-Retaliation in Early Jewish and New Testament Texts (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993), 72—93, here 75; W. Klassen, Love of Enemies: The Way to Peace (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984), 53-57. For other interpretations, see Burchard, "Joseph and Aseneth," 182, 190; R. D. Chesnutt, From Death to Life: Conversion in Joseph and Aseneth (JSPSup, 16; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995), 106-9; J. J. Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem (New York: Crossroad, 1983), 109—10. For an overview of the socio-political settings that have been advanced by scholars for Joseph and Aseneth, see especially Zerbe, Non-Retaliation, 93—97. 3 Klassen, Love of Enemies, 56 4 Zerbe, Non-Retaliation, 93. 5 R. Nir, Joseph and Aseneth: A Christian Book (Sheffield: Phoenix Press, 2012); R. Nir, "Aseneth as the 'Type of the Church of the Gentiles,' " in C. A. Evans and D. Zacharias (eds), Early Christian Uterature and Intertextuality (2 vols.; London/New York: T&T Clark, 2009), 1:109-37. My thesis follows P. Batiffol ("Le livre de la Prière d'Aseneth," in idem, Studiapatristica. Etudes d'ancienne littérature chrétienne [Paris: E. Leroux, 1889-1990], 1-87, here 23-25, 29, 36-37), who published the first critical edition of Joseph and Aseneth toward the end of the 19th century; see in his wake E. W. Brooks, Joseph and Asenath: The Confession and Prayer of Asenath Daughter of Pentephres the Priest (London/New York: The Macmillan Co., 1918), xi, xv, and many others in the late 19th and early to mid 20th century. For modern scholars who proposed Christian authorship or Christian interpolation see Kraemer, When Aseneth Met Joseph, 5 - 6 , 237-9, 253-74; T. Holtz, "Christliche Interpolationen in 2

166

RIVKANIR

will show, the second story of Joseph and Aseneth fits well within this Christian setting. Scholars are divided over the relationship between the two stories preserved in Joseph and Aseneth. At issue is whether they were written by two different authors and joined together at a later stage, or whether the second story constitutes an integral part of the first story, both stories being composed by the same author. The main observations that militate against the assumption of single authorship are the obvious dissimilarities between the style, the ambiance and the internal rhythm of the two stories. Whereas the first account is a tale of romance, marked by lengthy sentimental prayers and symbolic gestures, the plot of the second story revolves around war, darkish schemes and military victories. The obvious link between these distinct stories is the figure of Aseneth, who stands at the center of both accounts. Yet whereas the first story centers on Aseneth's relationship with Joseph and her conversion, chs. 22—29 focus on Joseph's brothers and the attempt of Pharaoh's son to abduct and marry her. Joseph, previously at center-stage, is pushed aside, as his place is taken over by Levi, the chief protagonist alongside Aseneth. And in place of the earlier rhetoric, abounding in symbols and images such as the "city of refuge," or the honeycomb and the bees, what we have is a seemingly simplistic and prosaic narrative. 6 That the first plot stands on its own, culminating in the marriage of Joseph and Aseneth and the birth of their sons, further sustains the assumption that it represents a separate story. In my view, therefore, these and other observations support the scholarly claim for distinct authorship of the two accounts. 7 At the same time, as I will show, scholars were nonetheless right to assume that the two stories are complementary, 'Joseph und Aseneth,' " NTS 14 (1967-1968), 482-97; Cook, "Joseph and Aseneth," 469; M. Penn, "Identity Transformation and Authorial Identification in Joseph and Aseneth," JSP 13 (2002), 171-83, here 182; J. R. Davila, The Provenance of the Pseudepigrapha: Jewish, Christian, or Other? (JSJSup, 105; Leiden: Brill, 2005), 195; M. Satlow, Jewish Marriage in Antiquity (Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2001), 46. 6 This is apparently the reason that significantly less attention was devoted to the second account than to the first one in chs. 1—21; note its absence, for example, in Davila, Provenance of the Pseudepigrapha, 190—5. 7 Philonenko,_/ftf]? in 13:2). One may wonder whether this reading implies that not every prophet is judged in Zech 13:2—6 but only the false ones. In any case, the LXX is most probably an interpretation of a Hebrew text that was similar to the MT, as is attested by the parallel changes made to the designation of prophets in the LXX of Jeremiah (see L X X J e r 6:13; 33:7, 8, 11,16; 34:9; 35:1; 36:1, 8). 119 About the D'Sin, see in particular T. J . Lewis, "Teraphim," in DDD (2nd rev. ed), 844-850.

ZECHARIAH 9 - 1 4

283

woes. 1 2 0 Z e c h a r i a h 13:2—6 s u p p o r t s this interpretation of Z e c h 11:8—9 b y c o n f i r m i n g that there will be n o m o r e true p r o p h e t s of YHWH after Z e c h a r i a h ' s activity. A d d i t i o n a l l y , if, as h a s b e e n p r o p o s e d , the pierced p e r s o n i n Z e c h 12:10 refers to a p r o p h e t i c figure, 1 2 1 this p a s s a g e c o u l d also serve to m a r k the end of YHWH's p r o p h e t s after the activity of Z e c h a r i a h b y e m p h a s i z i n g the d e a t h of a p r o p h e t of YHWH, p r e s u m a b l y Z e c h a r i a h himself. 1 2 2 T h u s , Z e c h 9—14 a p p e a r s to p o r t r a y the p r o p h e t Z e c h a r i a h as 120 This interpretation makes sense of the text's emphasis on the prophet's resignation, which is often overlooked by commentators (e.g., Petersen, Zechariah 9—14 and Malachi, 94—95). Note that the other passages dealing with the shepherd motif in Zech 9—14 seem also to have connections with the issues of divination and prophecy; see in particular the teraphim, the diviners and the dreams in Zech 10:1— 3a (v. 2); the term m"TN in 11:1—3 (v. 3), which seems to prepare for 13:4; and the fact that Zech 13:7—9 follows Zech 13:2—6 and recalls the pierced prophet of 13:3 by calling forth the sword against the shepherd (v. 7). 121 Mason, The Use of Earlier Biblical Material\ 160—165; Meyers and Meyers, Zechariah 9-14, 333-342. 122 Zech 12:10 is a complex passage which has been the subject of multiple interpretations (see for instance Petterson, Behold Your King, 225—231; Redditt, Zechariah 9—14, 109—111). The pierced one has been identified with many historical figures, such as Gedaliah, Zerubbabel, Onias III and Simon the Maccabee, as well as with less defined figures such as a (future) Davidic king, a priest and a prophet, or with Y H W H himself. This is not the place to analyze this passage in detail. Briefly though, it seems to me that the possible identification of the pierced one with Y H W H (see "hn) and the mention of the outpouring of a spirit of favor and supplication (DMUnm jn n i l ) are most easily understood if Zech 12:10 refers to a pierced prophetic figure. This interpretation is supported by the observation that in Zech 13:2—6 prophets are also both pierced (with the same verb I p l in v. 3) and related to a spirit (there an impure one, HNDUn n i l , v. 2). In addition, Joel 3 confirms the connection between the motif of the outpouring of the spirit by Y H W H (also with "[SU? and n i l , v. 1) and the question of the future of prophecy. In Zech 12:10, the prophetic figure could be Zechariah himself, since it is assumed that he is the one pronouncing the oracle (see "hn). Note that the shift between the words of Y H W H and the words of the prophet (supposedly Zechariah) is not rare in Zech 9 - 1 4 (cf. Zech 10:5-6, 7 - 8 ; 12:6-9; see with a different view M. Delcor, "Un problème de critique textuelle et d'exégèse. Zach., XII, 10: Et aspicient ad me quem confixerunt" RB 58 [1951], 189-199 [193]). According to this interpretation, Zech 9 14 not only presents the rejection of Zechariah by his contemporaries and his resignation from his prophetic role (Zech 11:8—9) but also his death by murder. If this is correct, one the functions of Zech 12:10 is probably to mark the end of the period of Y H W H ' S prophets, emphasizing their rejection by Israel. This tradition of

284

HERVÉ GONZALEZ

the last prophet of YHWH, an observation which has been overlooked in past research. Moreover, the dystopian depiction of the flock in Zech 11:9 and the emphasis on the false and idolatrous character of prophecy in Zech 13:2—6 (in relation to Zech 10:1—3a) present the time following the end of YHWH'S prophets as a period of chaos and confusion, especially as regards the cult. Nonetheless, this period is described as a provisional one, preceding the great restoration. In regard to this conception, it is worth mentioning that the presence of the book of Malachi after the book of Zechariah does not necessarily contradict the idea that Zechariah was the last prophet of YHWH.123 Indeed, Malachi is presented as a special figure, different from the other prophets. His book does not give him the title of "prophet" (N"Q,3). Instead, his identity is unclear and as the meaning of his name implies ("my messenger"), he is portrayed as a heavenly messenger having specific priestly concerns (see Mai 1:6—2:9; 2:17—3:5 in particular). 124 This is also suggested by the translation of the name Malachi with Hyyekoi; in LXX Mai 1:1. Furthermore, the similar headings in Mai 1:1, Zech 9:1 and Zech 12:1 (with the sequence miT "131 KU7Q found nowhere else in the HB) have the effect of placing the message of Malachi in the continuation of the last prophecies associated with Zechariah. In this way, the book of Malachi is presented as a supplement consolidating the words of Zechariah. What is more, the final words of the book of Malachi (Mai 3:22—24) are consistent with the conception of prophecy developed in Zech 9—14. They even seem to presuppose it, since the brief announcement of the future return of Elijah, one of the prophets of old, implies that the time of YHWH'S prophets has provisionally ceased. 125 the persecuted prophets appears to develop during the late-Persian and Hellenistic periods, probably as a means to explain (or maintain) the cessation of YHWH's prophets. See for instance 2 Chr 24:19—21, a text which seems to be closely related to Zech 12:10, since it presents a figure called Zechariah, having a prophetic role, and eventually being murdered. 123 On the conception of prophecy in the end of the Twelve, see E. W. Conrad, "The End of Prophecy and the Appearance of Angels/Messengers in the Book of the Twelve,"/JOT 73 (1997), 65-79. 124 Due to the ambiguity of the text, the identity of Malachi is disputed among scholars. Based on the LXX, some scholars even reconstruct an earlier form of Mai 1:1 displaying DN^D, "his messenger," instead of ,DNt7D, see Lacocque, Zacharie, 223—224; Petersen, Zechariah 9—14 and Malachi, 165—166. For a different view, see for instance R. Kessler, Maleachi (HKAT; Freiburg et al.: Herder, 2001), 94-102. 125 K. Schmid, "La formation des 'Nebiim': Quelques observations sur la genèse rédactionnelle et les profils théologiques de Josué-Malachie," in J.-D. Macchi et al.

ZECHARIAH

9-14

285

The development of the idea of the end of YHWH's prophets gives

great value to past prophetic activity because it presents Y H W H ' S prophecy as a kind of revelation that has a special quality and is limited in time. Such a conception has the effect of accentuating the importance of the preservation, transmission and study of the words of the prophets. 126 It implicitly brings to the fore the value of writing for the conservation of prophetic revelation and therefore also the significance of the role of the scribes in prophetic transmission. Thus, the conception of an end to the time of Y H W H ' S prophets also has literary implications. It conceptually creates a corpus of prophetic texts with a certain chronological limit. In fact, no text attributed to a prophet who would be later than Zechariah is supposed to be included in this corpus (as noted, Malachi is a special case).127 This limit underlines the particular status and the great authority of the writings attributed to the prophetic figures of the past, and it also gives the prophet Zechariah a special place in the chain of prophetic revelation. Such an emphasis on the end of a time of authoritative figures, pointing as it does to the value of a literary corpus, is best understood in the context of the cultural developments of the Ptolemaic period. 128 At that time, the study of ancient literature increased significantly throughout the Hellenistic world. The Ptolemies sought not only political dominion over the Hellenistic world, but also cultural supremacy as a symbol of their power. 129 They gave considerable weight to literary activity and sponsored (eds), Les recueils prophétiques de la Bible. Origines, milieux et contexte proche-oriental (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2012), 115-142 (132-133). 126 Cf. Lange, Vom prophetischen Wort %urprophetischen Tradition, 306—308. 127 This does not necessarily mean that the prophetic corpus is fixed and even less that the text of the prophetic books is stable (see for instance the late editions of the books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel, probably from the third or second century B.C.E., reflected in the variants in the ancient manuscripts, cf. footnote no. 66); cf. van der Toorn, Scribal Culture, 252—263; Nihan, '"The Prophets' as Scriptural Collection." 128 Contacts between Greece and Palestine existed long before the Hellenistic era (see for instance D. Auscher, "Les relations entre la Grèce et la Palestine avant la conquête d'Alexandre," VT 17 [1967], 8-30; and E. Ambar-Armon and A. Kloner, "Archaeological Evidence of Links between the Aegean World and the Land of Israel in the Persian Period," in Y. Levin [ed], A Lime of Change. Judah and Its Neighbours in the Persian and Early Hellenistic Periods [New York: T&T Clark, 2007], 1—22). My main point here is not only that these contacts intensified significantly during the Ptolemaic period, but also that specific cultural developments took place in the Hellenistic world at that time that are reflected in some prophetic texts, Zech 9-14 especially. 129 See in particular A. Erskine, "Culture and Power in Ptolemaic Egypt: The

286

HERVÉ GONZALEZ

great scholarly institutions such as the prestigious Musaeum at Alexandria, with its outstanding associated library. There, the systematic collection and evaluation of writings was one of the main scholarly activities. Greek writings attributed to such esteemed authors as Homer were especially significant objects of study. Critical editions and commentaries, catalogues as well as lexicons were produced, giving birth to an extended secondary literature treating texts attributed to prestigious ancient authors (see in particular the works of scholars like Zenodotus, Callimachus, Apollonius of Rhodes, Eratosthenes, Aristophanes of Byzantium, and Aristarchus of Samothrace). 130 Such significant cultural developments taking place in the Hellenistic world, and especially at Alexandria, most probably had an impact on the literary production in Judea. It is likely, indeed, that the Judean scribes were aware of Alexandrian scholarly developments, given the special relationship of the Diaspora (particularly in Egypt) to the Jerusalem temple, 131 and also the contacts of the Judean elite with the Ptolemaic administration, especially as the Ptolemies had an expanded administrative apparatus. 132 In particular, the Greek translation of the Pentateuch is one of the results of these scholarly developments taking place during the third century BCE. As S. Honigman convincingly argued, this translation was probably sponsored by the king for the supplementation of the library of Alexandria. 133 Such an initiative was certainly not unknown to the Jerusalem scribes, as the popularity of this translation suggests. 134 In addition, some

Museum and Library of Alexandria," Greece &Rome 42 (1995), 38-48. 130 This intellectual context has been identified by R. Pfeiffer as the cradle of classical scholarship; R. Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship. From the Beginnings to the End of the Hellenistic Age (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968), esp. 3 and 87-279. See also for instance W. Rosier, "Books and Literacy," in G. Boys-Stones, B. Graziosi, and P. Vasunia (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Hellenistic Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), 433-444. 131 The relationship between the Judean elite and the Egyptian diaspora is well attested already during the Persian period by the Elephantine papyri in particular. This relationship continued during the Hellenistic period as evidenced, for instance, by the prologue to Greek Ben Sirach. 132 Cf. Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, 202—203. 133 S. Honigman, The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship in Alexandria. A Study in the Narrative of the Letter of Aristeas (London/New York: Routledge, 2003), 93—118; see also Had, Dorival, and Munnich, Biblegrecque, 66—78. 134 Some scholars have even argued that the Jerusalem elite was included in this project; see for instance B. S. J. Isseriin, "The Name of the 72 Translators of the LXX (Aristeas, 47-50)," JANES 5 (1973), 191-197.

ZECHARIAH 9 - 1 4

287

Judean elites were probably also attracted by Greek education, 135 since it was one of the main markers of the ruling class;136 the book of Qoheleth attests to such an interest.137 In Zech 9—14, the scribal construction of the end of YHWH's prophets is most probably a reflection of the scholarly culture that developed in the Hellenistic world during the Ptolemaic period. Like Alexandrian scholars, Judean scribes sought to emphasize the value of their traditions and ancient writings. They did so by presenting the prophetic revelation as a special one no longer available, except through the study of the prophetic writings. Although the text of the prophetic corpus was probably not fixed during the third century BCE, 138 the delineation of an authoritative prophetic corpus, achieved by setting a chronological limit to true prophecy after Zechariah's activity, can be understood as a means of competing with the prestigious Greek texts and traditions whose influence among both Diaspora and Palestinian Jews was growing during the Ptolemaic period. As D. M. Carr has argued, the emphasis on the authority of ancient native literary traditions, including delineating them more precisely, was not an isolated phenomenon in the Hellenistic world. 139 It seems to have been a strategy used by other native elites to resist the growing importance of Greek traditions, as some indigenous book catalogues inscribed on Egyptian temples suggest.140 135 On Greek education, see D. M. Carr, Writing on the Tablets of the Heart. Origins of Scripture and Uterature (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 91—109. Among other aspects, Carr stresses the great value of literacy in Greek culture. The study of literary classics such as the Iliad and the Odyssey was highly prized, and textual competence was accessible to the aristocratic sphere, rather than being restricted to professional scribes (108-109). 136 See Carr, Writing on the Tablets of the Heart, 177-199. 137 See for instance R. Bohlen, "Kohelet im Kontext hellenistischer Kultur," in L. Schwienhorst-Schönberger (ed), Das Buch Kohelet. Studien %ur Struktur, Geschichte, Rezeption und Theologie (BZAW, 254; Beriin/New York: de Gruyter, 1997), 249-273; L. Schwienhorst-Schönberger, "Via Media: Koh. 7,15—18 und die griechischhellenistische Philosophie," in A. Schoors (ed), Qoheleth in the Context of Wisdom (BETL, 136; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1998), 181-203; A. Buhlman, "The Difficulty of Thinking in Greek and Speaking in Hebrew (Qoheleth 3.18; 4.13-16; 5.8)," JSOT90 (2000), 101-108. 138 See footnote no. 127. 139 Carr, Writing on the Tablets of the Heart, 193-199. 140 See the inscribed lists at the temples of Ed-Tod and Edfu; A. Grimm, "Altägyptische Tempelliteratur: Zur Gliederung un Funktion der Bücherkataloge von Edfu und et-Tod," Studien %ur altägyptische YMlture 3 (1988), 159—169; Carr, Writing on the Tablets of the Heart, 196—198.

288

HERVÉ GONZALEZ

In Z e c h 9—14, this cultural competition is also reflected in the association of the end of YHWH's prophets with the development of false and idolatrous prophecy or divination (Zech 13:2—6 and 10:1—3a). This association a f f i r m s the superiority of the J u d e a n prophetic tradition over foreign traditions (see in particular the suppression of the " n a m e s of the idols," •"Q^yn niQU7, in Zech 13:2). This polemic is probably m o r e specifically directed against Greek religious practices, w h i c h w e r e attracting some J e w s in the Diaspora and also in Palestine. This is quite clear in the Greek version of Zech 10:1—3a, w h i c h m a y preserve an older reading than the M T , and w h e r e mantic practices such as oneiromancy especially 1 4 1 are associated with the absence of healing (1W15, at the end of v. 2, instead of "shepherd," in the MT). 1 4 2 Indeed, the search for healing through dreams is a trait of Greek religion w h i c h significantly spread in the Hellenistic world. 1 4 3 Greeks affected by illness could spend the night in a 141 The mention of the dreams (oibn) in Zech 10:2 ends a small list of three false practices after the mention of the teraphim (D'Sin) and the diviners (DDp). It introduces two negative evaluations (JlDrU'' b i n l~nT N1U7H) instead of one for the teraphim (JIN 1131) and the diviners ("lpU? Itn). 142 Since, in general, the Greek translation of Zechatiah can be considered as faithful to its Hebrew Vorlage (see for instance C. Dogniez, "L'arrivée du roi selon la LXX de Zacharie 9,9—17," in W. Kraus and O. Munnich [eds], Ta Septante en Allemagne et en France. Textes de la Septante à traduction double ou à traduction très littérale [OBO, 238; Fribourg: Academic Press Fribourg; Gôttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2009], 217-237 [218, 236]), it is well possible that, behind the word iWiç, the LXX's Vorlage had the letters N31, corresponding to the Hebrew verbal root "to heal," instead of HJ71 in the MT. In this case, an ancient Hebrew text displayed v. 2 as being built on a wordplay between D'SUl at the beginning of the verse and N31 at the end. This possible woridplay in Hebrew hints at the existence of such an ancient text. The MT's reading HJ71, "shepherd," is well explained as having been provoked by the influence of the preceding reference to a flock (JNS) and/or the subsequent mention of the word HJ71 in v. 3a. Note that even in the MT, the problem of healing may still be implied by the term D'SUl and the verb HJJ7, "to be wretched, emaciated." 1 4 3 J.-M. Husser, "Songe," in DBSup 12 (1996), 1439-1543 (1444, 1474); P. Bonnechere, "Divination," in D. Ogden (ed), A Companion to Greek Religion (Blackwell Companions to the Ancient World; Maiden, Mass./Oxford/Victoria: Blackwell, 2007), 145-159 (153-154); S. I. Johnston, Ancient Greek Divination (Blackwell Ancient Religions; West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell, 2008), 90-95, 136; R. Stoneman, The Ancient Oracles: Making the Gods Speak (New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 2011), 104—131 (114-115); concerning the relations between divination and healing in ancient Greece, see Johnston, Ancient Greek Divination,

ZECHARIAH 9 - 1 4

289

temple in order to receive instructions for a cure or to be immediately healed by a deity during a dream. This practice of therapeutic incubation oracles is well known in relation to the cult of Asclepius at Epidaurus and it is also attested in Ptolemaic Egypt, where it was more specifically associated with the god Serapis, the patron deity of the royal dynasty.144 LXX Zech 10:1—3a appears to polemicize against this Greek practice, and perhaps this polemic was more specially directed against the Ptolemaic dynastic deity.145 In association with the idea of the end of YHWH's prophets developed in

Zech 9—14, this criticism of Greek religion serves to advance the preeminence of Judean traditions over Greek ones. It asserts that the only true divine revelation is Y H W H ' S prophecy preserved in the prophetic books of Jerusalem scribes. Such a development is not surprising in the context of the book of Zechariah, since Zech 1—8 already accentuates the particular place of Zechariah in the stream of prophetic revelation, that is, at the margin of "classical" prophecy. Zechariah 9—14 builds on this conception by developing the idea of the end of Y H W H ' S prophecy occurring just after the activity of Zechariah. In Zech 1—8, the depiction of the prophet Zechariah recalling the message of the prophets of old in a language inspired from other prophetic traditions (Zech 1 : 2 — 6 ; 7 : 4 — 1 4 ) is already a means of 119—125; M. A. Flower, The Seer in Ancient Greece (The Joan Palevsky Imprint in Classical Literature; Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press, 2008), 27-28, 212, 241. 144 Husser, "Songe," 1474; "L. Bricault, "Serapide, dio guaritore," in E. dal Covolo and G. Sfameni Gasparro (eds), Cristo e Asclepio: Culti terapeutici e taumaturgici nel mondo mediterráneo antico fra cristiani e pagani. Atti del Convegno Internationale Accademia di Studi Mediterranei, Agrigento 20—21 novembre 2006 (Rome: Las, 2008), 55— 71; Stoneman, Ancient Oracles, 126—131. On Serapis as the patron deity of the Ptolemies, see for instance J. E. Stambaugh, Sarapis under the Early Ptolemies (Etudes préliminaires aux religions orientales dans l'empire romain, 25; Leiden: Brill, 1972), esp. 6—13 and 88—102; J. D. Mikalson, Ancient Greek Religion (2d ed.; Blackwell Ancient Religion; West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010), 197; Holbl, History of the Ptolemaic Umpire, 99—101. According to J.-M. Husser, it is possible that the practice of therapeutic incubation already existed in Egypt before the Hellenistic period (Husser, "Songe," 1474). In any case, this practice developed significantly during the Ptolemaic period under the influence of Greek religion. If the Voriage of the LXX had instead of n j n at the end of v. 2 (see footnote no. 142), this specific polemic could be suggested by the wordplay between D'Sin at the beginning of the same verse and N31 at the end. This wordplay not only underlines the problem of healing but also recalls the name of Serapis, the dynastic deity supposed to bring healing at Alexandria. 145

290

HERVÉ GONZALEZ

emphasizing the importance of preserving and studying the prophetic texts, as well as a way of legitimizing the scribes preserving these texts. As several scholars have pointed out, this depiction is probably late in the redactional development of Zech 1—8, and some have even suggested that it could stem from the Hellenistic period. 146 In any case, the process of accentuating the authority of specific written traditions attributed to eminent ancient figures intensified in Judea during the Ptolemaic period. The development of the end of Y H W H ' s prophets in Zech 9—14 is most probably a result of this increasing emphasis on written traditions. 147 The fact that Zech 9—14 borrows heavily from other prophetic traditions (such as Jeremiah and Ezekiel), more than from Zech 1—8, is understandable in the context of the construction of Zechariah as the last prophet of Y H W H . This specific location in the (constructed) history of prophecy gives him the role of bringing prophetic revelation to its completion by offering a synthesis of the words of the preceding prophets. Such a significant role has the double function of conferring legitimacy on the postexilic prophet and of underlining the significance of the words of the previous prophets. Eventually, it is the value and the authority of the whole prophetic corpus (and more broadly of Judean written traditions) that is enhanced. Thus, the conception of the end of Y H W H ' S prophets can be seen as a means employed by Jerusalem scribes to advocate the study of their local traditions vis-a-vis Greek traditions in particular. Interestingly, the production of texts based on native traditions in order to oppose Hellenistic (political as well as cultural) domination appears to have parallels in other regions of the Near East under Hellenistic rule, as the Demotic Chronicle or the Potter's Oracle seem to attest in Egypt. 148 By endorsing 146 p o r i n s tance, Hallaschka (Haggai und Sacharja 1—8) dates the parenetical frame of Zech 1—8 either from the late Persian period or the Hellenistic period (esp. 311— 312, 322—323). This is not the place to date texts such as Zech 1:1—6 or Zech 7:7— 14. Note that some scholars place Zech 1:1—6 very late in the relative chronology of the prophetic texts, insomuch that it could be even later than (part of) Zech 9—14 (see for instance Schmidt, "La formation des 'Nebiim,' " 137—139). 147 We cannot exclude the possibility that the idea of the end of Y H W H ' S prophets after the activity of Zechariah could be older than the Ptolemaic period (see Zech 1:5b) but in any case, this conception was attributed a special significance during the Hellenistic period. 148 Cf. J. J. Collins, "Jewish Apocalyptic against Its Hellenistic Near Eastern Environment," BASOR 220 (1975), 27-36; J. Podemann Sorensen, "Native Reactions to Foreign Rule and Culture in Religious Literature," in T. EngbergPedersen, L. Hannestad, and J. Zahle (eds), Ethnicity in Hellenistic Egypt (Studies in Hellenistic Civilization, 3; Aarhus: Aarhus University Press, 1992), 164—181.

ZECHARIAH 9 - 1 4

291

this ethnocentric position, the Judean scribes seek to secure their own legitimacy and assert their authority in a context of cultural competition. In Zech 9—14, the opposition to Greek culture is expressed through the medium of dystopian images, which are associated with the period following the activity of the prophets of Y H W H (see in particular Zech 1 1 : 9 ) , and also via criticism of foreign mantic practices, especially related to Greek religion in the textual tradition preserved by the LXX. These negative images depict a time of troubles and confusion that will eventually come to an end with the achievement of the great restoration. CONCLUSION

Reading these three major themes in Zech 9—14 sociohistorically, and in the context of the book as a whole, I have offered three principal reasons for the expansion of the book of Zechariah with chs. 9—14. Crucially, these reasons are related to the rise of Hellenistic domination over Judea. Firstly, the collapse of Persian power, the end of centralized imperial authority over the ancient Near East, and the greater political instability it brought, led to the revision of the restoration scenarios of Zech 1—8 through the addition of dramatic war scenarios involving the Greeks in particular (Zech 9 : 1 3 ) . Secondly, socioeconomic changes in Judea brought about by Ptolemaic administrative policies, especially in tax collection, caused the modification of the positive image of the Judean community and its leaders in Zech 1—8 via the motifs of the bad shepherds and the mistreated flock. Thirdly, the emphasis on the study of literary "classics" in the Hellenistic world and the growing influence of Greek culture pushed Judean scribes to advocate the special status and authority of prophetic texts by advancing the conception of classical preexilic prophecy present in Zech 1—8; this was achieved by emphasizing the idea that the time of YHWH's prophets ended after the activity of Zechariah, an idea developed in association with a polemic against foreign cultic and mantic practices that can be connected to Greek religion in particular. By attributing chs. 9—14 to the prophet Zechariah, the Judean scribes of the Ptolemaic period integrated within their local traditions the impact of the rise of Hellenistic domination, so as to make sense of their new situation. They reshaped the memory of Zechariah as the last of Y H W H ' S prophets, who during the early Persian period not only announced Nevertheless, the interpretation of these texts remains a matter of debate; see A.-E. Veisse, "Les discours sur les violences dans l'Egypte hellénistique: Le clergé face aux révoltes," in J.-M. Bertrand (ed), La violence dans les mondes grec et romain (Paris: Publication de la Sorbonne, 2005), 213-223.

292

HERVÉ GONZALEZ

the restoration of Jerusalem and Judah through the rebuilding of the Jerusalem temple but also forecast the major changes of the period of Hellenistic rule. The use of several dystopian motifs in Zech 9—14, which are absent from Zech 1—8, serves to construct this period as a time of turmoil. At the same time, Utopian images of restoration were employed in order to interpret this period as a provisional one, immediately preceding the great intervention of YHWH that will bring the restoration of Jerusalem and Judah to its completion. The contrast between dystopian and Utopian depictions creates a radical break between the representations associated with the Hellenistic period and those of the restoration. As such, Zech 9—14 is to be understood mainly as an expression of opposition and criticism by the Jerusalem scribes toward the sociopolitical and cultural transformations taking place in Judea during the early Hellenistic period. This text also functions as a comfort to discontented Judeans by inviting them to live in the expectation of a better reality in the future. Furthermore, the construction of the figure of Zechariah as the last of YHWH'S prophets explains well why it is precisely his book that was expanded with oracles concerning changes in the Hellenistic period. The idea at stake was that the last of YHWH'S prophets would foretell the final dramatic events immediately preceding the glorious restoration. Thus, by adapting the oracles of the last prophet of YHWH to the Hellenistic context, the whole prophetic corpus was thus brought up to date. This updating of a large prophetic corpus is probably one of the main reasons why Zech 9—14 borrows more from other prophetic traditions than from Zech 1—8. This analysis increases our understanding of the history of Second Temple Judaism. It shows that tensions with Hellenistic power—at the very least on the ideological level—are not specific to the second century but have their roots in the Ptolemaic period.149 This can also be seen in other texts, for instance the Enochic Book of the Watchers. 150 In addition, it brings to the fore the importance of the sociohistorical developments of the Hellenistic period for understanding the last stages in the formation of the Hebrew Bible. At the methodological level, this study points to the 149 In particular, V. Tcherikover has made a similar suggestion on the basis of a historical reading of Josephus' tale of the Tobiads (Hellenistic Civilisation and the Jews, 126-134). 150 See G. W. E. Nickelsburg, / Enoch 1. A Commentaiy on the Book of 1 Enoch, Chapters 1—36; 81-108 (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001), esp. 62-63, 170; A. T. Wright, The Origin of Evil Spirits (WUNT, 198; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005), 23-50.

ZECHARIAH 9 - 1 4

293

relevance of associating a sociohistorical inquiry with literary approaches in the study of prophetic literature, especially difficult texts such as Zech 9—14.

A 7TH CENTURY B C E BULLA FRAGMENT FROM AREA D 3 IN THE 'CITY OF DAVID V S I L W A N

YUVAL GADOT, YUVAL GOREN A N D O D E D LLPSCHITS INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY, TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY This article reports on the discovery of a bulla fragment in A r e a D3 in the City of David/Silwan, Jerusalem. 1 The first excavation season at the site took place between February 4 and J u n e 14, 2013; the aim was to create an east-west section on the eastern periphery of the City of David/Silwan. The season w a s primarily devoted to understanding the seven-meter-thick d u m p layers that dated to the Early R o m a n period (1st century CE), estimated to be the R o m a n city's garbage d u m p (Reich and Shukron 2003; Bar-Oz et al. 2007; Zelinger 2010). 2 Previous field w o r k on the same layers of waste had

1 The excavations along the eastern slope of the 'City of David' ridge (license number G-4/2013) are directed by Yuval Gadot on behalf of the Sonia and Marco institute of Archaeology at Tel Aviv University and the Israel Antiquities Authority. The excavation team includes H. Machline (area supervisor) and O. Moshevich (wet-sifting supervisor), N. Nehama and R. Abu-Halaf (administration), A. Peretz (photographs), V. Essman and Y. Shmidov (surveying and drafting), S. 'Adalah (metal detection). We would also like to thank Prof. Christopher Rollston and Prof. David Vanderhooft for their valuable comments on an earlier draft of this paper. 2 While most scholars agree that the material within the earth layers dates only to the first century CE, there are disagreements regarding its formation processes. Some scholars claim that the layers are the city's actual garbage dump dating to the 1st century BCE (Bar-Oz et al 2007; Reich and Shukron 2003). Yet others claim that the remains were only discarded at the spot after the city of Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans (70 CE) as part of land clearance for the quarrying of natural rock on the slopes above (De-Groot 2012: 183—184).

295

296

YUVOL GADOT, YUVAL GOREN & ODED LIPSCHITS

noted the enormous volume of everyday artifacts such as ceramics, bones, seeds and charcoal, stone vessels, coins and metal objects. In order to produce a statistically valid sample of the finds and distribute them into different types, and also in order to study the formation process of the dump, careful wet-sifting was implemented. Dirt buckets were spread over a sifting net of 1mm and then carefully sprayed with water. When the soil dried, it was sorted for any items that might be related to human activity. T H E BULLA FRAGMENT

On April 9, 2013, while wet-sifting soil from the excavation, a small fragment of an Iron Age bulla was found (Reg. no. 13483/1, Locus 1027), unique among all the rest of the finds in these excavated layers, dated to the 1st century AD. It is the left segment of a bulla.

Signs of breakage are clearly seen on its backside. The narrow slot marks made by the bulla tying cord are visible. The color of the bulla is unified gray. When examining the section created by the breakage, the high quality and homogeneity of the clay can be observed; the fact that there are hardly any inclusions added is also obvious. In order to investigate the technology and possible provenience of the bulla, it was subjected to Microarcliaeological examination following the sampling procedure and examination method that were discussed elsewhere (Goren and Gurwin, in press). A shallow lamina, sizing only few mm, is peeled off from the broken facet of the bulla or from its reverse side under the stereomicroscope with the aid of a scalpel. The sample was set in a polyethylene mould and dried in an oven at 60"C for a few hours. Then it

THE BULLA FRAGMENT

297

was put in a desiccator and impregnated with Bueliler Epo-Thin epoxy resin under vacuum conditions. After curing, the resulting pellet was used for the preparation of a standard thin-section and subjected to routine petrologic examination under a polarizing microscope using X40 - X400 magnifications. Like all the contemporaneous bulla from Jerusalem that we examined so far (Arie et al. 2011; Goren and Gurwin, in press), the raw material of this bulla is readily identified as derived from terra rossa soil. The properties of the clay matrix in thin section indicate that it was exposed to high temperature of above 500"C, hence it was most likely fired or accidentally heated, most likely after it was detached from the document that it sealed. Although terra rossa soil is widespread along the JudeanSamarian hill area, it is exposed locally in the immediate surroundings of the site. Based on several considerations it has been suggested in the past that all the examined bullae were locally made. It should be emphasized that none of the nearly 300 bullae that we have examined so far were made of clay from other geological formations, such as the local Moza clay formation, even though it was extensively used for pottery production in Judali throughout the ages. This indicates that the entire assemblage of bullae from the City of David was most likely made locally around Jerusalem in a highly standardized manner. It appears that the bullae were used to seal local legal and administrative documents, rather than letters or other external dockets. We therefore join the opinion first presented by Avigad (1997: 33-39) and Shiloli (1986: 36-37) and we assume that Judahite bullae such as the item under discussion were used as sealings of legal documents. The quality of the seal used for stamping the bulla is excellent; it includes two written registers with two separation lines between the registers. It was probably elliptical in shape, and a double bezelled line, clearly visible on the lower left half of the fragment, indicates that it surrounded the entire seal. A reconstruction of the full encirclement of the bulla, based on the existing lines, attests to a vertical diameter of 8 mm. The transverse diameter, along the two separating lines, should be larger, since, according to the size of the existing letters, a round radius would not allow room for more than 4 letters in each register. Since we do not know the width of the seal, we cannot estimate the number of missing letters on the central and right side of the bulla.

298

YUVOL GADOT, YUYAL GOREN & ODED LIPSCHITS

THE LETTERS IMPRESSED ON THE BULLA

On the upper register, two letters are clearly seen: the left part of a qop ('p') and a complete mem ('0'). On the lower register two letters can be clearly observed: lamed ('V') and kap ('D'). The reading should, then, be: T W /

DP-

It is most probable that two private names were written in the two registers, as is the case in most other bullae: "(belonging to) Personal Name / (*son of) Personal Name" "[Vfxxx] ( p ) •pCxxxK'?] A private name might also be in the first register followed by a title in the second register: "(belonging to) Personal Name / title" "[Vfxxxxx] DpfxxxjfV] From the paleographical perspective the writing is similar to many of the bullae found in Stratum 10 of the City of David, and the script matches characteristics known from the late 8th to 7th/early 6th centuries BCE. 3 THE NAME IN THE UPPER REGISTER

Theoretically, in the first register, a name with a suffix derived from the root DpJ could be considered, but this root, especially as a suffix, is very rare among Judahite (Albertz and Schmitt 2012: 582), as well as Phoenician (Zadok 1988: 95; Benz 1972: 363), Ugaritic (Grondahl 1967: 168), and even Emorite (Huffmon 1965: 241) personal names. Theoretically a name derived from the root Dpi could also be considered, since according to Josh. 18:27 it was a geographical name in the territory of Benjamin, according to Num. 31:8 it was a name of a Midianite king (and cf. to Josh. 13:21), and it also appear as a personal name in 1 Chron. 2:43; 7:16. This name did not appear in epigraphic finds, however, until now, just like a name with a suffix derived from the root DpU? (cf. Zadok 1988: 69). The preferable suffix of the name in the upper register was well defined by Albertz (in Albertz and Schmitt 2012: 301, 306, cf. pp. 540, 550-551, cf. Noth 1966: 176-177) as derived from the root Dip QWM in Qal (as a subgroup of names that refer to divine attention express notion of movement toward a suffer). From this root three names appear in epigraphic finds: DpTIN i^Ahiqam) or in the abbreviated form DpriK

3 For example, the downstroke of the mem, which has a well-defined obtuse angle, may be earlier than more gently curving single strokes without a sharp angle, while the qop matches exactly what we know in the Siloam inscription, and the kap looks very much like the kap in the monumental inscription fragment from the City of David (Naveh 2000: 1-2).

THE BULLA FRAGMENT

299

(Ahiqdm) - "my [divine] brother has arisen," 4 •pirp (Yehdqdm) - "Yhwh has arisen," 5 Dpnty ( cA%pqdm) or in the abbreviated form Dplty ( cA%nqdm) -

"my [divine] help has arisen," or as derived from the same root but in hiphil (as a subgroup of names that express divine assistance in the sense of God's raising a fallen sufferer), with two names that appear in epigraphic finds:

•0)p ,! ?N ( jElydqim) - "El has raised,"6 and •0)p , irP (Yehdjdqim) or in the

Qiauqim) - "Yhwh has raised." 7 The name DpTIN i^Ahiqam) or in the abbreviated form DpriK

abbreviated form •('OpV

( ;'Ahiqam) is well known in epigraphic finds, and appears three times in ostraca from the late 7th or early 6th century BCE: irP^QU? p DpTIN in line 5 of ostracon 31 from Arad (Aharoni 1981, no. 31, p. 58-61); [•]pTIK in line 3 of the fragmentary ostracon discovered in the City of David (Stratum 10B, dated to the late 7th or early 6th century BCE, and see Shiloh 1981: 165; Naveh 2000, no. 3); • [Vu^Q p DpnK in line 1 of the ostracon from Horvat TJza (Beit Arieh 1985; 1986-87; 2007: 139-143; the reading of the last name follows Lemaire 1995: 221; 1997: 165; Na'aman 2012: 219). The letters p!"IN were incised on the body of a jar from Stratum VII (Building 521 in Area E) at Tel 'Ira, and it seems that Beit Arieh (1999: 409—410) correctly restored the name [n]pnK and pointed to what seems to be the beginning of another a mem at the end of the word. 8 This name appears 20 times in the Old Testament (2 Kgs. 22: 12, 25: 22; Jer. 26:24, 39: 14, 40: 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 14, 16, 41: 1, 2, 6, 10, 16, 18, 43: 6; 2 Chr. 34: 20). In three of these selections ''Ahtqäm is an important figure at the court of King Josiah and is active until the rule of King Jehoiakim. He has an important role in Josiah's cultic reform, and according to Jer. 26:24 he protected the Prophet Jeremiah from the people, a clear indication of his status and importance. 5 This name does not appear in the Old Testament, but cf. to the inverted order of the two components of the name — ¡"TOp1 (1 Chron. 2:41; 3:18). 6 This name appears twice in the Old Testament (2 Kgs. 23: 34; 2 Chr. 36: 4) as the former name of King Jehoiakim, but in most cases (2 Kgs. 18: 18, 26, 37, 19:2; Isa. 22:20, 36:3, 11, 22, 37:2) as one of the ministers in King Hezekiah's court, and once as a prophet in the days of Nehemiah (12:41). 7 Cf. to the rare name read by Lemaire (2007: 17) — häqim on a seal of unknown origin. 8 The name QpTIN was mentioned twice more in ostraca of unknown origin: "ITV p np'nx (Deutsch and Heizer 1995, no. 77:5, pp. 83-88) and Qpnx (ibid. no. 79:8, pp. 92—102). Four persons with the name QpTIN are known from seals and bullae, all of unknown origin: pia / QpTIX1? (scaraboid seal, Hecht Museum H-1744, Avigad and Sass 1997, no. 57, p. 69); ^ n p / •plnK>7 identical bullae, Hecht Museum H-2445 to H-2451, Deutsch and Heizer 1997, no. 94a, b, c; Avigad and Sass 1997, no. 430, p. 181); [inpnpq p / •plnK>7 (bulla, private collection, Deutsch 4

300

YUVOL GADOT, YUVAL GOREN & ODED LIPSCHITS

T h e n a m e •pin"' ('Yehoqam) is only k n o w n f r o m seals and bullae of u n k n o w n origin. 9 T h e n a m e D p l t y (^A^nqatri)^ w h i c h is the abbreviated f o r m of the n a m e •p'HTy is k n o w n f r o m a bulla excavated by Shiloh in the City of D a v i d (Area G, Stratum 10, dated to the late 7th and early 6th centuries B C E , a n d cf. to Shiloh 1986, no. 32, p. 29; S h o h a m 1994, no. 32, p. 58, and drawing p. 59) with the n a m e liTDQ / D p l t y . In all the other cases, this n a m e is k n o w n only f r o m seals and bullae of u n k n o w n origin. 1 0

1997, no. 24, p. 74-75); ptt> ][3] / Q p ' n ^ ] (bulla, private collection, Deutsch 1997, no. 25, p. 75-76; Avigad and Sass 1997, no. 431, p. 181). Five persons with the abbreviated name QpllN are also known from seals and bullae of unknown origin: irrtf7D / Opnx (seal, private collection, Avigad and Sass 1997, no. 61, p. 70); 3XI1X / Qpnx (bulla, private collection, Avigad 1986: no. 16, p. ; Avigad and Sass 1997, no. 432, p. 182); irr30 / |J]3 Qpnx"? (bulla, Israel Museum, Avigad 1986: no. 14, p. ; Avigad and Sass 1997, no. 433, p. 182); irr"n / Qpnx"? (bulla, private collection, Avigad 1986: no. 15, p. ; Avigad and Sass 1997, no. 434, p. 182). One more name was mentioned in an ostracon of unknown origin (Deutsch and Heizer 1995, no. 79: 8, pp. 92-102); Qpnx ri / 3 ntD^D1? (Deutsch 2003, no. 46, p. 75-76); ("f7)anx [1] / 3 opnx"? (Deutsch 2003, no.72, p. 106); irrnao / opnx"? (Deutsch 2003, no. 78, p. 107). The name also appears on two Aramaic seals — OiH "13 / Qpnx1? (Avigad and Sass 1997, no. 764, p. 286-287); 1 / 3 Qpn^ (Avigad and Sass 1997, no. 765, p. 287, with further literature). 9 For the seals and bullae from an unknown origin with the name Qpirr, see: a bulla with the name Qpirr (Avigad 1975, no. 11, p. 69); TUirr / Qpirr (ibid., no. 12, p. 69); Qpirr / i m s 1 ? (Avigad 1986, no. 12, p. 32); [Q]pirr / ... (ibid., no. 171, p. 94); ^n [•] / p u r p ] (Deutsch 1997, no. 51, p. 98); Qpirr / D^W^ (Deutsch and Lemaire 2000, no. 83, p. 89); Qpirr / irriffX1? (Deutsch 2003, no. 120, p. 141-142); Qpirr p / irrvttnrf? (ibid., no. 154, p. 167); Qpinp] / "7X3Ü"? (two identical and damaged bullae, ibid., nos. 176 a-b, p. 184-185); "lan . p / Qpirr1? (ibid., no. 193, p. 198); rr-DT / apirr"? (ibid., no. 194, p. 199); Q / pirr"? (four identical bullae, ibid., nos. 195a-d, p. 199-202); Qpirr / 'n... (ibid. no. 401, p. 360-361). 10 The name QpntV (^A^pqdm) and its abbreviated form Qp"IT3J ('Äzriqäm) are familiar in seals and bullae from unknown origin: QplTV (Avigad and Sass 1997, no. 1167, p. 442, with further literature; Deutsch and Lemaire 2000, no. 133, p. 140); "ID1D p / ap-TO1? (two identical bullae, and see Avigad 1986, no. 138, p. 82-83); [p] XpTU / apiTVp] (Avigad 1986, no. 139, p. 83); OS p / QpntV1? (Deutsch 1997, no. 75, p. 118-119); opnry / P pu"? (ibid., no. 83, p. 125-126, and cf. to another bulla with the same name, as published by Deutsch 2003, no. 335, p. 309-310); ] / 3 p©1? QplTV (ibid., no. 93, p. 133-134); '3n p / npnrv1? (Deutsch 2003, no. 302, p. 2 8 5 286).

THE BULLA FRAGMENT

301

The name ( j 'Elydqim) was discovered on two identical bullae excavated by Shiloh in the City of David - VniN p / •p'|!?N!? (Area G Stratum 10, dated to the late 7th and early 6th centuries BCE, and cf. to Shiloh 1986, nos. 29 and 30, p. 29; Shoham 1994, nos. 29 and 30, p. 58). The name is also well known from four identical stamp impressions on jar handles - p1\n / yiDp^KV (discovered at Ramat Rahel, Tel Beit Mirsim and Beit Shemesh, and cf. Grant and Wright 1939: 80; Vaughn 1999: 199; Albright 1932: Nos. 623, 860; Aharoni 1964: 33, Fig. 37: 6 and PI. 40: 4). In all the other 14 occurrences the name appears on seals and bullae of unknown origins. 11 The name D( , )p v i;T ('Yehojdqim), or its abbreviated form •('OpV ('Yauqim), are poorly represented in the epigraphic material. In line 3 of ostracon 31 from Lachish, as part of the five lines of names, a person named [Op^inf'' p ] was mentioned (and cf. to Ussishkin 1983, pi. XLI, and p. 159, and cf. to Dobbs-Allsopp et. al. 2005: 344-345). The other few occurrences of this name are from two bullae and two seals of unknown origin. 12 The conclusion from the above is that the names DpTIK (or in the abbreviated form DpriK), and Dp^K are the best candidates for the name in the first line, since they are the more attested in epigraphic finds, including finds from the City of David.

11 For the name •( 1 )p ll 7X ( ' E l y d q i m ) in seals and bellae of an unknown origin, see: "f^an 733) / •pl>7K>7 (seal, Avigad and Sass 1997, no. 6, p. 51-52); KT3J / Dp^X1? (seal, Hestrin and Dayagi-Mendels 1979, no. 91, p. 115); rPOTÜ p / Dp^X1? (Avigad 1969, no. 8, p. 4); i r r p ^ n 13] / Dp^X 1 ?] (Deutsch 1997, no. 30, p. 79-80, and cf. to two identical bullae published by Deutsch 2003, nos. 84a-b, p. 112-113); Qp^X 1 / 3 • ^ ( i b i d . , no. 87, p. 129); '3n • / p / 1 / ^iö (Deutsch 2003, no. 83, p. 1 1 1 112); "PO / •pl>7K>7 (ibid., no. 85, p. 114); "7X12? Dp / ^X1? (two identical bullae, ibid., 86a-b, p. 114-115); K^ri • / p^X1? (ibid., no. 87, p. 115-116); Qp^K / (two identical impressions on the same clay bulla, ibid., no, 198, p. 204—205); / .KID1? •p^X (ibid., no. 266, p. 258); .Dp / / rtop 1 ? (ibid., no. 342, p. 314-315). 12 For the name •(1)p1'irP (Yehoyäqlm) in the two bullae from an unknown origin, see: [•p] , irr / irTOX1? (Avigad and Sass 1997, no. 96, p. 80); J7W-p / Qp'irr (seal, ibid., no. 177, p. 104). Diringer (1934: 197, PI. X X 8a-b) published the seal and read it: a p r 13 / irrOT1?. Deutsch and Heizer (1995: 77-79) published a fragmentary steatite stone mould of a seal, which on its right side a mirror inscription was engraved: Dpi1.

302

YUVOL GADOT, YUVAL GOREN & O D E D LIPSCHITS

T H E N A M E / TITLE IN THE LOWER REGISTER

If the two letters at the end of the lower register are the suffix of a name, it is part of a group of names ending with the title "[Vo (king); among this group the most common name in epigraphic finds is "[VQnK ( ; 'Ahimelek) "my [divine] brother is king," 13 while all the other names - "[VQHK "[my] lord is king," "[VQVK "[my] god is the king," "[VQjn "The [divine] king is [my] mercy," 14 etc., are very rare in epigraphic material. If the two letters at the end of the lower register are a final component of a title, something that seems to be better represented in epigraphic material, then two well-known and common titles in the biblical material, as well as in epigraphic finds, can be reconstructed: "[Von p (the son of the king) or preferably, "[Von "T3y (the servant of the king). The title (in singular) "[Van " a y ' (cbd hmlk - the servant of the king) appears only six times in the Old Testament, and it ascribes to David, "the servant of Saul the king of Israel" (1 Sam. 29:3); Joab, "the king's servant" (2 Sam. 18:29); Jeroboam, "a servant of Solomon" (1 Kgs. 11:26); Asaiah, "the king's servant" (2 Kgs. 22:12, cf. to 2 Chr. 34:20), and Nebuzaradan, "a servant of the king of Babylon" (2 Kgs. 25:8).15 This title was meant to define the highest-ranking members of the court in the Kingdom of Judah from the end of the 8th century and during the 7th century BCE (SacherFox 2000: 53—63). Yet, this appellation was not intended to define a specific position. Rather, it was used to stress the special status of those who held it, their eminence over the other ministers, and their extraordinary loyalty to the king (Lipschits 2002). This title has an analogous meaning that can be seen from Ostracon 3 from Lachish and in the 16 Hebrew stamp impressions and seals, many of them well known (Lipschits 2002, Table 1 and Table 2, with a detailed list of finds and the relevant archaeological data). Evidently, any of the king's officials who defined himself as cbd hmlk ("servant of the king") might have worn a seal on his finger or around his 13

The name appears nine times in the Samaria Ostraca (Dobbs-Allsopp et. al. 2005, cf. citations on p. 769); once in an ostraca from Arad (72: 2, and cf. ibid., p. 93). It also appears on a stamped jar handle, bullae and seals of unknown origin, and see Avigad and Sass 1997, nos. 58-60, pp. 69-70; Deutsch and Heizer 1994, no. 8, p. 31; Deutsch and Heizer 1995, no. 79(4), line 4; Deutsch 1997, no. 18a-b, p. 69-70, and no. 26, p. 76; Deutsch and Lemaire 2000, no. 54, p. 60; no. 56, p. 62; Deutsch 2003, nos. 75-77, pp. 105-106; no. 108, p. 132; no. 288, p. 275. For the many occurrences of this name in epigraphic finds see also: Zadok 1988: 54; Davies 1991; 274-275; Albertz and Schmitt 2012: 578. 14 O n this name, see Shoham 2000, no. 3, p. 57. 15 This is not the place to discuss the name of Ebedmelech the Kushite, mentioned six times in Jeremiah (38: 7, 8,10, 11,12, 39: 16).

THE BULLA FRAGMENT

303

neck with this label on it. In this manner he would be expressing his absolute loyalty to the king, and the fact that he was close to him and had a unique status in his court. The title "[Van p ' (bn hmlk - the king's son) was meant to define the son of the reigning king or of a predecessor (Sacher-Fox 2000: 43—53). Five people with this title were mentioned in the Old Testament: "Joash, the king's son" was mentioned in 1 Kgs. 22:26 (and cf. to 2 Chr. 18:25); "Jotham, the king's son," who "was over the household" was mentioned in 2 Kgs. 15:5 (and cf. to 2 Chr. 26:21); "Jerahmeel, the king's son" was mentioned in Jer. 36:26; "Malchijah, the king's son" was mentioned in Jer. 38:6, and "Maaseiah, the king's son" was mentioned in 2 Chr. 28:7. In the epigraphic material 29 seals and stamp impressions are known; most of them are of unprovenanced origin. 16 SUMMARY

Finding the bulla in a controlled excavation, even out of its original context, is a welcome addition to the growing corpus of bullae, stamp impressions and Hebrew names dating between the late 8th and the early 6th centuries BCE. Although the name on the seal cannot be safely reconstructed, the seal's quality and the reconstructed title of its bearer leave no doubt that it was used by a high official in the royal Judahite administration. The names DpTIN (or in the abbreviated form •pnN), and Dp,!7K are the best candidates for the name in the first register, since they are the more attested in epigraphic finds, including finds from the City of David. The title 'I^Qn "UJT ("the servant of the king") is the best candidate for the reconstruction of a title in the second register. The best parallel to our reconstruction is a seal published by Vermeule (1970: 202, and cf. to Avigad and Sass 1997, no. 6, p. 51—52, with further literature). It is a seal with very similar characteristics — two inscribed registers, a double bezelled line, and with the name 'D,p',,7K,7' in the upper register and the title "[Van "Qy' in the lower one. Also the script is very similar, even if the seal is far from being identical to our bulla, since it is much larger and with a triple line field divider.

16

Deutsch 2003: 56-60, with a detailed list on p. 60.

Aharoni, Y. 1964. Excavations at Jkamat Jkalpel, Seasons 1961 and 1962. Rome. Aharoni, Y. 1981. Arad Inscriptions. Jerusalem. Ahituv, S. 2008. Echoes from the Vast: Hebrew and Cognate Inscriptions from the Biblical Period. Selected and Annotated. Jerusalem. Albertz, R. and Schmitt, R. 2012. Family and Household Religion in Ancient Israel and the Eevant. Winona Lake. Albright, W.F. 1932. The Excavations of Tell Beit Mirsim, Vol. I: The Pottery of the First Three Campaigns (AASOR 12). New Haven: 55—128. Arie, E., Goren, Y. and Samet, I. 2011. Indelible impression: petrographic analysis of Judahite bullae. In: The Fire Signals of Eachish, Studies in the Archaeology and History of Israel in the Eate Bronze Age, Iron Age and the Persian Period in Honor of David Ussishkin, eds. I. Finkelstein, N. Na'aman. Tel Aviv. Avigad, N. 1975. New Names on Hebrew Seals. EI 12: 66-71 (Hebrew). Avigad, N. 1986. Hebrew Bullae from the Time of Jeremiah— Remnants of a Burnt Archive. Jerusalem. Avigad, N. and Sass, B. 1997. Copus of West Semitic Stamp Seals. Jerusalem. Bar-Oz, G., Buchnic, R., Weiss, E., Weissbrod, L., Bar-Yosef, D. and Reich, R. 2007. "Holy Garbage": A Quantative Study of the City-Dump of Early Roman Jerusalem. Eevant Beit-Arieh, I. 1985. The Ostracon of Ahiqam from Horvat 'Uza. EI 18: 94— 96 (Hebrew). Beit-Arieh, I. 1986—87. The Ostracon of Ahiqam from Horvat 'Uza. Tel Aviv 13-14: 32-38. Beit-Arieh, I. (ed). 1999. Tel 'Ira: Stronghold in the Biblical Negev (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 15). Tel Aviv. Beit-Arieh, I. 2007. Horvat 'U^a and Horvat Rjidum: Two Fortresses in the Biblical Negev (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 25). Tel Aviv. Benz, F. L. 1972. Personal Names in the Phoenician and Punic Inscriptions. Rome. De Groot, A. 2012. Discussion and Conclusions. In: De Groot, A. and Bernick-Greenberg, H., Excavations at the City of David 1978-1985 Directed by Yigal Shiloh. Vol. VIIA: Area E: Stratigraphy and Architecture Text. (Qedem 53). Jerusalem: 141—184. Deutsch, R. 1997. Messages from the Past: Hebrew Bullae from the Time of Isaiah through the Destruction of the First Temple. Tel Aviv-Jaffa (Hebrew). Deutsch, R. 2003. Biblical Period Hebrew Bullae — The Josef Chaim Kaufman Collection. Tel Aviv-Jaffa. Deutsch, R. and Heizer, M. 1995. New Epigraphic Evidence from the Biblical Period. Tel Aviv-Jaffa. 304

THE BULLA FRAGMENT

305

Deutsch, R. and Heizer, M. 1997. Windows to the Vast. Tel Aviv-Jaffa. Deutsch, R. and Lemaire, A. 2000. Biblical Period Personal Seals in the Shlomo Moussaieff Collection. Tel Aviv-Jaffa. Dobbs-Allsopp, F.W., Roberts, J.J.M., Seow, C.L., and Whitaker, R.E. 2005. Hebrew Inscriptions. New Haven and London. Goren, Y. and Gurwin, S. In press. Royal Delicacy: Material Study of Iron Age Bullae from Jerusalem. The OldPotter's Almanac. Grant, E. and Wright, G.E. 1939.^4/» Shems Excavations 5. Haverford. Gröndahl, F. 1967. Die Personnamen der Texte aus Ugarit (Studia Pohl 1). Rome. Huffmon, H. B. 1965. Ammorite Personal Names in the Mari Texts. Baltimore. Lemaire, A. 1995. Epigraphie palestinienne: Nouveaux docmunents II — Décennie 1985-1995. Henoch 17: 209-242. Lipschits, O. 2002. On the Titles 'bd hmlk and ' b d j h w h . In: Japhet, S. (ed). Shnaton — An Annual for Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies XIII: 157-172. (Hebrew). Na'aman, N. 2012. A New Look at the Epigraphie Finds from Horvat 'Uza. Tel Aviv 39: 212-229. Naveh, J. 2000. Hebrew and Aramaic Inscriptions. In: Ariel, D. T. (ed). City of David Excavations; Final Report VI (Qedem 41). Jerusalem: 1—14. Reich, R. and Shukron, E. 2003. The Jerusalem City-Dump in the Late Second Temple Period. ZDPV119: 12-18. Sacher-Fox, N. 2000. In the Service of the King — Officialdom in Ancient Israel and Judah. Cincinnati. Shiloh, Y. 1981. The City of David Archaeological Project The Third Season - 1980. BA 44 (3): 161-170. Shiloh, Y. 1986. A Group of Hebrew Bullae from the City of David. IEJ 36: 16-32 Shoham, Y. 1994. A Group of Hebrew Bullae from Yigal Shiloh's Excavations in the City of David, in: Geva, H. (ed), Ancient Jerusalem Ikevealed, Jerusalem: 55—61 Ussishkin, D. 1983. Excavations at Tel Lachish, 1978-1983, Third Preliminary Report. Tel Aviv 10: 97—175. Vaughn, A. G. 1999. Theology, History and Archaeology in the Chronicler's Account of Hezekiah. Atlanta. Vermeule, C. 1970. Near Eastern, Greek and Roman Gems: A Recent Gift to the Collection. Bulletin of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston 68: 197—214. Zadok, R. 1988. The Pre-Hellenistic Israelite Anthroponymy and Prosopography (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 28). Leuven.

306

YUVOL GADOT, YUVAL GOREN & ODED LIPSCHITS

Zelinger, Y. 2010. Jerusalem, the Slopes of Mount Zion. Hadashot Arkheologiyot 122; available online at http://www.hadashotesi.org.il/report_detail_eng.aspx?id=1530&mag^_id=l 17

A N EMENDATION OF HAB 2:4A IN THE LIGHT OF HAB 1:5

THOMAS RENZ LONDON

n W S J m u ^ xb nVay run See, swollen, not straight is his throat in him! See, presumptuous, not right is his desire in him! WSJ mu^ kVh bysn jn Consider the doer: Is not his desire in him right?

1. INTRODUCTION

If texts were landscapes, with the amount of commentary written on them marked as elevations, Hab 2:4 would be an Ophel, a hill rising above its neighbourhood, 2 and this in spite of the fact that the book of Habakkuk has 1 Note that distinct final forms of letters only developed in the Persian period and were used with consistency only much later, see E. Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible (3rd ed.; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2012), 197. 2 Apart from the major commentaries and R. D. Haak, Habakkuk (VTSup, 44; Leiden: Brill, 1992), see J. A. Emerton, "The Textual and Linguistic Problems of Habakkuk II. 4 — 5 J T S 28 (1977), 1-18, for a valuable overview of some earlier studies, and subsequently, e.g., J. G. Janzen, "Habakkuk 2.2—4 in the Light of Recent Philological Advances," HTR 73 (1980), 53-78; J. M. Scott, "A New Approach to Habakkuk II 4-5A," VT 35 (1985), 330-340; K. Seybold, "Habakuk 2,4b und sein Kontext," in S. Kreuzer and K. Küthi (eds), Zur Aktualität das Alten Testaments: Festschriftfür Georg Sauer %um 65. Geburtstag (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1992), 99—107, reprinted in K. Seybold, Studien %ur Vsalmenauslegung (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1998), 189-198; A. Pinker, "Habakkuk 2.4: An Ethical Paradigm or a

307

308

THOMAS RENZ

plenty m o r e to offer in the area of textual and exegetical difficulties. 3 It m a y seem p r e s u m p t u o u s therefore to elevate the hill further by offering yet another solution to the p r o b l e m s of the first half of the verse. But it is clear that w e have not reached a consensus and m a y b e w e have not thoroughly explored the full range of options. F e w of the ingredients that m a k e up m y fresh proposal are entirely n e w but I have put them to a different use. A b o v e is the consonantal text underlying the MT, 4 followed by t w o of the translations w h i c h have the m o s t merit. 5 T h e first rendering is close to one offered b y Robert D. H a a k . 6 It echoes the swallowing motif in 1:13 and prepares for the t h e m e of not getting sated in the following verse. 7 Alternatively, can be understood as "desire" in 2:4—5. This and the only other occurrence of a verb VflJ), in N u m 14:44, lends support to the concept of "swollen with p r i d e " w h i c h gives us the second translation offered above. 8 T h e idea behind the m o r e concrete i m a g e of the first rendering Political Observation?" JSOT 32 (2007), 91-112. 3 See O. Dangl, "Habakkuk in Recent Research," CurBS 9 (2001), 131-168, for a general review which did not have the space to discuss this particular issue. An earlier, more detailed, review by P. Jocken, Das Buch Habakuk: Darstellung der Geschichte seiner kritischen Erforschung mit einer eigenen Beurteilung (BBB, 48; Koln-Bonn: Hanstein Verlag, 1977) rarely concerns itself with textual and linguistic matters and maybe for this reason does not offer anything much to contribute to this discussion. 4 B. Ego, A. Lange, H. Lichtenberger, and K. De Troyer (eds), The Minor Prophets (Biblica Qumranica, 3b; Leiden: Brill, 2005), 132, conveniently illustrates early textual diversity. The Targum probably does not represent a translation of a recoverable Hebrew text different from MT, see R. P. Gordon in The Targum of the Minor Prophets (The Aramaic Bible, 14; Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1989), 151. In this article Hebrew is usually written without vowels when the discussion concerns ancient forms of the text, but with vowels when the MT is cited. 5 These two are offered to suggest a range of possibilities on a spectrum. If I had to opt for one translation, I would pick one which contrasts a "swollen" with a "judicious" desire or "appetite". 6 "Behold, swollen, not smooth, will be his gullet within him" (Haak, Habakkuk, 57-59). 7 Cf. 2:16. F. I. Andersen, Habakkuk: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentaiy (AB, 25; New York: Doubleday, 2001), 208, interprets "throat" as an organ of (wicked) speech rather than (greedy) swallowing. 8 DCH offers three entries for a verb bap. The first ("swell") and second ("be heedless") try to account both for Hab 2:4 (as pual perfect or, emended, as qal participle) and for the hiphil in Num 14:44; cf. G. R. Driver, "Linguistic and Textual Problems: Minor Prophets. Ill," ]TS 39 (1938), 393-405, 395. The third ("become weak") only accounts for the pual perfect in Hab 2:4 and goes back to a

AN EMENDATION OF HAB 2:4A

309

might be that the throat gets blocked up with food guzzled up by the glutton until the blockage of a grotesquely extended throat leads to death. This fits with the promise of an end to the greedy grabbing of nations and peoples of which verse 5 speaks but this is arguably rather fanciful and it is not clear is whether ¡ T W ("straight/smooth") is an appropriate word to form such a contrast; a smooth/straight throat is perhaps not readily understood as an image for moderation and good health. It is maybe easier to contrast presumptuousness with a right, i.e., appropriate desire. The reference back to the hiphil verb in Num 14:44 in this context has a long history. 9 The existence of a related noun bsp to refer to a thickening or swelling of tissue and the designation "Ophel" for an (elevated?) area in the city of Jerusalem and one in Samaria seem equally relevant. They all point in the direction of the root, which has an equivalent in Arabic, being used for a swollen appetite or pride although both the use of a pual and the reference to something non-material is unique. Our brief discussion so far has hinted at the problems with the MT. The two most commonly noted problems in addition to the difficulties with nVflJ) are the lack of an antecedent in the verse to and the unsatisfactory relationship between this colon and the following (¡"PIT inJIQNH pHVI, "and a righteous one will live by his faithfulness"). Many readers look for a noun in the first colon to contrast with pHV and a verb indicating an outcome which contrasts with ¡TIT. In other words, they expect the first colon to say in one way or another that the wicked will perish. 10 The ancient versions offer a good deal of variety, some attesting a proto-Masoretic text, others suggesting confusion over its meaning. lQpHab offers a text similar to the MT for the first four words, mU7Vl KlV ¡"Un. The rest of the verse is missing because the manuscript is damaged at this point. 11 The LXX translator, beginning the verse with eav, apparently divided after but the Nahal Hever scroll and Aquila attest rnn (¡Sou). Glossing U7rooreiX>]TA[, the LXX may reflect HD^y for H^Sl?,11 a proposal taken up in HALAT, based initially on an emendation to the root It is not clear to me on what basis the possibility of III ^by = bsj? is contemplated. 9 See conveniently D. Barthélémy (ed), Critique textuelle de 1'Ancien Testament, vol 3: Ezechiel, Daniel et les 12 Prophètes, Kapport final du Comité pour l'analyse textuelle de l'Ancien Testament hébreu (OBO 50/3; Ftibourg: Éditions universitaires; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1992), 842-843. 10 Somewhat differently the Targum: "Behold, the wicked think that all these things are not so, but the righteous shall live by the truth of them." (Translation by R. P. Gordon, see above.) 11 Laurenz Reinke, Der Prophet Habakuk: Umleitung, Grundtext und Ueberset^ung nebst einem vollständigen philologisch-kritischen und historischen Commentar (Brixen: AI.

310

THOMAS RENZ

reading which has been adopted by several scholars and is also found in two medieval manuscripts cited by Kennicott, once in plene H^IS?.12 It is possible, however, that the LXX only reflects uncertainty about the meaning of H^SV. The same may be true for the substitution of N for 17. The earliest witness to this reading is the use of cmorla in the Nahal Hever scroll (cf. Aquila). 13 Like the D/1? metathesis, it has found some support among medieval exegetes. 14 Using the "711? root ("iniquity"), the Peshitta reads 1 for 3 and thus either reflects a Hebrew text which had H^IS?,15 or creatively interprets a difficult text. This, too, has found a following among modern scholars, beginning with Julius Wellhausen. 16 It is not obvious how one might get from rtal? to the Vulgate's rendering "incredulus" (which in Isa 21:2 is used to render one of the two occurrences of 713). What is clear is that readers have struggled with the first half of this verse for a long time. With reference to the textual diversity in the versions, Andersen suggests, "In the face of such chaos, all one can do is resign to the likelihood that the original text is irretrievably lost or else struggle to make the best of the MT as it is." 17 Others, of course, more boldly have sought to retrieve the original text by way of various proposed emendations. 18 Today this is usually done in the spirit expressed by J. J. M. Roberts, "Any interpretation.. .will be clouded by a certain amount of hypothetical guesswork." 19 It is in this spirit that I offer the following proposal. While I

Weger's Buchhandlung, 1870), 27, claims that Jerome used "retraxerit te," which would correspond to LXX. This reading is not reflected in (later editions of) the Vulgate. 12 See Barthélémy, Critique textuelle, 3:841-42. Cf. HALOT entry f]1?}?. Andersen, Habakkuk, 208, wonders whether in fact the root f]1?}? is behind Aquila's rendering vw^eÀeuojiévou ("being sluggish"), cf. Isa 51:20. 13 The MT only attests the form VîJN but l Q I s a a has the feminine form nbflN (rfpflN) in Isa 29:16. 14 Cf. Barthélémy, Critique textuelle, 3:843. For a more recent juxtaposition of "puffed up" and being "in darkness" see the Me'am Lo'ez anthology: Shmuel Yerushalmi, The Book of Trei-Ajar, vol. 2\ Micah — Malachi (trans, and adapted by Zvi Faier; New York: Moznaim, 1997), 170-171. 15 So already Reinke, Der Prophet Habakuk, 30. 16 Julius Wellhausen, Ski^en und Vorarbeiten — Funftes Heft: Die kleinen Propheten uberset^t, mitNoten (Berlin: Georg Reimer, 1892), 163. 17 Andersen, Habakkuk, 209. 18 See above n. 2 for literature reviewing earlier proposals, cf. Barthélémy, Critique textuelle, 3:841. 19 J. J. M. Roberts, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah (Louisville, Ky.: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1991), 111.

AN EMENDATION OF HAB 2:4A

311

am convinced that it is possible to make sense of the MT, the difficulties invite exploration of other options. 2. RE-READING HAB 2:4A

The opening word of Hab 2:4 signals the citation of the vision of which w . 2—3 spoke. In a recent full discussion of Hjn, Cynthia L. Miller-Naude and Christo H. J. van der Merwe classified Hab 2:4 with verses in which a speaker draws attention to something newsworthy. This is an avenue I wish to pursue in spite of the fact that the classification does not actually fit the version of the text reflected in the MT.20 The representative example for this category is Josh 24:27 which they render "Consider this stone, it will be a witness against us." 21 An analysis along those lines would strengthen our expectation that a noun should follow Hjn, assuming that Hjn not only signals the beginning of the vision but within the vision presents a specific object to the attention of the addressees. 22 There are a few possibilities for emendation which would offer the required noun. The best known may be Wellhausen's Viyn ("the evildoer") with possible support from the Peshitta and maybe the Targum (see above). This could be linked to the use of the root Viy in v. 12. While the addition of the direct article ¡1 can be explained easily, either by different word division (cf. LXX) or by assuming haplography, the deletion of ¡1 at the end of the word is harder to explain. The l/S interchange could not have happened orally, as the reconstructed word sounds very different from the Masoretic word, nor is it known as a frequently made copying error although 1 and 3 are similar in some scripts. But while btyil fits the context well, it is maybe not likely that nVflJ) could have arisen from it by accident.

20 This was conceded by C. H. J. van der Merwe, who is responsible for this part of the essay, in personal conversation. He now calls his classification erroneous, while observing that there is no ready alternative classification for the text as it stands. 21 C. L. Miller-Naude and C. H. J. van der Merwe, "Hinneh and Mirativity in Biblical Hebrew," HS 52 (2011), 53-81. A good example with a living object is Ps 52:9 [ET, 7], where one might translate "Consider this man who has not made God his stronghold..." 22 Cf. F. I. Andersen, "Lo and Behold! Taxonomy and Translation of Biblical Hebrew H3n," in M. F. J. Baasten and W. Th. van Peursen (eds), Hamlet on a Hill: Semitic and Greek Studies Presented to Professor T. Muraoka on the Occasion of his Sixty-Fifth Birthday (OLA, 118; Leuven: Peeters, 2003), 25-56, on the observation that H3H "is best classified as a presentative" (p. 52).

312

THOMAS RENZ

Wilhelm Rudolph suggested a metathesis of the first two letters, a proposal which was taken up in modified form by Klaus Seybold. 23 He took the resulting noun nV|32 to mean "punishment" with debatable support from Isa 65:7; Pss 17:4; 28:4; and 109:20. Aaron Pinker objects that "'punishment' would hardly balance pHÎJ in the following hemistich" 24 but Rudolph and Seybold would be able to deflect this criticism by pointing out that on their proposal the opening words are the heading and pHÎJ is in parallelism either with mu?"1 or ¡TIT. Pinker is right, however, to observe that the support for the translation "punishment" is very tenuous and this must be one reason for the low take-up of Rudolph's emendation by other scholars. This weakness likely led Seybold to the proposal of emending further to H!7',!?2 (only attested in Isa 16:3).25 This further emendation incorporates tib which would thus disappear. Rudolph retained tib but assumed that W i Ù had been lost through haplography. In both cases, the emendation is as extensive as Wellhausen's was. I believe that a less drastic emendation with a more straightforward understanding of the root byù is possible. While rejecting Rudolph's emendation, with good reason, Pinker notes that four words in 1:5—6 are echoed in Hab 2:3—4 and accepts that this lends "support for understanding ¡1 bùy as ¡1 byb through homophonic correspondence." 26 He reckons, however, that "the nebulous nature of the referent for nbys vis-à-vis the very specific pHÎJ in the parallel hemistich" is a "major problem." 27 But if the root byù, like pHÎJ, is traced back to ch. 1, it is not nebulous at all. Interestingly, byù is used in an initially mysterious way, namely without an obvious subject, in Hab 1:5 and only subsequently clarified (YHWH is doing an incredible deed by way of Babylonian 23 Rudolph, Micah-Nahum-Habakuk-7,efanja (KAT, 13/3; Gütersloh: Mohn, 1975), 212-213; Seybold, "Habakuk 2,4b," 206. Seybold leans towards an emendation to n t 7 , t 7 3 (attested in Isa 16:3) which gives "Urteil" (judgement) for Rudolph's "Strafe" (punishment). This emendation incorporates the third word (NV) which would thus disappear, cf. Nahum, Habakuk, Zephanja (ZBK:AT 24/2; Zürich: Theologischer Verlag, 1991), 66. Rudolph suggested instead that U^N1? had been lost through haplography. 24 Cf. Pinker, "Habakkuk 2.4," 98. 25 This gives him "Urteil" (judgement) for Rudolph's "Strafe" (punishment), cf. his Nahum, Habakuk, Zephanja (ZBK:AT 24/2; Zürich: Theologischer Verlag, 1991), 66. 26 Pinker, "Habakkuk 2.4," 99. The relevant words in 1:5-6 are 1HDJH IHQPini (in

2:3 nnnniT) bv3 byb (in 2:4 rteu), w a n n (in 2:4 irmnN3), and van (in 2:4 nan). 27 Pinker, "Habakkuk 2.4," 99. He considers a reference to "Babylon's treament of Judah."

AN EMENDATION OF HAB 2:4A

313

expansion). A reference to the divine agent is suitable here in 2:4, if one follows the word-divisions which Pinker suggests. 28 Seeing an allusion back to 1:5 means of course that the root retains its common meaning. This removes the need to propose elaborate emendations to find a reference to judgement or punishment in this first colon. If the second word of the verse was indeed originally a participle or a noun, it seems likely that it had the direct article attached. As indicated above, the direct article might have been lost either through haplography or through different spacing.29 A case can be made either way but the latter is assumed in the textual version presented at top of this essay, cf. LXX but interpreting |il as functionally equivalent to Hjin. More importantly, I propose another re-spacing of characters at the end of the emended word to produce KVn Vyan. If, with Vyan Jil, the vision originally referred to the doer of the deed in Hab 1:15, the statement 13 m i y nV is entirely implausible and must have been understood as a rhetorical question, most likely marked by H.30 In other words, the earlier text would have read JH KVH VyflH,31 unless the later text is the result of haplography in which case the earlier would have read KVn ilVyan |il. "The one who does it" (ilVyan) would be perfectly possible here but Vyan ("the doer") works equally well, as the context of the book makes it clear what deed is in view, and assuming a different word division in two places has the advantage of keeping the same number of letters as the received text. 28 Pinker proposes reading Nbn VajJn jn for N1? nbaj? run. Following Scott's earlier proposal, he argues that VflJJn refers to Jerusalem's fortified acropolis, the Ophel ("Habakkuk 2.4," 100). This emendation is less invasive than mine, only requiring a re-spacing of characters, but it relies on attributing an unusual meaning to both Ophel (finding a reference to the city's rulers) and the verbal phrase (interpreting it as "being satisfied with something"). In addition, he proposes a further emendation in 2:4b to make for a better parallelism with his new understanding of 2:4a. 29 Whether or not ancient Hebrew texts were written in scriptio continua, it is clear that the spacing was often minimal and sometimes ambiguous, cf. Tov, Textual Criticism, 208-209, 252. 30 An interrogative sentence follows a H3H clause also, e.g., in 2 Kgs 10:4; Ezek. 13:12; 17:10. Good parallels for the use of H3H to present something about which a negative statement is made can be found in Ps. 40:10 [ET, 9]; 52:9 [ET, 7] and Ezek. 4:14. 31 It would be possible to adopt my reading of the text without any re-spacing of characters, "Behold a doer: is not his desire in him right?", but I do not consider it likely that this rhetorical question could have remained unmarked and "doer" would most likely have had a direct article.

314

THOMAS RENZ

If my overall conjecture is right, the tiny shift of ¡1 on the page, marking a different word division, may have prompted the other changes. The misreading of the grapheme H as belonging to rather than makes little difference to merely making the object explicit albeit in a general way, but crucially loses the interrogative, turning the rhetorical question into its opposite. Once the text was understood as making a negative statement about someone, a different referent had to be found than the one doing an amazing deed in 1:5. Hbys no longer made sense and Num 14:44 may have come to the rescue in suggesting nVflJ). These deliberations point towards understanding as "desire" and mU^ as judging this desire to be "right" whether in the sense of morally "upright" or in the sense of "straightforward" as opposed to twisted. While this has been a common way of reading the phrase, it needs to be defended in the face of Janzen's strong objection to any translation which renders the verb mU?"' (rnU7j) similarly to how one might render the adjective ¡ T W (rHU^).32 He claims that "verbal forms in every other instance have to do, literally or figuratively, with locomotion along a path, or making straight such a path." 33 In fact, only fifteen other occurrences of the qal are attested, three of which are outside the Hebrew Bible. 34 Of the biblical occurrences outside Habakkuk all but one are with the phrase "in the eyes o f ' which refers to a positive value judgement. I am not at all convinced that in any of these cases locomotion is implied. 35 This leaves the single non-metaphorical instance, 1 Sam 6:12, which speaks of young bulls going straight on the road to Beth-Shemesh. This is hardly sufficient evidence to demand a distancing of the verb in the qal from the related nominal and adjectival forms, and especially so in the light of the fact that only one of the extra-biblical occurrences suggests locomotion, namely llQShirShabb which in col. vii refers to the celestial chariotry not turning but going straight.36 Sir 39:24 claims that to the faithful God's ways are straight. While Janzen's objection is to readings of the Masoretic text and therefore applies only indirectly to our discussion. The underlying consonantal text could of course be read as either verb or adjective. But it will be useful to show that the Masoretic reading of the consonantal text can be retained without harm to the interpretation offered here. 33 Janzen, "Habakkuk 2:2-4," 63; cf. Pinker, "Habakkuk 2.4," 101 (n. 39). 34 Sir 39:24; 4QJub d 21:15; llQShirShabb 3:6 are listed in DCH. 35 Janzen claims an implicit reference to a "way" or "path" that is straight but the noun most commonly used is "OT There is not a single instance of a (metaphorical) path or way being straight in someone's eyes. 36 I am not entirely sure that this is the reference given in DCH, as I cannot correlate "llQShirShabb 3:6," which apparently uses the reference system in 32

AN EMENDATION OF HAB 2:4A

315

it is of course implied that the faithful will walk in God's ways, the reference itself is not to locomotion or to a path being made straight but to the contrast between smooth ways and ways which are full of pitfalls. 4QJub d speaks of Abraham asking Isaac to carry out God's commandment so that he will be "upright" in all his deeds.37 In sum, while the verb in the qal can refer to locomotion, the standard dictionaries are correct in glossing "be straight, be upright, be level, be right" alongside "go straight ahead," as frequently no locomotion is implied. As with the adjective, the reference to something being even, level, straight, or right need not imply a moral judgement although it can do so. Some have objected to such a reading on the grounds that, unlike the "heart" (3t?/:n,7),38 ' 'desire" is nowhere else said to be, or not to be, mU7\39 But the phrase "upright heart" (33*7 usually characterises in effect the whole life of a person, 40 while the reference here may be more specific. The question at hand is not whether YHWH is, generally speaking, "upright" but whether the deed for which he claims responsibility (cf. 1:5) and which had such a disastrous impact on Judah was done with a crooked desire.41 In other words, the question is whether, in using the Babylonians, YHWH's passion is straightforward, presumably in the sense of truly desiring justice to be done, or whether his desire is in fact twisted, anger gone out of control. The question was voiced in 1:12 where the prophet expresses his anguished hope that the Babylonians will not make a complete end of the people of God (niQJ N*?)42 but were ordained for 02U7Q. The "why?" (e.g., Newsom, Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice, to which I do not have access, to The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition. The Song is based on Ezekiel 1 which does not use the verb " W in this context. 37 See F. Garcia Martinez and E. J. C. Tigchelaar (eds), The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition, vol 1: 1Q1 - 4Q273 (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 466-467. The reference seems to be Jub 21:12 rather than 21:15 (which is not extant in this manuscript), as given in DCH. 38 31?: J o b 33:3; Ps 7:11 [ET, 10]; 11:2; 32:11; 36:11 [ET, 10]; 64:11 [ET, 10]; 94:15; 97:11; 125:4. M 1 ?: Deut 9:5; 2 Kgs 10:15; 1 Chr 29:17; 2 Chr 29:34; Ps 119:7. 39 E.g., Haak, Habakkuk, 58. 40 Some of the uses with 331? in particular (2 Kgs 10:15 and 1 Chr 29:17; 2 Chr 29:34) can be read as referring more specifically to particular decisions or deeds rather than a whole life commitment but the latter seems implied in the great majority of cases. 41 While is used in various contexts to refer to the whole person, the point here is that in characterising a person as righteous i b / n b is used but not so that its more specific reference to desire is more likely. 42 The first person plural in MT is also found in LXX and probably not the

316

THOMAS RENZ

1:3 and 1:12) is at least as important in Habakkuk's complaint as the "how long?" (1:2). On the proposed emendation the revelation in 2:4 would begin to give reassurance on the "why" question, just as 2:5 begins to address the "how long" question. Neither gives a full answer but 2:4 would indicate that there is an upright desire behind the raising of the Babylonians, as 2:5 indicates that the Babylonian evil cannot last for ever. It is also worth considering whether the use of mU?'1 with is implicitly in contrast to a that is dislocated, i.e., alienated, as in Jer 6:8; Ezek 23:17, 18 (twice), 22, 28 (with ypV^pj). This would further strengthen the link with 1:12 which appeals to the relationship between YHWH and his people, as the prophet implores that there has to be a positive purpose to the calamity. While YHWH's reply in 2:4 does not in fact claim such a positive purpose, an affirmation of right intentions could specifically be a claim that YHWH's self is still directed towards Israel, not turned away in alienation from his people. But this must remain tentative, as to my knowledge " W and Vp"1 are nowhere explicit antonyms. A final question needs to be considered. Does YHWH have a U723? with reference to The construct mrp is not attested and the use of God is rare and sporadic, but it is not unknown, especially in the prophetic literature where most such occurrences are found. Nearly always the context is the one just mentioned above, namely of intense, passionate aversion, although a positive use is found, e.g., in Isa 42:1. 43 The more common use of in connection with God's passionate rejection of his people may well provide a background to its use here in Hab 2:4, even without the more specific claim that 1U7'' is the antonym of yp\ 3. CONCLUSION

Habakkuk experienced the devastating consequences of Babylonian hegemony for the rule of law and order within Judah as elsewhere (1:2—4). The Torah, meant to safeguard God's justice, was compromised under an onslaught that had been identified in an earlier prophecy (1:5—11, probably cited in the complaint ad sensum in a new and more scathing form) as God's work: "Look at the nations and observe, and astonish yourselves, be

result of a scribal emendation, cf. C. McCarthy, The Tiqqune Sopherim and Other Theological Corrections in the Masoretic Text of the Old Testament (OBO, 36; Freiburg: Universitätsveriag; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1981), 105-111. 43 Cf. the entries by C. Westermann's in THAT 2:71-96 (cols. 91-92) and H. Seebass in TDOT 9:497-519 (p. 516).

AN EMENDATION OF HAB 2:4A

317

astonished! For one is about to do a deed in your days (which) you would not believe, if it were told" (1:5).44 The prophet argues that surely the use of Babylonian violence must ultimately be "for justice" (1:12) but there was no sign of this. YHWH's toleration of evil raises the question whether the divine desire is truly for justice or aims for the destruction of YHWH's people. Habakkuk's complaint is that YHWH's work seems to be destructive and not at all conducive to the victory of justice. On the reading suggested here the answer, the vision on the tablet, comes by way of a description of all three parties, YHWH in 2:4a ("Consider

the doer: Is not his desire in him right?"), the righteous in 2:4b who is promised life in continuing faithfulness, and the proud Babylonians in 2:5 who are compared to someone who in his greed had too much to drink and as a result will stumble and be overcome, as elaborated in 2:6ff. If the Hjin of the earlier prophecy pointed to YHWH as the cause of the rise of the

Babylonians (1:6), the second revelation, introduced by JH, suggests that YHWH's desire in doing this was right and offers this as the ground for the hope and promise that things will turn out all right in the end.45

44 For reasons why ch. 1 should be read as a unified complaint which cites an earlier oracle rather than a dialogue, see, e.g., M. H. Floyd, "Prophetic Complaints About the Fulfillment of Oracles in Habakkuk 1:12-17 and Jeremiah 15:10-18," JBL 110 (1991), 397-418, and idem, Minor Prophets: Part 2, (FOTL, 22; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2000), 85-86; G. T. M. Ptinsloo, "Reading Habakkuk as a Literary Unit: Exploring the Possibilities," OTE 12 (1999), 515-535; D. CleaverBartholomew, "An Alternative Approach to Hab 1,2-2,20," SJOT 17 (2003), 2 0 6 225. There were already 19th century interpreters who considered w . 5—11 an earlier oracle (e.g., Giesebrecht, Wellhausen) although they did not offer an integrated reading of the chapter. 45 I want to thank my friends Karl Moller, Chris Thomson, Steffen Jenkins and Matthew Mason for casting their critical eyes over this essay, helping me to present the argument more clearly.

JERUBAAL, JACOB AND THE BATTLE FOR SHECHEM: A TRADITION HISTORY*

ZEV FARBER, EMORY UNIVERSITY

INTRODUCTION Jerubaal appears in the book of J u d g e s as an alternative n a m e for Gideon. M a n y scholars agree that the identification between Gideon and Jerubaal is not original but derives f r o m the redactional combination of two originally distinct accounts, one relating to Gideon and the other to Abimelech. Whether an independent account of Jerubaal ever existed remains a matter of debate. 1

* This article had its beginnings in a seminar paper I wrote for David Petersen of Emory University. I thank him for his initial comments, which were of great help in turning the paper into an article. My thanks also go to my advisor Jacob Wright for reading through many versions of this text and suggesting changes, as well as to Reinhard Kratz for discussing a number of finer redactional points with me over e-mail. For help with the archaeological questions, my thanks go to Avi Faust for going over these—and many other—archaeological minutia with me during our conversations on the dig at Tel Eton. Finally, I thank the anonymous reviewers for JHS and its associate general editor, Christophe Nihan, for their many valuable critiques and suggestions. 1 For a fuller discussion of the secondary nature of the identification between Gideon and Jerubaal, see H. Haag, "Gideon-Jerubbaal-Abimelek," 2^41^79 (1967), 305-14; also B. Lindars, "Gideon and Kingship," JTS 16 (1965), 315-26. For a critique of this position, see J. A. Emerton, "Gideon and Jerubbaal," JTS 27 (1976), 289—312. For an alternative approach to the problem, see B. Halpern, "The Rise of Abimelek," HAR 2 (1978), 79-100. For a recent attempt to reconstruct the develop-ment of the Gideon saga, see K. J. Murphy, Mapping Gideon: An Exploration of Judges 6—8 (Ph.D. diss., Emory University, 2011). Graeme Auld suggests the interesting possibility that instead of a conflation of 319

320

ZEB FARVER

In this article, I will argue that there w a s an i n d e p e n d e n t account of Jerubaal. Isolating various ripples and fissures in the biblical text, I will attempt to trace the contours of a once-independent J e r u b a a l tradition, w h i c h focused on this character's domination of the city or area of S h e c h e m . 2 I will argue that the older J e r u b a a l tradition w a s u s u r p e d by J a c o b at a time w h e n traditions about this patriarch's conquest of C a n a a n w e r e gaining currency. Eventually, w h e n the idea of a conquering patriarch had fallen out of favor, this tradition reemerged as part of the highly controversial account of the rape of D i n a h in Genesis 34.

PART 1: THE ABIMELECH ACCOUNT Like m a n y biblical narratives, the A b i m e l e c h account (Judg 9) s h o w s evidence of expansion. 3 S o m e of this g r o w t h seems to derive f r o m multiple two traditional chieftain characters, what occurred here is that a rather late character (Gideon) was created by the editor of the book of Judges and attached to the older character (Jerubaal). See A. G. Auld, "Gideon: Hacking at the Heart of the Old Testament," VT 39/3 (1989), 257-67. Although it is a provocative argument, I do not find it convincing. The story of Gideon focuses on his battle against Midianite invaders and much of the action occurs in the Transjordan. However, once the transition is made to Jerubaal's son, Abimelech, the entire story takes place in Shechem and its surrounding provinces. This implies that each main character, Gideon and Jerubaal, had his own enemy, Midian and Shechem respectively. How old the Gideon tradition is in comparison with the Jerubaal tradition is difficult to say, but it seems that when the editor merged Gideon and Jerubaal, Gideon already had a story of his own, one unlike the (lost) Jerubaal account, which probably had to do with his subjugation of Shechem, as will be seen later on in the article. Additionally, the Gideon account itself seems multilayered, hardly evidence of its being a creation out of whole cloth by the late editor of Judges. In fact, the most likely solution to the Zeev-Orev/Zebah-Tzalmu-nah doublet is that there were multiple Gideon traditions available to the editor of the Gideon account. 2 For a tradition historical analysis of all the Shechem traditions, see E. Nielsen, Shechem\A Traditio-HistoricalInvestigation (2d ed; Copenhagen: G.E.C. Gad, 1959). 3 This article is not the place for a survey of past reconstructions of this narrative's textual growth or for offering a full, verse by verse, reconstruction of my own. The article will offer some observations about the relative chronology of the narrative and its development and engage the relevant scholars when it does so. For some attempts at reconstructing the layers of the Abimelech story, see G. F. Moore, Judges (ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1895), 237-38; W. Richter, Traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen %um Richterbuch (BBB, 18; Bonn: Hanstein, 1963), 246—318 (314—16); F. Crüsemann, Der Widerstand gegen das Königtum: Die antiköniglichen Texte des Alten Testaments und der Kampf um den frühen israelitischen Staat

JERUBAAL, JACOB AND THE BATTLE FOR SHECHEM

321

Abimelech traditions and some f r o m redactional supplements aimed at harmonizing the Gideon and Jerubaal/Abimelech cycles. I will begin with the latter category.

HARMONIZING SUPPLEMENTATION T h e story of Gideon's destruction of the B a ' a l idol and his subsequent n a m e change to Jerubaal (Judg 6:25—32) appears to be a prime example of a harmonizing supplement. T h e story functions to explain w h y Gideon is also k n o w n as J e r u b a a l — a n explanation necessary for any editor attempting to combine the traditions about the two characters. 4 O n e less evident case, but (WMANT, 49; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1978), 19-42; V. Fritz, "Abimelech und Sichern i n j d c . ix," VT 32/2 (1982), 129-44; U. Becker, Richtest und Königtum: Redadionsgeschichtliche Studien %um Richterbuch (BZAW, 192; Berlin: De Gruyter, 1990), 184-208; E. Würthwein, "Abimelech und der Untergang Sichems: Studien zu Jdc 9," in E. Würthwein, Studien %um Deuteronomischen Geschichtswerk (BZAW, 227; Berlin: De Gruyter, 1994), 12-28; I. de Castelbajac, "Histoire de la redaction de Juges IX: une solu-tion," VT 51/2 (2001), 166-85; W. Groß, Richter: Übersetzt und ausgelegt (HTKAT; Freiburg: Herder, 2009), 485-94; E. Jans, Abimelech und sein Königtum: Diachrone und synchrone Untersuchungen Ri 9 (ATSAT, 66; St. Ottilien: EOS Verlag, 2001); R. Müller, Königtum und Gottes herrsch aft: Unter suchungen %ur alttestamentlichen Monarchiekritik (FAT 2, 3; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004), 93— 118; R. G. Kratz, The Composition of the Narrative Books of the Old Testament (trans. J. Bowden; London: T&T Clark, 2005), 170-73, 203-4, 208; and N. Na'aman, "A Hidden Anti-Samaritan Polemic in the Story of Abimelech and Shechem (Judges 9)," BZ 55 (2011), 1-20. For some attempts at a synchronic reading, see E. Assis, Self Interest or Communal Interest: An Ideology of leadership in the Gideon, Abimelech and ]ephthah Narratives (Judg 6-12) (VTSup, 106; Leiden: Brill, 2005), 1-173; J. L. Story, "Jotham's Fable: A People and Leadership Called to Serve," ]ournal of Biblical Perspectives in Leadership 2/2 (2009), 29-50. For a social scientific approach to the text, see N. Steinberg, "Social-Scientific Criticism: Judges 9 and Issues of Kinship," in G. A. Yee (ed), Judges and Method: New Approaches in Biblical Studies (2nd ed.; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2007), 46-64. 4 That the Ba al account should be seen as a late editorial gloss has been argued by a number of scholars. See, for example: Y. Amit, Judges: Introduction and Commentary (Mikra LeYisrael; Tel Aviv: Am Oved, 1999), 158 (Hebrew); Becker, Richter^eit, 151—160; Gross, Richter, 373—74; and Kratz, Composition, 203—4. A different approach was taken by Albert de Pury, who argues that although the final form of the passage shows evidence of Deuteronomistic editing, an earlier form of the passage, which he reconstructs, was actually a part of one of the oldest strands in Judges, which dealt with the weakness and inevitable defeat of Ba al. See A. de Pury, "Le raid de Gédéon (Juges 6, 25—32) et l'histoire de l'exclusivisme yahwiste,"

322

Zeb F a r v e r

more important for the purposes of this study, appears at the end of the Gideon cycle and is focused on the place of residence and action of the protagonists. Since Gideon is said to have ruled "Israel" (or at least Manasseh and Ephraim) from Ophrah, and Abimelech was king of Shechem (ruling from Arumah), this discontinuity in place of residence required some explanation. The connection is built by the addition of a verse to the end of the Gideon cycle (Judg 8:30—32). ova OTOU? vn riruVi ^ iV vn n i s i a ^ r r ? ian? iV-n-rb;

w

nw ïu^ai(ià

T^anN inurnN

ja w r m ;

n r m a U7NV-I3 pjna na;i

30. Gideon had seventy sons, children of his loins, for he had many wives. 31. And his concubine, who lived in Shechem, also gave birth to a son, and he named him Abimelech

TON U7NV - o p s - o i f i roiü 32. Gideon son of Joash died ntyn n « m a y s

at a ripe old age, and was buried in the sepulcher of his father Joash in Ophrah of the Abi-Ezrites.

Verse 30 presents a standard description of a successful chieftain in the book of Judges. Numerous offspring is an indication of success in this work, and this same measure of success appears in the description of Yair (Judg 10:4), Ibzan (Judg 12:9) and Abdon (Judg 12:14). Marking a chieftain's grave, as is done in v. 32 for Gideon, is also a common way of ending the description of a chieftain. 5 What stands out in this ending is v. 31. Here Abimelech is said to have been Gideon's son through a concubine who lived in Shechem. The idea of the next leader being born of a mother of inferior status is reminiscent of the account with Jephthah, who is said to have been born of a harlot (Judg 11:1). As such, this claim about Abimelech may reflect a common trope or motif about leaders used by biblical authors. What is odd about this verse is that the concubine apparently lives in Shechem rather than with her husband in Ophrah. This artificial construct in T. Römer (ed), Lectio dfficiliorprobabilior? L'exégèse comme expérience de décloisonnement: Mélanges offerts à Françoise Smyth-Florentin (Heidelberg: Wiss.-theol. Seminar, 1991), 173-205. 5 See Judg 10:2,10:5, 12:7, 12:10, 12:12, and 12:15.

JERUBAAL, JACOB AND THE BATTLE FOR SHECHEM

323

was most probably designed to explain why, if Abimelech is indeed the son of Gideon, he lives in the area around Shechem and not in Ophrah with his seventy brothers. The addition of v. 31 gives the editor an opportunity to combine the stories in another way. How does Abimelech become king of Israel (or, at least, Shechem) if he has seventy legitimate brothers? The answer, the editor suggests, is that he killed them. The seventy sons of Gideon, originally referenced merely as a standard closing description of a successful Israelite chieftain, have artificially become Abimelech ben Jerubaal's seventy brothers and his chief rivals. As such they needed to be dispatched. As Gideon's (other) sons do not live in the same city as Abimelech, the editor has Abimelech hire an "army of rabble" and send them to Ophrah to assassinate them. 6 The Abimelech story itself focuses almost exclusively on Shechem and its environs (like Arumah, where Abimelech lives); the connection to Ophrah as a competitor city is best understood as a consequence of the attempt to create a link between Gideon and Jerubaal/Abimelech. Although some have argued that the fratricide should be seen as an early feature of the Abimelech account, 7 I believe that it is best explained as a fortuitous side-product of the combination of the stories which was intelligently used by a later editor to paint Abimelech in the worst possible light. Finally, the latest piece of the Abimelech story appears to be the speech of Jotham and his parable, which was grafted onto the account of the killing of the seventy brothers at a later date. 8 As all of the harmonizing 6 The army of rabble theme may have been inspired by the Jephthah story (Judg 11:3) or even by the David story (1 Sam 22:2). 7 J a n s (Abimelech, 372), although agreeing that Judg 8:31 is supplemental, suggests that there is a verse missing from the final form of the story that was once part of the introduction to an earlier Abimelech tradition (what he calls the BAAUM-Er^ahlimg). This missing verse would have also given Jerubaal seventy sons, thereby making Abimelech's fratricide an early feature of the account. The idea that the killing of the seventy legitimate heirs should be seen as an early and integral feature of the Abimelech account goes back to Ernst Sellin, who suggested that in the oldest version, Abimelech killed the seventy sons of Hamor, thereby becoming king. See E. Sellin, Wie wurde Sichem eine israelitische Stadt? (Deichert: Leipzig, 1922). 8 Verse 5b, which records the survival of Jotham, has all the appearance of a late harmonizing supplement; I thank Christophe Nihan and the JHS reviewers for pointing this out. For a discussion of the relative lateness of the Jotham parable, see K. Schopflin, "Jotham's Speech and Fable as Prophetic Comment on Abimelech's Story: The Genesis of Judges 9," SJOT 18/1 (2004), 3-22. Schopflin believes that the Jotham section was written in stages with the parable entering last to reinforce

324

ZEB FARVER

supplements (the secondary birth-status of Abimelech, the murder of the brothers and the Jotham parable) referenced in this section are late literary developments of the earlier traditions, this article will not discuss them further.

EARLY REDACTION AND MULTIPLE ABIMELECH TRADITIONS Late nineteenth century and early twentieth century scholarship assumed that the purported Pentateuchal sources, JEDP, continued into the Former Prophets, including the book of Judges. As such, a number of scholars attempted to solve various discontinuities in the narratives by separating out these sources. Although this model no longer seems viable to most biblical scholars, the question of how best to solve the discontinuities in the Abimelech account (Judg 9), and whether one should assume multiple sources or supplementation, is a live one. The central segments of concern to this article are the doublet with respect to the reasons for Shechem's rebellion against Abimelech and the doublet with respect to the battle scene between Abimelech's forces and the forces of the Shechemites. Providing a reason for the rebellion, Judg 9:23 states that God placed an evil spirit upon the Shechemites; Judg 9:26—29, on the other hand, state that a passing ruffian named Ga'al caused the Shechemites to disapprove of Abimelech. Similarly, the Ga'al rebellion seems to have been put down by Abimelech in Judg 9:40—41, yet Abimelech puts down a general rebellion in Judg 9:43-45. A possible solution to the doublet problem suggests itself when one compares Judg 9:25 with Judg 9:42.

Jotham's prophetic role as critiquing the monarchy. Nadav Na'aman also believes that the Jotham section was put in towards the end of the revision of the Abimelech cycle, in post-exilic times. He argues that the Jotham addition helped reshape the story into an anti-Samaritan polemic (Na'aman, "Hidden," 15—20).

325

JERUBAAL, JACOB AND THE BATTLE FOR SHECHEM

DDU7 •'bun iV ncty^i D'ICD

by

"oirn

^N-ba

d^ind nn

i^i

oun

(n3

Am -"by

nnnan w i ( 3 n

r ^ ' z i i b ra'i rn&n ''

'

''T

2S-

And the masters of Shechem placed ambushes upon the tops of the mountains against him (=Abimelech), and they robbed anyone who passed them upon the way, and this was told to Abimelech.

A n d it w a s o n t h e that

the

PeoPle

next went

out to the field and they told this to Abimelech.

Verse 25 explains that after God places the evil spirit of rebellion in the bosoms of the leaders of Shechem, they begin their rebellion with brigandry. They rob passersby who are, ostensibly, under Abimelech's protection. Abimelech hears about this and, as one might expect, he offers a military response. Verse 42, on the other hand, makes little sense. Firstly, who told Abimelech and what did they tell him? Secondly, it is unclear what problem the people are causing by going out to the fields. Finally, if they were going out to the fields to rob passersby or fight with Abimelech, this would be folly on the people's part; did not Abimelech just attack Shechem and eject Ga'al and his followers from the city? One possible solution to the problem of v. 42 is that it is, in fact, a resumptive repetition (Wiederaufnahme) of v. 25. 9 If this is correct, then the entire story of Ga'al and his rebellion was added into the story of the Shechemite rebellion against Abimelech. This solution further explains why there appear to be two reasons for the rebellion and two campaigns against Shechem: Two accounts are being combined here. Yet this suggestion poses problems. One difficulty is that the story of Ga'al (Judg 9:26—41)—the section being proposed as supplemental—is generally considered to be the oldest section of the story, and for good My suggestion dovetails with that of Groß (Richter, 492), who believes that v. 42 was written in order to connect two different Abimelech accounts. Criisemann (Widerstand, 34), who also believes the Ga'al account ( w . 26—41) to have been inserted, nevertheless, does not believe that v. 42 is a resumptive repetition at all, but rather a part of the primary stratum that would have immediately followed v. 25. Würthwein (Studien, 17), in a middle position, suggests that v. 42b is a Wiederaufnahme, with v. 42a being part of the primary stratum. 9

Zeb F a r v e r

326

reason. 10 The Ga'al story reads more like a trivial local drama between a chieftain and an Apiru leader than part of a significant Israelite drama characteristic of the Deuteronomistic History. Moreover, the explanation that a small-time brigand leader speaks rashly and gets into trouble with the local chieftain is a good point of departure for a tale of political rivalry, as compared with the more theologically-driven explanation according to which God caused an evil spirit to overcome the rebels' senses. The latter fits best into the later picture of the Deuteronomist, where the God of Israel has a hand in all important events among God's people. Yet if this is correct, one must explain how the earlier narrative can interrupt the later narrative. Another difficulty is that if one believes the two stories are independent accounts, one is hard pressed to explain the many narrative connections between the two. 11 The most obvious of these connections are the use of the term "ambush", the going out to the field, and the term "masters of Shechem" (CDW ^ j n ) . Any solution to these problems has its difficulties. Nevertheless, it is possible that the two stories were combined early on and these similarities reflect editorial expansions, or that the author of the spirit-of-God story knew the Ga'al account, but did not include it in his alternative version. 12 Either way, the older Ga'al-Abimelech narrative—whether in its current form or in some more skeletal version—seems to have been added into an alternative Abimelech account, either by the author of that narrative or some later editor. Nonetheless, the Ga'al story still seems to represent one of the oldest, if not the oldest, account of Abimelech.

NOTE ON TRANSMISSION HISTORY (UBERLIEFERUNGSGESCHICHTE) The above analysis brings up the question of transmission history. The (older) Ga'al account, as it appears in the Book of Judges, is incomplete. The story has neither a proper introduction nor a conclusion. How would the later author or editor of the core, biblical Abimelech story have access

See, for example, Kratz, Composition, 203—4. Reinhard Kratz in a personal communication. 12 Another possibility is that the "spirit of God" narrative was written as a framework to introduce and conclude the Ga'al narrative. The difficulty with this solution is that the use of a Wiederaufnahme would be an odd strategy for someone composing the introduction and conclusion, considering how choppy it makes the narrative appear, whereas it would be the method of choice for someone combining sources or adding a supplement. 10 11

JERUBAAL, JACOB AND THE BATTLE FOR SHECHEM

327

to a sliver of an older Abimelech account? There are a number of possibilities. First, although any claim about oral traditions are by definition conjectural, it seems likely that stories about old heroes were known to people and passed down through the ages. Such stories would have remained fluid and would have given birth to multiple variants. It is possible that one of these variants formed the core of the biblical text, and a piece of an alternative tradition, finding favor in the eyes of a later scribe or redactor, was inserted in the biblical text. On more than one occasion, the biblical authors assume knowledge of stories not included in any biblical text.13 Nevertheless, this does not appear to be the best explanation in the Abimelech and Ga'al case. It is one thing to suggest that stories about a certain character were known and passed down orally but quite another to suggest this about a saga with multiple parts.14 If Judg 9:26—41 (or the core of it) represents an incomplete picture of a larger, alternative, Abimelech account, then oral transmission would appear to be an insufficient explanation. More likely, there was once a more extensive written—or, at least, a writing-supported oral—tradition about Abimelech, of which the Ga'al account was only a part. 15 Two examples: a) In Genesis (36:24), a Horite/Hurrian character named Anna son of Zibion is mentioned. The biblical author then informs the reader that this is the same Anna that found the jeimim—meaning of word unknown—when he was shepherding his father's donkeys in the desert. No such story is recorded in Genesis or any other biblical book, and yet the author/editor assumes that the reader will appreciate this reference. Apparently stories about famous Hurrians and their adven-tures were part of the Israelite/Judahite repertoire, b) In Ezekiel (14:14, 20), a righteous "Gentile" named Dan'el (or Daniel) is mentioned. The reader is supposed to know this character even though no such person is described anywhere in biblical literature (including the book of Ezekiel). It is possible that this Dan'el is the protagonist of the Ugaritic story of Aqhat, but this only brings up the question of how a Judean prophet/author in Babylon, during the sixth century (at the earliest), could have been familiar with a story found in Ugarit during the thirteenth century. Apparently, more survives "off the record" than that of which we are aware. 13

14 The difference between what reasonably forms an oral legend and what appears like a written saga was one of the basic analytical tools used in John Van Seters' classic analysis of the development of the J Abraham texts. See J. Van Seters, Abraham in History and Tradition (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1975). 15 For more on the concept of writing-supported oral traditions, see D. M. Carr, The Formation of the Hebrew Bible: A New Reconstruction (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011), 13—36. See also the review of Carr's book by Angela Roskop Erisman,

328

Zeb F a r v e r

T h e r e are a n u m b e r of examples in biblical b o o k s of references to w o r k s no longer extant. A l t h o u g h s o m e of these titles m a y be fictional constructs of the biblical author, others seem to refer to real books. 1 6 Additionally, certain biblical b o o k s contain supplementary material that probably c a m e f r o m written sources. 1 7 Therefore, it seems likely that the G a ' a l account w a s taken f r o m a (lost) written collection either about A b i m e l e c h , or about local heroes or chieftains including A b i m e l e c h . T h e account w a s then inserted into the heart of w h a t w o u l d eventually b e c o m e the biblical account of A b i m e l e c h , by a later editor. 1 8 T h e idea that a core piece of one A b i m e l e c h narrative w o u l d h a v e b e e n inserted into an alternative A b i m e l e c h account corresponds to a p h e n o m e n o n described by D a v i d Carr. Carr notes "the tendency of m a n y (if not m o s t ) tradents not to reproduce the entirety of compositions w h o s e parts they appropriate, particularly the beginnings and ends of

who highlights the importance of distinguishing between the fluidity of oral traditions and the relative stability of writing-supported oral traditions; compare A. Roskop Erisman, "Review of D. Carr, The Formation of the Hebrew Bible: A New Reconstruction," H-Judaic, H-Net Reviews (2012). Online: http://www.hnet.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=34258 (accessed 14 October 2013). 16 The phenomenon of fictionalized references is probably the best explanation for a number of references in Chronicles (like Midrash Ido the Prophet in 2 Chr 13:22). Some examples of what appear to be references to actual works now lost are The Book of the Wars ofYHWH (Num 21:14), The Book ofYasharQosh 10:13 [MI]; 2 Sam 1:18), The Book of the Kings of Israel and The Book of the Kings of Judah (mentioned numerous times throughout the books of Kings and Chronicles). 17 One example is the collection of lists of battles and heroes in 2. Sam 21:15— 22 and 23:8—39; this example serves as a particularly good parallel as it seems to contain material that is earlier than the biblical David narrative; some of it is even contradictory to this narrative, such as the ascription of the defeat of Goliath to a man named Elhanan as opposed to David. The argument that these traditions, although added later into the book of Samuel, actually predate it, is made in I. Finkelstein and N. A. Silberman, David and Solomon: In Search of the Bible's Sacred Kings and the Roots of Western Tradition (New York: Free Press, 2006), 54—57. 18 Although entirely different than the above suggestion, it is worth noting that Alexander Rofe believes that the core of the book of Judges was once an Ephraimite History that predated the Deuteronomistic History. See A. Rofe, "Ephraimite versus Deuteronomistic History," in D. Garrone and F. Israel (eds), Scritti in onore di J.A. Soggin (Brescia: Paideia, 1991), 221—35; reprinted in G. N. Knoppers and J. G. McConville (eds), Reconsidering Israel and Judah: Recent Studies on the Deuteronomistic History (Sources for Biblical and Theological Studies, 8; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2000), 462-74.

JERUBAAL, JACOB AND THE BATTLE FOR SHECHEM

329

compositions" 19 . As examples of this phenomenon, Carr points to the Chronicler's use of Samuel-Kings, the Temple Scroll's use of Deuteronomy, and Matthew and Luke's use of Mark. 20 My suggestion regarding the Abimelech account is similar, in the sense that the second Abimelech tradition seems to have been preserved only in a fragment. Nevertheless, there is a significant difference. Carr is discussing a phenomenon where a later author builds off of the core of an earlier work, but ignores the opening and closing of that work, replacing it with something new. With the Abimelech account, I am suggesting that a fragment of an earlier Abimelech account was inserted into an alternative, albeit later, Abimelech account by a later scribe who wished to preserve this piece of the alternative tradition but not the entirety of that tradition.

PART 2: RECONSTRUCTING JERUBAAL USING THE ABIMELECH ACCOUNT TO RECONSTRUCT JERUBAAL As Jerubaal seems to have been known as the father of Abimelech before he became identified with Gideon,21 a close look at the Ga'al story can help in reconstructing the contours of an older Jerubaal account. The key passage is found in Judg 9:28, part of Ga'al's speech at the party thrown in "dishonor" of Abimelech. The proper reading of this verse has been debated throughout the ages. As pointed by the Masoretes, the text reads:

Carr, Formation, 88. Carr, Formation, 88—89. This phenomenon should not be confused with a rather different phenomenon, which Carr discusses on p. 66, of scribes adding material to the beginning or ending of a work, without significantly revising the heart of the work itself. This phenomenon, dubbed by Sara Milstein "revision through introduction," is the subject of her dissertation Reworking Ancient Texts: Revision through Introduction in Biblical and Mesopotamian Uterature (Ph.D. diss., New York University, 2010) and her book Tracking the Master Scribe: Revision through Introduction in Biblical and Mesopotamian Uterature (forthcoming). I thank Sara Milstein for clarifying some of these issues for me over e-mail. 21 The name Gideon is never mentioned in the Abimelech cycle and Abimelech is always called "the son of Jerubaal," even when referenced outside of the book of Judges (e.g., 2 Sam 11:21). 19

20

Zeb F a r v e r

330

bvi -inN'l

nzi-rnyj i T p s ban V y x i H ? ¡>6n ddu7 'on ninn " ^ s t x

my

unjN i n r i y j UTTDI

And Ga'al ben Ebed said: "Who is Abimelech and who is Shechem 22 that we should serve him? Is [he] not the son of Jerubaal, and Zebul his deputy? Serve the men of Hamor the father of Shechem! Why should we serve him?!

In her article on the A b i m e l e c h story, Katie H e f f e l f i n g e r m a k e s an argument in support of this reading. 2 3 She writes: "the speech is a call to the current Shechemites to serve themselves, Shechemites o n behalf of Shechemites, rather than the partial Shechemite of w h o m they had once said, 'he is our brother.' " This is certainly an elegant interpretation of the Masoretic text; nevertheless, for m a n y reasons, the Masoretic pointing itself is very difficult to accept and G a ' a l ' s a r g u m e n t as a w h o l e remains inexplicable. Firstly, VyXT1 p KVn is not a sentence; there is no subject. In general, phrases like this beginning in hVk require a p r o n o m i n a l subject. 2 4 If the verse w e r e trying to say, "Is he not [just] the son of J e r u b a a l ? " it should

It would take us too far afield to discuss the possible meanings of this phrase. The LXX reads: "xal rig eotiv [o] uio; Eu^gji" (and who is the son of Shechem?). This reading seems to make the two phrases parallel since Abimelech is a "son of Shechem," i.e., a Shechemite. For a fuller discussion of this, see R. G. Boling, "'And Who Is S-K-M?' Judges IX 28)," F T 13/4 (1963), 479-82. Tur-Sinai, in his characteristically creative fashion, argues that since this half of the verse should parallel the second half, the phrase should really refer to Zebul. Based on this, he suggests the emendation: 'Dl ("and who is his minister?"). See N. H. Tur-Sinai, Peshuto shel Mikra (4 vols.; Jerusalem: Kiryat Sepher, 1964), 2:80 (Hebrew). There exists, however, no textual evidence to back up this suggestion. 23 K. M. Heffelfinger '"My Father is King': Chiefly Politics and the Rise of Abimelech," JSOT 33/3 (2009), 277-92 (291-92). Her point is made in the context of her argument against Robert Miller, who prefers a different reading of the text; see R. D. Miller, Chieftains oft the Highland Clans: A Histo/y oft Israel in the 12th and 11th Centuries BC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 120. 24 Cf. Gen 19:20 NTl ¡>6n or the many examples of the construct DmrD on i>6n in Kings (e.g., 1 Kgs 11:41; 15:7; 16:5; 2 Kgs 1:18; 8:23; 10:34). 22

JERUBAAL, JACOB AND THE BATTLE FOR SHECHEM

331

have said Kin V y x v p KVn. 25 Second, what is the purpose of the words It^lV a p m ? Is there something particularly insulting about claiming that Zebul was his deputy? Third, how can the people of Shechem serve the men of Hamor? Are the men of Hamor still around to serve? Where have they been until now? 26 Finally, how does the final phrase follow the one before it? The "him" being referred to must be Abimelech, but he has not been referenced in this sentence at all. I would argue for an alternate pointing of the text, understanding the y.3.7.1 not as the imperative (cibdu), but as the perfect (cabdu). The verse would then read: i v p s ban V y a - i n ? •ON -rinn

nay

unjN i m y j y n n i odu?

Did not the son of Jerubaal and Zebul his deputy once serve the men of Hamor the father of Shechem! So why should we serve him?

This reading is supported by the Targum and is the translationThis reading is supported by the Targum and is the translation offered by the JPS and the NRSV, among others. The problems with this reading are not grammatical but historiographical. I say historiographical and not historical, because the past few decades of scholarship have shown that attempting to find historical clues—let alone historical records—in the book of Genesis is fraught with methodological problems. To be clear, this article is in no way attempting to discuss the question of whether there ever was a king of Shechem named Hamor, and if so, when he may have lived. My discussion of the historiographical problems with certain interpretations should be seen in the context of a tradition-historical or mnemohistorical analysis of various textual artifacts. 27 Boling (1963) notices this problem and attempts to solve it by pointing to L X X A (LXXB reads like the MT), which has ou^ ouzoq oioq Iego^aaX, adding the pronominal subject and making it a complete sentence. Nevertheless, Boling's methodology here is questionable. The L X X A text can best be understood as evidence that the L X X A (or its Vorlage) noticed the problem with the half sentence and tried to solve it. The same strategy may be behind the Peshitta's text, which also adds the pronominal subject, "rfam A ^ ^ i , i^D Ak'TO." 25

26 Heffelfinger's interpretation attempts to address this problem by understanding "men of Hamor" to be referencing Shechemite natives in general. Although this is a creative interpretation, I am unsure that it is a convincing one. 27 In the past, many scholars did attempt to situate the Hamor and Shechem

332

ZEB FARVER

If one takes the Primary History as a whole, Ga'al's claim flatly contradicts the account in Genesis 33—34. According to the logic of the Primary History, Hamor and Shechem lived hundreds of years earlier and were slaughtered by Jacob's children. One would have expected greater consistency in the redactional layer and Ga'al's claim that Abimelech once served the sons of Hamor seems highly problematic. 28 narrative in some historical reality, like the Amarna period, even going so far as to claim that the tradition is grounded in a real historical event which occurred during the "patriarchal period." Some of these scholars latched onto the mention of Simeon and Levi, two tribes who were said to have been landless (or virtually landless) during the monarchic period, and use this to argue for the antiquity of the tradition (thus, e.g., Moore, Weinfeld, Speiser, and to some extent Westermann, in their commentaries on Genesis ad loc., to name a few). Others argued the antiquity of this tradition based on the curious absence of a conquest story for Shechem in the book of Joshua (Kaufmann, Joshua, 133; Sarna, Genesis, ad loc.). Some even pointed to archaeological evidence for the possibility of an early tradition; Shechem Stratum XIII has a destruction layer (F. M. T. Böhl, referenced by G. E. Wright, Shechem: The Biography of a Biblical City [New York: McGraw-Hill, 1965], 139— 40, 257 nn. 3 and 4). However, this historical approach has been abandoned by much of modern scholarship. Currently, most scholars do not see the "patriarchal period" as reflective on any historical period but as a mythological construct, put together in a relatively late period. See, T. L. Thompson, The Historicity of the Patriarchal Narratives: The Quest for the Historical Abraham (Berlin/New York: De Gruyter, 1974); E. Blum, Die Komposition der Väter-geschichte (WMANT, 57; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1984); J. Van Seters, Prologue to History: The Yahwist as Historian in Genesis (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1992). Furthermore, the field of cultural memory studies has begun to dem-onstrate that a people's memory of their history often differs greatly from their actual historical experience. For more on cultural memory studies, see M. Halbwachs, On Collective Memory (original French, 1941; trans, and ed. L. A. Coser; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992); J. Assmann, Religion and Cultural Memory: Ten Studies (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2006); A. Eril, "Cultural Memory Studies: An Introduction," in A. Eril and A. Nünning (eds), Cultural Memory Studies: An International and Interdisciplinary Handbook (Media and Cultural Memory, 8; Berlin/New York: De Gruyter, 2008), 1-18. For an attempt to apply cultural memory studies to biblical studies, see P. R. Davies, Memories of Ancient Israel: An Introduction to Biblical History Ancient and Modern (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2008). The problem is made even worse if one accepts the LXX's interpretation of the verse, where the phrase DDU? "llDn flN is understood to mean "together with the men of Hamor father of Shechem" (auv rotg avSpäciv Ejijxwp Trarpog 28

JERUBAAL, JACOB AND THE BATTLE FOR SHECHEM

333

One could try to solve the problem by suggesting that the references to Shechem and Hamor are secondary glosses. For example, one reviewer suggested the following reconstruction: "3 ban

-c inruu

-linn ''ràNTIN ITM) /irps u - a w ir.TC-. DDU7 n n unjN

Who is Abimelech [and who is Shechem] that we should serve him? Is he not the son of Jerubaal, and Zebul his deputy/his servant? [the men of Hamor the father of Shechem!] Why should we serve him?!"

Who is Abimelech [and who is Shechem] that we should serve him? Is he not the son of Jerubaal, and Zebul his deputy/his servant? [the men of Hamor the father of Shechem!] Why should we serve him?!" According to this suggestion (as I understand it), the explanation for the enigmatic term JJXTI , which has been the source of debate for two millennia, is that the word was originally a copyist's gloss offered as an interpretation for the less familiar term 2 p m that was then copied into the main text by a later scribe. This conflated reading would have caused confusion, leading to the interpretation of yXTI as a verb. Another, later, scribe, being bothered by the fact that no object existed for this verb, and being familiar with the Dinah story, may have offered the suggestion in the margins that it was Hamor, king of Shechem, that Abimelech once served. Finally, the words "and who is Shechem" would have been added to the opening question to create parity with the next line. As ingenious as this suggestion is, I find it unconvincing for a number of reasons. Firstly, if one assumes that the original verse simply read "is [he] not the son of Jerubaal and Zebul his deputy," the problems with the MT reading return. What is insulting to Abimelech about this claim? Even if one could suggest some sort of criticism of Abimelech in Jerubaal being his father or Zebul being his deputy, one still faces the

Eu^efi), implying that the men of Hamor were still around and serving Abimelech. This is the reading preferred by Jans ( A b i m e l e c h 5 6 n. 42). Nevertheless, the interpretation is an odd one, as it is hard to understand how claiming that the men of Hamor are his slaves would be insulting to Abimelech. However one understands it, the lack of consistency in the redactional layer remains, since the men of Hamor should have been long gone by the time Jerubaal came on the scene.

334

ZEB FARVER

problem that Ga'al's quip is not a complete sentence, as it is missing the pronominal subject required in Hebrew. Finally, even if one is willing to overlook the grammatical infelicity, still by adding Hamor and Shechem into the account the purported scribe creates more problems than he solves with his gloss. According to Genesis 34 Hamor and Shechem were long dead. By suggesting that Jerubaal or Abimelech once served the men of Hamor, 29 the scribe creates a historiographical contradiction between Judges and Genesis. It is difficult to understand why a scribe, who ostensibly accepts the biblical presentation of history as a baseline, would create an unnecessary narrative contradiction just because he noticed that the two stories occurred in the same city. Were he really motivated by the perceived need of an object for the verb "served" he could simply have filled in something like "[served] the people of Shechem" (D3U7 ,t 7y3) and left it at that. Therefore, it appears that the reference to Hamor is best understood as original, and that Judges 9 and Genesis 34 reflect two different historiographical traditions regarding the conquest of Shechem and its king, Hamor. 30

OTHER POSSIBLE CLUES A number of elements in the older segments of Abimelech's story imply an earlier and longer cycle. For example, at the end of the account, Abimelech inexplicably lays siege to the city of Thebetz where he meets his death. 31 31 29 Although either Jerubaal or Abimelech can be understood as the referent, I suggest Jerubaal as the vanquisher of Hamor and not Abimelech. One could argue, alternatively, that this is a reference to Gideon and that Ga'al's speech should be taken literally as a claim that Abimelech himself once served Hamor, and that Jerubaal, his father, was a man of no account. Nevertheless, this appears to me to be the less likely interpretation for a number of reasons, not least of which is the independently referenced tradition (1 Sam 12:11) that records Jerubaal as some sort of a savior. 30 To be clear, I am not suggesting that the story in Gen 34 as we have it is a tradition in the technical sense—i.e., a written or writing-supported story that existed in a form more or less similar to what we have now before its inclusion in the biblical text. Rather, what I am suggesting, which will be clarified in a later section, is that Gen 34 is based on a tradi tion which had Jacob—not Jerubaal or Abimelech—as the conqueror of Shechem. 31 One could suggest that Judg 9:50 was added into the account later, in order to make the assault on the tower into a separate battle, with the original tower being a tower in Shechem itself. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that at least by the time of the final form of the Bathsheba and Uriah story, Abimelech was said to have laid siege to a tower in Thebetz and died there (2 Sam 11:21).

JERUBAAL, JACOB AND THE BATTLE FOR SHECHEM

335

Not only is there a complete lack of context for this siege, but w h e n Abimelech dies, J u d g 9:55 states: nn "3

i*q»i

i c p c ? v r x - o r : -Vc-^x

And when the men of Israel saw that Abimelech was dead, each man went back to his place.

W h o are these m e n of Israel and w h e n did they arrive? T o w h a t places did they return? Another example of possible missing information concerns Abimelech's h o m e base. T h r o u g h the course of the narrative, at least in the G a ' a l section, the reader learns that A b i m e l e c h rules f r o m A r u m a h (Judg 9:31 3 2 and J u d g 9:41). 3 3 O n e can reasonably hypothesize that this w a s Jerubaal's Judg 9:31 actually reads "l"IQ~irQ," and there are those who translate it as "secretly" from the root Vn.Q.~l. This is the translation offered in the LXXB (ev xpucfiyj) and the Peshitta («.=) as well as in the KJV. LXXA reads "with gifts Qieret Scopcov)," but whether this is an attempt to translate nmrQ or represents a different Vorlage is hard to say. The most reasonable hypothesis, I would argue, is that the word is a scribal error and should read nmiQ, meaning that Zebul sent Abimelech a message while he (Abimelech) was in Arumah, his home town. 32

33 Arumah plays an important role in Robert Miller's historical reconstruction, since it would have been the largest of the sub-chieftaincies in the region controlled by Shechem, according to Miller's Gravity Model (Miller, Chieftains, 120). However, it should be admitted that Miller's Gravity Model has come under some heavy criticism; see, for example, the reviews of R. D. Miller, Chieftains, by W. G. Dever in NEA 69.2 (2006), 99 and J. L. Wright in ZAW118 (2006), 469. Whether one accepts Miller's Gravity Model or not, Khirbet el-Urmah (Arumah) is a large site in the vicinity of Shechem, whose pottery repertoire includes Iron I and Iron II pottery; see R . J . Bull and E. F. Campbell Jr., "The Sixth Campaign Balatah (Shechem)," BASOR 190 (1968), 2-41, esp. 38-41. See also Erasmus Gaß's discussion of the site in: E. Gaß, Die Ortsnamen des Richterbuchs in historischer und redaktioneller Perspektive (Abhand-lungen des Deutschen PalästinaVereins, 35; Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2005), 330-31. The fact that the site existed in the Iron I is an important point as it allows for the possibility that the Abimelech story may be based on an early tradition or even a historical memory of some kind; Arumah could have played an important role in the Shechem traditions during this period. Katie Heffelfinger, responding to Miller's suggestion that the Abimelech account may be based on the memory of Arumah rebelling against its Shechemite overlord, writes: "Miller assigns Abimelech's residence to Arumah, a site the text notes only in passing. Arumah should probably be seen as an encampment during

336

Zeb F a r v e r

town as well, Ophrah having been Gideon's town, tradition-historically speaking. Most importantly, as was pointed out in the previous section, it is clear from Ga'al's speech that Abimelech and/or his father once served Hamor. (Again, this is meant as a literary claim, following the logic of the speech. I am making no claims about the historical reality of a king of Shechem named Hamor.) If this is really the meaning of Ga'al's statement, then it is possible that at least part of the J erubaal-Abimelech cycle would be about how he, Jerubaal, overthrew Hamor and became king himself. 34

RECONSTRUCTION On the basis of the above, I would suggest the following overall structure to the Jerubaal tradition. Jerubaal, Abimelech's father, ruled Shechem from his native city of Arumah, having vanquished Hamor, the previous ruler. After Jerubaal's death, his son, Abimelech takes his place as ruler. 35 At some point Abimelech displeases the Shechemites. In one version this is attributed to the spirit of God causing discontent; in another, possibly earlier, version it is attributed to the newly arrived brigand, Ga'al ben Eved. In this latter version, Ga'al stirs up discontent with his speech, reminding everyone of what they already knew: not long ago Jerubaal and the Arumites served the king of Shechem, but now, everything is backwards and the Shechemites serve Abimelech, the ruler of Arumah. This "absurdity" makes doubly good sense when one takes into account that Arumah (Khirbet el-Urmah), although a relatively large town, was in close proximity to Shechem. The Shechemites, being native to the larger and more important city, would presumably have been offended by the upstart Abimelech's campaign against Shechem rather than as his permanent residence" (Heffelfinger, "My Father is King," 291). I must disagree with Heffelfinger here. It seems clear from the story that Abimelech does not live in Shechem at all, and, following his coronation, is always found outside the city. In fact, Yairah Amit, in her commentary on Judges, goes so far as to suggest that Abimelech's remaining in Arumah may have been the main reason for the bad feelings the inhabitants of Shechem had for him (Arait, Judges, 177). 3 4 1 accept the basic outline of Haag's theory that Jerubaal was the conqueror/redeemer of Shechem ("Gideon-Jerubbaal-Abimelek," 305—14). Lindars ("Gideon and Kingship," 315—26) suggests that Jerubaal was a vanquisher of Canaanites in general, but the idea that there were pan-Israelite chiefs in this period seems to be a later development in "Israelite/Judahite" historiography. 35 The idea that Abimelech is a native Shechemite and that that was what gave him preference over his brothers is probably a construct derived from the attempt to attach Abimelech to Gideon, as argued above.

JERUBAAL, JACOB AND THE BATTLE FOR SHECHEM

337

family of the upstart t o w n ruling over them. For this reason, G a ' a l can appeal to their " S h e c h e m i t e " pride. O n e key theme behind this older Jerubaal-Abimelech tradition seems to be the domination of S h e c h e m by an outsider. O n e cannot help but notice that any account of the conquest of S h e c h e m is conspicuously absent f r o m the various conquest traditions in J o s h u a and Judges. 3 6 A n older Jerubaal story m a y have filled this very niche, at least at s o m e point in its development.

PART 3: TWO CONQUESTS OF SHECHEM Both Genesis 34 and J u d g e s 9 contain a story or reference to a king H a m o r of S h e c h e m w h o w a s once the reigning m o n a r c h but gets displaced b y (Israelite) protagonists. In Genesis 34 the vanquishers of H a m o r are S i m e o n and Levi, the sons of J a c o b ; in J u d g e s it seems to have been Jerubaal. It is tempting to suggest that the account of the slaughter of the Shechemites and their king H a m o r by J a c o b ' s sons m a y represent an alternative version of the tradition that spawned the Jerubaal account, deriving f r o m the identical niche in Israelite mnemohistory, namely, the Israelite domination of Shechem. 3 7 T h e merging of Jerubaal with Gideon and the pushing of the In fact, as noted above, this forms one of the bases for the maximalists' defense of the historicity of Gen 34. 37 In much of twentieth century scholarship, the consensus was that the Shechemites in this period were Canaanites. See, for example, A. Zertal, A Nation is Born: The Altar on Mount Ebal and the Beginning of Israel (Israel: Yedioth Aharonot, 2000), 292 (Hebrew). Dissenters, like Yehezkel Kaufmann, who called it "the creation of scholarly fancy" (Judges [Jerusalem: Kiryat Sepher, 1964], 195—196 [Hebrew]), remained the minority. Over the past couple of decades, however, the entire paradigm has begun to shift, with some scholars questioning the reality of neat ethnic distinc-tions between Israelites and Canaanites and pointing to the fluidity of ethnic identity and the complexity of making such determinations based on material culture. The entire issue of ethnicity in the Iron Age I period will require serious réévaluation over the coming years. For a discussion of the archaeological issues, see W. G. Dever, "Ceramics, Ethnicity and the Question of Israel's Origins," BA 58 (1995), 200-13; I. Finkelstein, "Ethnicity and Origin of the Iron I Settlers in the Highlands of Canaan: Will the Real Israel Please Stand Up?," BA 59 (1996), 198-212; A. Killebrew, Biblical Peoples and Ethnicity: An Archae-ological Study of Egyptians, Canaanites, Philistines and Early Israel, 1300-1100 BCE (Atlanta: SBL, 2005); and A. Faust, Israel's Ethnogenesis: Settlement, Interaction, Expansion, and Resistance (London: Equinox, 2006). For a discussion of the biblical conception of Israel as an outside group, see P. Machinist, "Outsiders or Insiders: The Biblical View of Emergent Israel and its Contexts," in L. G. Silberstein and R. L. Cohn (eds), The Other in Jewish Thought and 36

338

ZEB FARVER

Shechem account far back into Israel's past would then be the precipitant causes of the above-mentioned lacuna in the conquest tradition.

THE CONQUEST OF SHECHEM TRADITIONS Working with this suggestion, one can begin to trace a skeletal framework for the "conquest of Shechem" tradition and its various iterations: There was a ruler of Shechem named Hamor. For one reason or another, a nearby warrior rose up against him and slew him, conquering the city and reigning in his stead. Each version has a life of its own. In the Jerubaal version, the hero is a local citizen of Arumah, perhaps its chieftain. Until Jerubaal's "uprising," his city was most probably ruled by Shechem. Unfortunately, the casus belli has been lost. Jerubaal does not slaughter the people of Shechem; rather he takes control of the city, ruling as chieftain from his native Arumah. Ostensibly, the story would have Jerubaal hailed as a savior in his lifetime, at least by the Arumites and other disaffected citizens, but eventually his son Abimelech destroys the city, when the Shechemites attempt to throw off the yoke of the less popular new leader. In the Genesis 34 version, Jacob's impetuous sons Simeon and Levi attack the town of Shechem, killing all the male inhabitants. The casus belli in this story is the taking of Jacob's daughter, Dinah, by King Hamor's son. The main problem with suggesting that the two accounts are versions of the same tradition is that the Simeon and Levi story does not seem to share very much with the posited Jerubaal story, other than the conquest of Shechem by a group of Israelites and the name of the king, Hamor. If one is to assume that the story in Genesis developed out of the Jerubaal story (as I am suggesting here), then a stage, if not many stages, must be missing that would explain how the former developed into the latter. Luckily, yet another biblical account provides a helpful hint with an allusion to the story.38

JACOB'S SWORD AND BOW In Genesis 48:22, in his final words to Joseph, Jacob states:

History (New York: New York University Press, 1994), 35-60; and N. Wazana, "Natives, Immigrants, and the Biblical Perception of Origins in Historical Times," Tel Aviv 32/2 (2005), 220-44. 38 Another allusion, which will not be explored here, is in Jeremiah 40:5.

JERUBAAL, JACOB AND THE BATTLE FOR SHECHEM

by h i n oriu?

^nm vini

•F.yT"" ' a i n a "iCN-

339

I have given you one shechem more than your brothers, which I took with my sword and my bow

Although the w o r d " s h e c h e m " here m e a n s portion, it appears to be a play on words. 3 9 J a c o b is claiming that, insofar as the inheritance of the land goes, he is giving J o s e p h the city of Shechem. J a c o b believes that this is his right, since he took it with his o w n sword and bow. N o such story is recorded in any transmitted biblical text. 4 0

But see Claus Westermann, who does not believe that there is any connection between this passage and the conquest of Shechem tradition in ch. 34: "This cannot be Shechem but must mean a smaller piece of land which can be described as 'a shoulder' . . . The present passage has nothing to do with Gen 34 . . ." C. Westermann, Genesis 37—50: A Commentaiy (trans. J. J. Scullion; Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1986), 192—93. As an absolute claim, this is hard to accept. 40 This problem was noticed already by early rabbinic exegetes, who attempted to solve the difficulty midrashically. Cf. Gen. Rab., Va-Yislah, 80 (J. Theodor and C. Albeck [eds], Midrash Bereshit Rabba: Critical Edition with Notes and Commentaiy [Berlin: Bi-defus Ts. H. Itskovski, 1903; reprinted: Jerusalem:Wahrman, 1965, 3 vols.], 96566). 39

Zeb F a r v e r

340

M o d e r n scholarship has struggled with this problem in various ways. 4 1 Erhard Blum and N a h u m Sarna both suggested that the verse reflects a tradition about J a c o b making war on Shechem which was not preserved in the biblical corpus. 4 2 A more radical hypothesis was offered years earlier by J o h n Skinner: "The verse . . . seems to carry us back to a phase of the national tradition which ignored the sojourn in Egypt, and represented Jacob as a

Vnu? Vnidu? iron -vpn by iNm i*a v i inn mb nan ^co p •nV? by dtito:! ib nan nun -rj?n by npy u^n

¡rn nVi .jprn ma

imu7}?u7 jrai - p iva i w u ? rum m

t7ia,t7

"n

rm

na

nan

m n Vuj nu?j? na nViyn niniN nan ddu? nna by i n p i inu?pi jintn 1 ? nViyn niniN inn'' dn niitt Nin p a s •pd

nr|t ?J

Tinp1?

tioi',t?

w s a p w Tiu7p3i m m inu?pi m n

apy

ton

Qnt7

nan nann bvw DDU73

"And they came to the city securely" (Gen 34:25)—Samuel asked Levi ben Sisi (about this verse). He said to him: "What does it mean 'they came to the city securely'?" He said to him: "Secure in the power of the old man. Our father Jacob did not want them to do this (i.e., massacre Shechem), but once they did it, he said: 'Can I let my sons fall to the nations of the world?' What did he do? He took his sword and his bow and stood by the entrance of Shechem. He said: 'If the nations come to join the [Shechemites] I will fight against them.' This is what he meant when he said to Joseph: 'Which I took from the Amorite with my sword and my bow.' For where have we seen that our father Jacob took a sword and a bow against Shechem?"

The midrash harmonizes the claim of Jacob in his speech to Joseph with the Dinah story recorded in Gen 34. 41 Speiser believed the problem to be insurmountable; E. A. Speiser, Genesis (AB, 1; Garden City: Doubleday, 1964), 358. 42 See Blum, Composition, 219 n. 39; N. Sarna, Genesis (Philadelphia: JPS, 1989), 330. Understanding the two accounts as two separate traditions, Blum notes a number of differences between the accounts other than the role of Jacob in the battle, like the name of the enemy (Gen 34 has Hivites whereas Gen 48:22 has Amotites). Most importantly, Blum points out that the etiological purpose of the two accounts differs; Gen 48:22 explains Joseph's place in Shechem whereas Gen 34 explains the scattering of the tribes of Simon and Levi.

JERUBAAL, JACOB AND THE BATTLE FOR SHECHEM

341

warlike hero who had effected permanent conquests in Palestine, and died there after dividing the land amongst his children." 43 Skinner's hypothesis w a s bold for his day, but it finds resonance in current, mostly European, models of Pentateuchal studies that reckon with a fundamental distinction between the Patriarchal and the E x o d u s traditions. T o clarify, following Rolf Rendtorff, 4 4 a n u m b e r of E u r o p e a n scholars see the incorporation of the Genesis block into the Pentateuch/Hexateuch/Enneateuch block as having occurred very late, even after the Priestly redaction. This w o u l d m a k e the incorporation of the Genesis stories one of the last steps towards creating the overall structure of the Primary History as it is k n o w n today. 4 5 These scholars believe that the Patriarchal accounts circulated separately, not just as oral traditions, but as a written work. Steps towards disentangling Genesis f r o m the rest of the Pentateuch/Hexateuch w e r e taken by Albert de Pury and T h o m a s R ö m e r , and complete models of a literarily independent Genesis have been put forward b y J a n Christian Gertz, Reinhard Kratz and K o n r a d Schmid. 4 6 T h e 43 J. Skinner, A Critical and Exegetical Commentay on Genesis (ICC, 1; New York: Scribner, 1910), 507. See also his comment (422): "The one point, indeed, which stands out with some degree of evidence from these discussions is that there was a form of the patriarchal tradition which knew nothing of the sojourn in Egypt, and connected the story of the conquest with the name of Jacob." 44 See R. Rendtorff, The Problem of the Process of Transmission in the Pentateuch (original German, 1977; trans. J. Scullion; JSOTSup, 89; Sheffield: JSOT, 1990). 45 There are still a number of scholars who defend the classical Documentary Hypothesis model, according to which the combination of the Patriarch and Exodus traditions would have occurred during the earliest stages of writing, and perhaps even before this in the pre-Monarchic period. For a defense of this position, see R. E. Friedman, The Bible with Sources Revealed (San Francisco: Harper, 2003); B. J. Schwartz, "Does Recent Scholarship's Critique of the Documentary Hypothesis Constitute Grounds for its Rejection?," in T. B. Dozeman, K. Schmid and B. J. Schwartz (eds), The Pentateuch: International Perspectives on Current Research (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011), 3—16; J. S. Baden, The Composition of the Pentateuch: Renewing the Documentary Hypothesis (Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2012). 46 46 See A. de Pury, "The Jacob Story and the Beginning of the Formation of the Pentateuch," in T. B. Dozeman and K. Schmid (eds), A Farewell to the Yahwist: The Composition of the Pentateuch in Recent European Scholarship (SBLSymS, 34; Atlanta: SBL, 2006), 51—72; T. Römer, Israels Väter. Untersuchungen %ur Väterthematik im Deuteronomium und in der Deuteronomistischen Tradition (OBO, 99; Freiburg: Universitätsverlag, 1990); T. Römer, "The Exodus in the Book of Genesis," SEA 75 (2010), 1-20; J. C. Gertz, "The Literary Connection between the Books of Genesis and Exodus," in Dozeman and Schmid (eds), A Farewell to the Yahwist, 73—

342

ZEB FARVER

latter scholar, in his monograph, traces the overall structure of each text before they were combined and seeks to uncover the fissures and glosses that demonstrate the imperfectly woven seams of the combined work. Comparing Skinner's insights about a Jacob conquest tradition with the current model of an independent Genesis account, one can see a major difference in emphasis between the pre-Genesis patriarchal traditions and the form those traditions take in Genesis itself. Current models emphasize the non-warlike character of patriarchs in Genesis (with some exceptions, like Abraham in Gen 14) in contrast to the conquest-based Exodusthrough-Joshua traditions. Yet the hints to a warlike Jacob saga noted by Skinner point to the probability that the early patriarchal accounts may very well have been military in character. Skinner's insight demonstrates just how hard the editors of Genesis worked to erase most traces of military spirit from its account, creating the relatively passive and peaceful character of that book. In the spirit of Skinner, I would like to suggest that the evidence marshalled above regarding a (lost) Jacob and Shechem account suggests that at least one version of a patriarchal story was, in fact, warlike in character. Specifically, I suggest that there was once a tradition where Jacob as the leader of a band of Israelites conquers the city of Shechem, wresting it from the reigning monarch Hamor. This tradition would represent a development midpoint between the older—now lost—Jerubaal account, and the canonically recorded Simeon and Levi account. A schematic of the development proposed here would look like the following: A. Jerubaal conquers Shechem (implied by Ga'al's speech) B. Jacob conquers Shechem (referenced in Gen 48:22) C. Simeon and Levi conquer Shechem (Gen 34) There are little data for a reconstruction of B, the conquest of Shechem by Jacob. Nevertheless, one can hypothesize that B shared the basic features of the overall conquest of Shechem tradition outlined above. If so, it may have been a version of the tradition midpoint between the Jerubaal account and the Dinah account. 87; Kratz, Composition, 248—99; K. Schmid, Genesis and the Moses Story: Israel's Dual Origins in the Hebrew Bible (trans. J. Nogalski; Sifrut: Literature and Theology of the Hebrew Bible, 3; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2010). It is worth noting the somewhat different model of the American scholar, David Carr. Carr sees a preexilic proto-Genesis composition being com-bined with a pre-D Moses story and a proto-DtrL during the early exilic period to form what he calls the non-P post-D Hexateuch; see Carr, For-mation, 277—78, 286—89.

JERUBAAL, JACOB AND THE BATTLE FOR SHECHEM

343

One can even see elements of the older Jacob tradition in the Dinah story-elements which were not fully reworked. For example, the claim of the brothers in Gen 34:7: on1? i n ' i ffuttNn n x y i T i bnntyn ntyp nbrn"':? i n n N'1? JDI a p i r - r a - n N nau?1?

And the men were perturbed, and became full of wrath, for a horror had been committed in Israel to sleep with the daughter of Jacob—and such is not done!

The reference to "in Israel" would fit a context of an Israelite people led by Jacob, as opposed to a family unit. 47 Similarly, in their speech to Hamor in Gen 34:16, the sons of Jacob claim that through marriage they and the Shechemites will become "one nation." Hamor, in his speech, reiterates this to his own people. This claim would make much more sense if the party negotiating with Hamor were a larger group than just one family unit. These examples bear witness to the existence of an older version of the conquest of Shechem story that portrayed Jacob as the conqueror. In this tradition, Jacob would have been the leader of a people as opposed to the father of a single family unit. It seems clear that the refashioning of the Jacob-as-conqueror story into the Dinah story and its insertion into the Jacob cycle occurred at a relatively late stage of the editing process. 48 What seems less clear is why this was done. Skinner's insight referenced above may be decisive: As the 47 Blum (Komposition, 212) points out the connection between the language in this verse and the language used in the account of the rape of Tamar (2 Sam 13:12). The intertextual resonance is so striking that it seems clear that either one story copied from the other, or that both were penned by the same author or school of authors. Assuming that Genesis 34 is copying from Samuel, one could argue against my claim that this verse is a sign of an earlier layer by assuming that the (late) author of this account simply copied a dramatic statement from the older Tamar rape story without modifying it to fit the new context. Nevertheless, when taking Genesis 48 and Hamor's language of "one nation" into account, I believe the case for an earlier Shechem conquest narrative that was reworked into the Dinah story remains plausible. 48 See Blum, Komposition, 210—23; D. M. Carr, Reading the Fractures of Genesis: Historical and Uteraiy Approaches (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996), 252; J. Van Seters, "The Silence of Dinah (Genesis 34)," in J.-D. Macchi and T. Romer (eds), A Plural Commentary on Genesis 25—36. Melanges offerts a Albert de Puty (Geneva: Labor et Fides, 2000), 239-47.

344

ZEB FARVER

patriarch cycle began to merge with the exodus tradition scribes felt the need to explain why one of the patriarchs was conquering Canaanite territory before the return from Egypt. Wasn't Abraham told during the covenant of the parts (Gen 15:13—16) that his descendants would take control of the land only in another 400 years? If Jacob were a conqueror then he would be acting too early and ignoring the explicit word of YHWH to Abraham. The above explains why the story required reworking, but not why Simeon and Levi had to take the fall, and why Jacob needed to express consternation over the conquest. Noting that the Dinah story seems to be a late addition to the Jacob cycle, James Kugel suggests that one motivation for the rewrite may have been to offer a "backstory" to the curse of Simeon and Levi in Genesis 49:5-7. 49 As Kugel points out, although Genesis 34 works as a midrashic expansion and interpretation of Jacob's curse, the reverse seems impossible. The curse makes no mention of Shechem or Hamor, and never references rape, trickery, circumcision or any of the salient points of the Dinah story. It seems that a later editor, confronted with a virtually incomprehensible passage recording Jacob condemning two of his sons, reworked an already problematic text that recorded some sort of battle between Jacob's clan and the city of Shechem that ended in the "Israelite" takeover of the city as a backstory to this curse.

COMPARING THE ACCOUNTS In comparing the reconstructed Jerubaal story (A) to the reconstructed Jacob account (B)—the Dinah account is clearly secondary—the question of priority arises. Although it is possible to argue that both the Jerubaal and Jacob traditions surrounding the conquest of Shechem were independent sites of memory, nevertheless to me the most reasonable hypothesis seems to be that the Jerubaal account represents the older version. 50 It is common that traditions important to various Israelite groups are attributed to the ancestor figure Jacob. This is clear from the amount of cities that claim an association with Jacob (e.g., Succot, Penuel, Mahanaim, Beth-El, Shechem, Gilead). It seems most reasonable to argue that the traditions of the less important and more local hero are taken over and See J. L. Kugel, How to Read the Bible: A Guide to Scripture Then and Now (New York: Free Press, 2007), 169—75. Skinner notes many of the same points but admits to being unable to synthesize them to create an overall explanation (Skinner, Genesis, 421—22). 50 I avoid using the term "original" here for it is difficult to determine upon what the Jerubaal story may have been based. 49

JERUBAAL, JACOB AND THE BATTLE FOR SHECHEM

345

incorporated into the story of the more famous national figure, a phenomenon I call "tradition-cannibalism." 51 It would be more difficult to believe that the figure of Jerubaal could have taken over a story previously attributed to Jacob, and the pattern of Jacob's tradition-cannibalism militates against the possibility that there was simply an independent Jacobas-conqueror story. Moreover, the Jerubaal-Abimelech tradition refers to a specific building, the Temple of El-Brit or Ba'al-Brit, and the story explains its total destruction. Lawrence Stager argues that the Temple of El-Brit or Ba'al-Brit is to be identified with Wright's "Temple 1," a large building with a tower. 52 If Stager is correct, this part of the account, at least, must stem from an early memory, even if only an etiological tale about a destroyed building, since the building was destroyed in ca. 1100 BCE according to the standard higher chronology (1000 BCE according to Finkelstein and his lower chronology), 53 and all remains of the building would have been entirely covered for most of the monarchic period. Traditions B and C have no such particulars in their versions of the story, and nothing tying their versions archeologically to such an early period. 54 Z. Färber, Images of Joshua: The Construction ofMemoiy in Cultural Identities (Ph.D. diss., Emory University, forthcoming), ch. 2. Other examples are David's appropriation of the Goliath story from Elhanan (1 Sam 17 vs. 2 Sam 21:19), Joshua's appropriation of the conquest of Hebron and its native giants from Caleb (Josh 11:21 vs. Josh 14:12-15; 15:13-14), as well as his appropriation of the conquest of Hazor and defeat of King Jabin from Barak (Josh 11:10 vs. Judg 4:2, 23-24). 52 As opposed to "Temple 2," which Stager claims is illusory, having really been a granary; L. E. Stager, "The Fortress Temple at Shechem and the 'House of El, Lord of the Covenant,' " in P. H. Williams, Jr. and T. Herbert (eds), Healia Dei: Essays in Archaeology and Biblical Interpretation in Honor of Edward F. Campbell, Jr. at his Retirement (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1999), 228—49. See also Gaß's discussion of Bet Ba al-Berit-Bet El-Berit (Gaß, Ortsnamen, 312-14). 53 See I. Finkelstein, "Shechem in the Late Bronze Age and the Iron I," in E. Czerny et al. (eds), Timelines: Studies in Honour of Manfred Bietak (3 vols; OLA, 149; Leuven: Peeters, 2006), 2:349—56 (I thank Israel Finkelstein for discussing some of the details of his dating of Shechem with me and for directing me to this article). 54 Admittedly, this particular argument is not conclusive, since it is based on Stager's (reasonable but not certain) identification of the building. Na'aman, for instance, claims that the Temple of El-Brit is not the temple of Shechem at all, since he identifies Migdal Shechem as a town outside of Shechem and not a part of Shechem itself. He argues ("Hidden," 10—11) that the Temple of El-Brit may very well be the unusual structure uncovered by Adam Zertal and identified by him (Zertal) as an altar (A. Zertal, "Has Joshua's Altar been Found on Mount Ebal?," 51

346

Zeb F a r v e r

CONCLUSION I have argued that there are three different constructions of the same tradition regarding the conquest/destruction of Shechem recorded or referenced in the biblical texts. The earliest tradition would have been the BAR 11/5 [1985], 26-44). Zertal's description of the site, and his claim that the structure was Joshua's altar, brought about a flurry of counter-claims, with the dominant alternative interpretation of the structure being a watch-tower. For more on the polemic of tower vs. altar, see A. Kempinski, "Joshua's Altar—An Iron Age I Watchtower," BAR 12/1 (1986), 42, 44-49; A. Zertal, "How Can Kempinski be so Wrong?," BAR 12/1 (1986), 43, 49-53; and A. F. Rainey, "Zertal's Altar—A Blatant Phony," BAR 12/4 (1986), 66. It was in the context of this debate that Na'aman first offered his own suggestion that the structure was Migdal Shechem; see N. Na'aman, "The Tower of Shechem and the House of El-Berith," Zion 51/3 (1986), 259-80 (Hebrew). If Na'aman is correct, one could argue that this part of the story was inspired by the ruins of this ancient structure (thirteenth—twelfth centuries according to Zertal, eleventh century according to Finkelstein). Nevertheless, to me it appears very difficult to support the understanding of this structure as a tower (or even a temple with a tower). Rather, ignoring Zertal's more radical claim about the structure being Joshua's altar, it seems most probable that the structure was some sort of cult center, and its remains were the inspiration for the story of Joshua and the altar on Mount Ebal (in a personal communication, this was the opinion of Avraham Faust as well). In a similar vein, Amichai Mazar tentatively accepts Zertal's claim about "the cultic nature of the site." He writes: "The site's ritual purpose is suggested by the animal bones... found in the fill of the superseding structure. The bones include those of ritually clean young animals which may have been sacrificed here." Mazar suggests that the biblical references to the altar could be based on "old traditions." See A. Mazar, Archaeology of the Eand of the Bible (Anchor Bible Reference Library; New York: Double-day, 1990), 348-50. Mazar further discounts Na'aman's suggestion that the building was the tower of Shechem, writing that most probably "the tower of Shechem was located in Shechem itself," (Mazar, Archaeology, 366 n. 50; for a survey of possible geographic locations for Migdal Shechem, see Gaß, Ortsnamen, 305-11). Zioni Zevit, in his balanced discussion of the site, reaches similar con-clusions as well; see Z. Zevit, The Religion of Ancient Israel: A Synthesis of Taralladic Approaches (New York: Continuum, 2001), 196—201. For a book-length and very thorough analysis of the structure and the many possible interpretations, see R. Hawkins, The Iron Age I Strurture on Mount Ebal: Excavation and Interpretation (Bulletin for Biblical Research Supplements, 6; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2012). Hawkins, admitting that the site is an anomaly, comes to the conclusion that the site was Israelite and that the structure was cultic (I thank Ralph Hawkins for clarifying his position with me over e-mail).

JERUBAAL, JACOB AND THE BATTLE FOR SHECHEM

347

Jerubaal-Abimelech cycle, before its incorporation into the Gideon narrative. Jerubaal rebels against/vanquishes King Hamor and becomes the ruler of Shechem. Eventually, his son Abimelech destroys the town. As time went on, two parallel processes occurred. First, the conquest of Shechem became associated with the patriarch, Jacob. Second, Jerubaal began to be associated with Gideon, another Menassite hero. With these two processes working together, Jerubaal became thought of as the vanquisher of the Midianites (Gideon's story) and the conquest of Shechem was erased from the cycle and firmly planted into the Jacob cycle. An edited version of the Abimelech piece was added to the Gideon cycle, producing the incongruities mentioned earlier (Ophrah vs. Arumah, the serving of Hamor, etc.). Finally, the Jacob story itself began to morph into the Dinah saga as we have it. Ironically, Jerubaal himself was lost in the shuffle, and his story as it was once told is nowhere to be found. Yet through the accidents of tradition history, he lives on as the hero Gideon, and the patriarch Jacob.

MALBIM'S APPROACH TO THE SINS OF BIBLICAL PERSONAGES

AMOS FRISCH BAR-ILAN UNIVERSITY

1. INTRODUCTION Meir Loeb ben Jehiel Michel Malbim (1809-1879) was an Orthodox rabbi with a strongly conservative bent. 1 W e w o u l d therefore expect that in his Bible commentary, he would attempt to justify problematic actions performed by biblical characters, especially those in the book of Genesis, to the greatest extent possible so as to absolve them of any wrongdoing. 2 A n d

* This is a revised and enlarged version of a paper read at the Society of Biblical Literature International Meeting 2012 in Amsterdam, July 25, 2012. 1 On Malbim's life, see S. Z. Schaechter, "The Malbim, His Literary Work and Thought" (Ph.D. diss.; Hebrew University, 1983), 4-32 (Hebrew); M. M. Yashar, The Gaon Malbim: His Life, Teachings, Struggles, and Works (Jerusalem: Hod, 1976) (Hebrew); N. H. Rosenbloom, Malbim: Exgesis, Philosophy, Science and Mysticism in the Writings of Rabbi Meir Tebush Malbim (Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook, 1988), 1—87 (Hebrew); A. Sorski, In Storm and in Tempest: Chapters in the Stormy Life of the Renowened Gaon Rabbi Meir Lebush Malbim (Bnei Brak: Zivtanim, 1999) (Hebrew); H. Eshkoli, "Synonymy in Biblical Hebrew according to the Method of Malbim: A Critical Examination of His Semantic Method in the Field of Synonymy" (Ph.D. diss.; BarIlan University, 2009), 7-19 (Hebrew). 2 On the attitude to the sins of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs and other biblical personages found in the early translations, the Rabbinic literature, and the traditional Jewish commentary, see, e.g., E. Margaliyot, Those Uable in the Bible and Exonerated in the Talmud and Midrashim (London: Ararat, 1949 [Hebrew]); Y. Komlosh, The Bible in the Tight of the Aramaic Translations (Ramat Gan/Tel Aviv: BarIlan University Press/Dvir, 1973), 208-16 (Hebrew); E. Z. Melamed, Bible Commentators (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1975), vol. 1, 174—79, 292—93 (Hebrew); A. 348

MALBIM'S APPROACH

349

scholars do indeed de scribe his approach in this way. Noah Rosenbloom, for example, writes in his comprehensive book on Malbim: Like most of the commentators who preceded him, Malbim seeks to exonerate the heroes of the Bible from any smudge on their character. And like them, he makes efforts in every way to preserve their honor and explain their deeds, that at times seem to exceed the bounds of law and morality. Here, as well, his approach is eclectic, and is taken from the commentaries of his predecessors, whom he does not always attribute. 3

Rosenbloom supports this reading with seven examples: "You are my sister" (Gen 12:13); Isaac's blessing to Jacob, the rods in the troughs (Gen Shinan, The Embroidered Targum\ The Aggadah in Targum Pseudo-Jonathan of the Pentateuch (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1975), 152-56 (Hebrew); D. Berger, "On the Morality of the Patriarchs in Jewish Polemic and Exegesis," in C. Thoma and M. Wyschogrod (eds), Understanding Scripture: Explorations of Jewish and Christian Traditions of Interpretation (New York: Paulist Press, 1987), 49—62; E. Levine, The Aramaic Version of the Bible: Contents and Context (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1988), 99—111; A. Grossman, The Early Sages of France: Their Uves, Leadership and Works (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1995), 488-92 (Hebrew); A. Frisch, "Rabbi S. R. Hirsch's Method in the Issue of the 'Ancestors' Sins'," in M. Ahrend and S. Feuerstein (eds), Biblical Studies and Teaching (Ramat Gan: Bar-Ilan University Press, 1997), 181-97 (Hebrew); A. Frisch, "R. Jacob Zvi Meklenburg's Method in the Issue of the Patriarchs' Sins," JJS 53 (2002), 107-19; G. Sasson, "Visiting the Iniquity of the Fathers: The Sages' Criticism of the Patriarchs' Sins" (Ma thesis; Bar-Ilan University, 2002) (Hebrew); Y. Medan, " 'Anyone Who Says that Reuven Sinned . . .'," Alei Et^ion 14 (2006), 95-126; J. A. Diamond, "King David of the Sages: Rabbinic Rehabilitation or Ironic Parody?," Prooftexts 27 (2007), 373-426; M. Ophir, "A Preface to Studies in Hazal's Attitude to the Sexual Sins of the Biblical Heroes: Reuben and Bilhah, Judah and Tamar: A Proposal and a Paradigmatic Chapter" (Ma thesis; Bar-Ilan University, 2007) (Hebrew); M. Rachimi, "Exonerating Unconventional Behavior of the Patriarchs in the Commentary of R. Obadiah Sforno to the Pentateuch," in S. Vargon, A. Frisch, and M. Rachimi (eds), Studies in Bible and Exegesis 8 (E. Touitou Jubilee Volume; Ramat Gan/Elkana: Bar-Ilan University Press/Orot Israel College Press, 2008), 607-22 (Hebrew); N. Elyakim, "The Net^i? s Approach to Explaining Unconventional Behavior by the Patriarchs and Matriarchs," in Studies in Bible and Exegesis 8, 637—53; A. Grossman, He Shall Hule Over You? Medieval Jewish Sages on Women (Jerusalem: Zalman Shazar Center, 2011), 220—22, 511—16 (Hebrew). For an article that discusses the attitude of traditional commentary to this issue, see A. Frisch, "The Sins of the Patriarchs as Viewed by Traditional Jewish Exegesis," JSQ 10 (2003), 258-73. 3 Rosenbloom, Malbim, 150.

350

AMOS FRISCH

30:38, 41); the killing of the people of Shechem (Gen 34); Reuben and Bilhah, Aaron and the Golden Calf; David and Bathsheba. Zvi Schaechter writes in a similar vein in his PhD dissertation on Malbim. He begins his very short discussion (about a single page) on Malbim's attitude to biblical figures by stating: "As was already mentioned above, Malbim deemed it necessary to defend David, Solomon, and Jeremiah against the complaints of Don Isaac Abrabanel." 4 (Shaechter here refers to what he wrote in his discussion of Malbim's attitude to Abrabanel, namely, that Malbim disagrees with Abrabanel's suggestion that Jeremiah's knowledge of Hebrew was faulty and that David sinned in the Bathsheba episode.) Shaechter adds an additional figure to the discussion, stating that "Malbim defends Joseph, as well." In 1982 Maaravi Perez wrote an article on Malbim's commentary to the Jacob and Esau narrative in which he asserted—relating solely to this narrative—that [Malbim's] way is that of maximal justification of the deeds of Isaac, Rebekah, and Jacob, and the absolute indictment of Esau's actions. 5

This "maximal justification" stands in contrast to the interpretation of the Rabbis, who voiced sometimes trenchant criticism of Isaac, Rebekah, and Jacob. Michal Dell presents a similar view to Perez in her Ph.D. dissertation, but does, however, mention in its summation (which covers less than three pages) the following exception: Malbim generally defends the Patriarchs and seeks a way to justify their actions and mitigate their sins. We found only two places in which he voices criticism: against Rachel, who did not pray and therefore was not blessed with offspring; and against Jacob, who tarried in fulfilling his vow, and was accordingly punished by the episode with Dinah. [. . .] In both instances, the criticism is of educational value for his readers (how not to behave). An additional shared element is that Jacob and Rachel were punished (Dinah, barrenness), and presenting their actions as negative explains the tragedy that befell them. 6

Schaechter, "The Malbim," 117. M. Perez, "The Episode of Jacob and Esau according to the Commentary of Malbim," Bisdeh Hemed 25 (1982), 102-97(Hebrew). 6 M. Dell, "Orthodox Biblical Exegesis in an Age of Change: Polemics in the Torah Commentaries of R. J. Z. Meklenburg and Malbim" (Ph.D. diss.; Bar-Ilan University, 2008), 200 (Hebrew). Dell reconstructs the criticism of Rachel by combining Malbim's explanations to three passages in Genesis 30: the comparison he draws between the actions of Leah and those of Rachel in v. 14; the critique he 4 5

MALBIM'S APPROACH

351

M y initial p r e m i s e is that these descriptions do not fully reflect the complexity of M a l b i m ' s c o m m e n t a r y . W e shall therefore submit his c o m m e n t a r y on this topic to a f u n d a m e n t a l a n d t h o r o u g h e x a m i n a t i o n , to present a m o r e c o m p l e t e description of his a p p r o a c h to the sins of the progenitors of the J e w i s h people.

2. MALBIM'S DEFENSE OF THE PROGENITORS OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE A s m e n t i o n e d a b o v e , M a l b i m g o e s to s o m e lengths to d e f e n d the ancestors of the J e w i s h people. W e will e x a m i n e a simple yet representative e x a m p l e followed b y t w o m o r e c o m p l e x instances, in a bid to u n d e r s t a n d not only what M a l b i m asserts, but also the method he uses to d e f e n d his reading.

MALBIM ON GENESIS 12 Gen 12:10: "There was a famine in the land"—this, too, was a trial, as the Rabbis said, if he would [questioningly] think about the Lord's word, when He promised him, "And I will bless you [. . .] and you shall be a blessing" [Gen 12:2], and was faced [instead] with a curse and the fever of famine. But Abraham did not have such thoughts; he was too small in his own eyes to think that the Lord would change nature on his behalf. Consequently, nor did he expect to be miraculously sustained during the famine, all he asked was natural aid. He therefore went down to Egypt, not to establish a permanent home, but only to sojourn there temporarily, "for the famine was severe in the land," and to return when the famine would have passed. Accordingly, it was considered as if he still dwelled in the Land, since he meant to return. 7 D i d A b r a h a m act p r o p e r l y w h e n he w e n t d o w n to E g y p t during the f a m i n e in the l a n d of Israel, or should h e h a v e r e m a i n e d in the l a n d ? 8 T h r o u g h o u t

puts in Leah's mouth in v. 15; his explanation for the remembrance of Rachel in v. 22: "For now she prayed." Malbim is explicitly critical of Jacob in his commentary to Gen 33:18, 20. 7 Hebrew source: Hamishah Humshei Torah with the Ha-Torah ve-ha-Mit^yah Commentaiy by the Rabbi Meir l^eibush Malbim, vol. 1: Genesis (Jerusalem: Horev, 2008). The Hebrew source for the citations from Malbim's commentary to Samuel and Kings: SeferMikra'ei Kodesh Prophets and Writings by the Rabbi Meir Leibush Malbim, vol. 1 (Jerusalem: Horev, 2010). The passages from his commentary were translated for this article. 8 For a presentation and analysis of the views found in the early translations, the Rabbis, and medieval commentary, see A. Shinan and Y. Zakovitch, Abram and

352

AMOS FRISCH

the entire passage above, Malbim seeks to justify Abraham's conduct. His explanation is divided into three parts, and he raises three considerations in his bid to vindicate Abraham: (1) The famine was a trial to test Abraham: How would he react when, despite God's promise to bless him, he was in distress because of the famine in the land to which the Lord had led him? Interestingly, Malbim adopts a concept already found in the Rabbinic literature 9 (and in the light of his formulation, I think that his reference here is based mainly on Rashi), which he integrates into his commentary on this episode. 10 (2) Abraham reacts in a natural, rational manner, and does not rely on miracles. While Malbim does not explicitly mention the Rabbis, unlike in the preceding section, he probably based his interpretation upon them, since they derived a halakhic conclusion from Abraham's conduct in this narrative: "Our masters taught: When there is a famine in the city, remove your feet [i.e., leave], as it is said: 'There was a famine in the land, and Abram went down to Egypt to sojourn there [DU? "TUV]' [Gen 12:10]" (b. B. Qam. 60b). (3) Malbim engages in a close reading of "DU? "llA" and insists that it does not indicate taking up permanent residence, but moving to Egypt only temporarily. 11 Malbim's interpretation of this phrase is composed of two elements: (a) first, he argues that the very appearance of this wording reveals the purpose of the action ("went down"), since a similar description does not appear in the parallel depiction of Isaac's response to the famine in his time: "and Isaac went to Abimelech, king of the Philistines, in Gerar" (Gen 26:1); (b) second, he resorts to his interpretive method of assigning a separate, distinct meaning to each verb. 12 Sarai in Egypt: Gen. 10: 10-20 in the Bible, the Old Versions and the Ancient Jewish Uterature (Jerusalem: Hebrew University, 1983), esp. 6—21 (Hebrew). 9 For instance: Gen. Rab. 40:2; Pirqei K E/., chapter 26. 10 Unlike Rashi's focused interpretation, Malbim begins his commentary by connecting the verse with its context: "This, too, was a trial." He thereby links the topic of this verse with the preceding verses in the chapter (12), which Malbim presented as a trial: v. 1 ("for this was part of the trial [...] for if He had revealed this to him immediately, it would not have constituted a trial") and v. 6 ("all this was part of the trial"). Malbim draws this same distinction from a close reading of the verb Tub in additional verses: Gen 47:3; Exod 1:10; Num 20:15; Ruth 1:1. 12 Malbim's consistency regarding this distinction (cf. above, n. 11) is evident in his commentary to "nNTil flfrO "YU" (Gen 26:3), in which, too, he interprets the verb to mean a temporary stay. He thereby differs from Sforno, whose interpretation of " i l l " in 26:3 diverges from his understanding of the same verb in 11

MALBIM'S APPROACH

353

MALBIM ON GENESIS 37 Any commentator who seeks to defend a biblical figure faces a challenge that is by no means simple to overcome: namely, in instances of conflict between the characters, any defense of one of the protagonists inevitably results in the incrimination of another. What did Malbim do in such instances? We will discuss two stages in Joseph's interactions with his brothers, firstly, Joseph's speaking ill of his brothers to their father; and then, the brothers' negative attitude to Joseph, culminating in their plan to kill him. (i) Gen 37:2: "And Joseph brought bad reports of them to their father." Rashi, who is fundamentally apologetic regarding the acts of the Israelite patriarchs 13 identifies in this verse criticism of the brothers of Joseph who were the sons of Leah, as well as criticism of Joseph himself. Rashi ascribes three transgressions to Joseph's brothers: they were contemptuous of the children of the handmaidens, they ate flesh from living animals, and "they were suspected of illicit sexual behavior." Meanwhile, Joseph is criticized for engaging in childish behavior as well as slander against his brothers, for which he received three punishments that corresponded to the contents of his slanderous remarks. Malbim, in contrast, sets out to justify Joseph on all accounts. According to him, Joseph told his father "so that their father would rebuke them, he would make peace among them, and he would admonish them." Malbim writes: As regards Joseph, all this attests to his righteousness and good traits. He told this to his father out of his love for them, and from the attribute of truth and peace that had taken root in his soul, so that their father would rebuke them, and lead to peace between them.

the current verse. 13 See: L. Hacohen, "Educational and Moral Issues in the Patriarchs' Deeds according to Jewish Medieval Commentators: Rashi, Nahmanides and Ibn Caspi" (Ma thesis; Bar-Ilan University, 1995) (Hebrew); A. Grossman, "A Religious Controversy and Educational Aim in Rashi's Commentary to the Torah," in M. Ahrend, R. Ben-Meir and G.H. Cohn (eds), Virkei Nechama: Prof. Nechama Leibowit^ Memorial Volume (Jerusalem: Jewish Agency for Israel, Dept. for Jewish Zionist Education, 2001), 192-93 (Hebrew); A. Mondschein, '"Was He Then Named Jacob that He Might Supplant Me' (Gen. 27:36): On the Methodology of Rashi and Ibn Ezra in Their Attitude to Jacob's Act of Supplanting," Talpijot 12 (2001-2), 50-61 (Hebrew); A. Grossman, Rashi (trans. J. Linsider; Oxford: Littman Library, 2012), 105—6; cf. D. Rappel, Rashi: His Jewish Worldview (Jerusalem: Ministry of Education and Sport, Religious Education Administration, 1995), 16-17 (Hebrew).

354

AMOS FRISCH

Malbim cannot, however, entirely exonerate Joseph's brothers, since he had already declared in the questions that precede his interpretation that nK [...] NTT (as opposed to the more usual wording "OH niJTN) is a true statement. In other words, the language of the credible narrator suggests that Joseph's criticism of his brothers is based on reality. Accordingly, there must be some evil that the brothers committed, as he asserts: Since the sons of Jacob from the Matriarchs thought the sons of the handmaidens as slaves from their mothers' side, they spoke ill of them, calling them slaves; and the sons of the handmaidens also spoke ill of the sons of the Matriarchs.

Notwithstanding this, the extent to which Malbim limited the wrongdoing of the brothers is noteworthy. Rashi explains the "speaking ill" as Joseph's reporting of every ill of theirs that he saw, and ascribing to them sins that could be regarded as severe. For Malbim, in contrast, this refers solely to the brothers' flawed speaking to each other (and in this context, he expands the numbers of sinners to include the sons of the handmaidens who also spoke against the sons of the Matriarchs). (ii) Gen 37:4 ff.: "And his brothers saw . . . "—Malbim lays out his interpretation of the brothers' plan for Joseph in a programmatic section at the beginning of the narrative (37:2): This is the reason why the tribes, the tribes of the Lord, agreed to sell their brother, and initially wanted to murder him, for they had to presume him to be wicked and corrupt, to the extent that they thought it obligatory to remove him from the world. It is inconceivable that for a minor jealousy over the coat of many colors that his father had made for him these righteous ones, the pillars of the earth, became a band of murderers and wild animals. These scriptures will explain this to us, to exonerate the tribes, on the one hand, since their intent was for Heaven's sake. Accordingly, we did not find that they were punished for this, since in this they were "like a nation that does what is right, that has not abandoned the laws of its God" [Isa 58:2], Nonetheless, Joseph's righteousness, on the other hand, will also be revealed, for "archers bitterly assailed him" [Gen 49:23] without reason, therefore "yet his bow stayed taut" [Gen 49:24],

There is much to be gleaned from this passage. Malbim asserts: "These scriptures will explain this to us, to exonerate the tribes, on the one hand, since their intent was for Heaven's sake," and he characterizes the brothers as "these righteous ones." At the same time, though, he insists "Joseph's

M A L B I M ' S APPROACH

355

righteousness, on the other hand, will also be revealed." Malbim presents Joseph as righteous, and the brothers not as wicked, but as having incorrectly interpreted Joseph's behavior and Jacob's intentions. They had wrongly thought that the following generation would only see a single son chosen as successor, namely Joseph, and that they would not all continue the "divine influence." For example, see Malbim's commentary to v. 4: "Accordingly, they thought to remove a painful thorn from the vineyard for the general good, not because of anyone's jealousy of another. Rather, so that the holy princes would not be profaned, and Jacob abandoned to proscription and Israel to mockery." In these two instances, where both sides could emerge tarnished, Malbim defends Joseph and completely exonerates him. He also, at the same time, advocates on behalf of the brothers, but without leaving them entirely blameless. Attention should be paid to the formulaic wording "relates the righteousness of X" used by Malbim to develop his explanations detailing the good and proper conduct of a certain individual. (T found nine such instances in his commentary to the Torah, an additional two in his commentary to the book of Ruth, and yet another in his commentary to the book of Esther.) In two cases, this wording appears in the context of Malbim's attempt to transform a problematic action of the character into a positive depiction (Gen 21:14—the expulsion of Ishmael; Gen 41:52—the names of the sons of Joseph, which could sound like an attempt to expunge the family history). And again, in similar language: "Joseph's righteousness, too, will be revealed" (Gen 37:2).14

3. MALBIM'S CRITICISM OF THE BIBLICAL PROGENITORS In addition to these examples of Malbim's defense of the biblical forefathers—as well as the two examples of Malbim's leveling a degree of criticism towards them cited in Michal Dell's dissertation (namely, Rachel's failure to pray as well as Jacob's tarrying in the fulfillment of his vow)—I could list a further seven cases in Genesis of his limited critique of individuals, attribution of sin, or disparagement: (i) Gen 32:8-9: Malbim finds fault with Jacob's fear of Esau, especially in light of the assurance of God's aid. He reads the dual language: "then Jacob was greatly afraid and was distressed," not as complement or Along with the formulation: "relates [~ID0Q] the righteousness of X," Malbim also employs variant wordings: "tells [T1H]," "informs [VTIH]," and in this verse: "reveals pfrr]." 14

356

AMOS FRISCH

addition but as consequence: "After Jacob saw that he was afraid, he therefore was distressed; this itself distressed him, for he deduced from this that he was not worthy of miracles, since his trust [in God] was not perfect." 15 (ii) Gen 35:16: Malbim explains Rachel's death after giving birth to Benjamin as a divine response to "the flaw of his [Jacob's] possessing the two sisters." He observes that before the Torah was given it had been permitted to marry two sisters, but after the blessing that God had given him to be under divine Providence, since then the divine influence shone for them as it was after the Giving of the Torah. Since then there had been the [perception as a] flaw of his possessing the two sisters, especially once she had given birth to Benjamin and the tribes had been born. Malbim mentions a presumed Rabbinic dictum: "For this reason she died and was not buried in the Cave of Machpelah." 16 (iii) Gen 35:21-23: Concerning Reuben, Malbim agrees with the opinion of the Rabbis (the dictum of R. Samuel bar Nahmani in the name of R.Jonathan: "Whoever maintains that Reuben sinned is merely in error [. . .] this teaches that he transposed his father's couch"—b. Sabb. 55b), as well as with the Kabbalists 17 ("the Kabbalists explained that Manasseh and Ephraim should have come forth from Jacob that night that he changed the place of his father's couch. Due to this action they were not born, and it was accounted to Reuben as if he had lain with Bilhah"). 18 He even adds an embellishment of his own in a reading that is opposed to the simple 15 This interpretation was already offered by the Tosafists; see: J. Gellis, ed., Sefer Tosafot Hashalem: Commentary on the Bible, vol. 3 (Jerusalem: Mifal Tosafot Hashalem, 1984), 214 n. 14 (Hebrew). 16 This explanation appears in Nahmanides' commentary to Lev 18:25, but I did not find it in the Rabbinic literature. A Rabbinic aggadic teaching has Jacob finding a flaw within himself: ". . . for I married two sisters in their lifetime, while the Torah will forbid them to me" (b. Pesah. 119b). This version, however, does not speak of a sin, nor does it relate to the death of Rachel. 17 For the inclusion of Kabbalistic conceptions in his commentary, see, e.g.: Rosenbloom, Malbim, 246-49, 373-75, 378, 380-81, and more; for the incorporation of Kabbalistic notions in his halakhic writings, in his Art^ot ha-Hayyim (on Shulhan A.rukb, Orah Hayyim), see Schaechter, "The Malbim," 38—46. 18 For the inclusion of Kabbalistic conceptions in his commentary, see, e.g.: Rosenbloom, Malbim, 246-49, 373-75, 378, 380-81, and more; for the incorporation of Kabbalistic notions in his halakhic writings, in his Art^ot ha-Hayyim (on Shulhan A.rukb, Orah Hayyim), see Schaechter, "The Malbim," 38—46.

MALBIM'S APPROACH

357

meaning of the verse. According to Malbim's reading, the subject of the verb in "he lay with Bilhah, his father's concubine" is Jacob, and not Reuben; for Malbim, Reuben thought that Jacob should have been in the tent of his mother Leah, and not in that of Bilhah, Rachel's handmaiden. He therefore "transposed his father's couch," as a result of which the two sons who should have been born to Jacob from Bilhah were not born. Despite downplaying the intensity of the act, Malbim still uses the incriminating term "sin" (TON) that does not appear in the biblical text. Thus, he concludes "By these two sons being born to Joseph, the sin of the act with Bilhah would be rectified"; and also remarks in the body of his commentary: "so that the other tribes, who did not sin, would not be deprived." He goes on to state: "Even though he did this for his mother's honor, he was insolent to his father and his wife." Malbim's formulations express a critical view of Reuben's behavior. How are we to understand this, in light of Malbim's introductory statements which, as noted above, adopt the Rabbinic position that Reuben did not sin? He seems to maintain that Reuben did not commit a severe sin, contrary to what the language of the text implies, but still asserts that Reuben definitely sinned to some degree. (iv) Regarding Gen 38:1, Malbim writes: "Judah went down"—he was punished by descending from the level of his brothers by cleaving to Hirah. "And he saw" (b)—by taking a Canaanite woman, as it is written in 1 Chr 2:3, "Bath-shua [literally, the daughter of Shua] the Canaanite woman [bore to him]." Her name is not known, because she did not convert, rather he took her as she was. Consequently, he called the first two sons Er and Onan, because their end was bad, for they did not live; while the third he named Shelah, auguring for good, as the Rabbis said, for then he was in Chezib, for he had brought her out from her father's house and converted her.

Following the Rabbis and Rashi, Malbim sees "Judah went down" as not merely describing a physical action, but also serving as a moral judgment that expresses punishment: a descent from his moral standing.19 In direct

For the Rabbinic teachings, see, e.g. Gen. Rab. 65:2; Exod. Rab. 42:3; Tanh. (ed. Buber), Vajeshev 12; b. Sotah 13b. For an understanding of the locative verbs Plbj? and TT1 (ascend and descend, respectively) appearing in the Bible in a metaphorical sense, see M. Garsiel, "Metaphorical and Metonymical Methods in the Biblical Story," Criticism and Interpretation 23 (1987), 16—19 (Hebrew); I. Rozenson, "Zorah-Timnah: A Study of the Interpretive Meaning of the Geographical Descriptions in the Samson Narratives," BeitMikra 41 (1996), 135-52, esp. 146-48 19

358

AMOS FRISCH

continuation of this reasoning, Malbim's commentary on Judah's actions at the beginning of the narrative sounds as if he understands them as a sin, even if he does not explicitly state this. In other words, Malbim interprets the wording "Judah went down," not as a neutral statement, but as a report of moral significance: Judah descended from his high standing, as punishment. Malbim understands Judah's further actions, depicted in v. 2, to be the continuation of this negative perception of Judah. They portray Judah's sin, even though this word itself does not appear in the biblical text. Nevertheless, Malbim's reading is unlike that of Rashi, who writes that his wife, the daughter of Shua, was the daughter of a "OJ^D with the meaning of "merchant." Malbim (on the basis of 1 Chr 2:3) understands this to be an ethnic designation ("Canaanite"), and immediately adds the crucial detail that Judah did not convert his wife. 20 The bitter fate of the first two sons, which is symbolized in their names, is apparently also linked to their origin (as can be deduced from a close reading of what Malbim writes about the birth of Shelah, at the time of the conversion of Bathshua). (v) Gen 42:21-22: When the viceroy of the Egyptian monarch imprisons one of Joseph's brothers and asks that they also bring their little brother, the brothers regret their previous actions and Reuben reminds them that they did not heed his warning. Malbim seeks meaning in every element of the text, and erects a sophisticated edifice of a legal disagreement between Reuben and his brothers, with the position of each side being built on three premises. The brothers think that they were punished not because of a fault in their judgment, since even now they maintain that Joseph deserved to die, but because they did not treat him beyond what strict law demanded. In his examination of v. 21, Malbim suggests three reasons why the brothers should have shown compassion to

(Hebrew). For the Rabbis' ascription of such meaning to these verbs, see N. Leibowitz, Studies in Shemot (The Book of Exodus) (trans. A. Newman; Jerusalem: World Zionist Organization, Dept. for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora, 1976), 559-60. 2 0 1 mentioned Rashi because of the context of the discussion, but the apologetic interpretation of ''JJJJD as "merchant" (following Isa 23:8; Prov 31:24) also appears in Targum Onkelos and Pseudo-Jonathan, Rabbinic teachings (b. Pesah. 50a), and the leading traditional commentaries (e.g., R. David Kimhi, Nahmanides, Abrabanel). Nevertheless, Malbim could find support in Rabbinic sources (such as Gen. Rab. 85:1) that understood this term in its ethnic sense. For a presentation and discussion of the early Jewish exegetical sources on v. 2, see: A. Shinan and Y. Zakovitch, The Story of Judah and Tamar: Genesis 38 in the Bible, the Old Versions and the Ancient Jewish Literature (Jerusalem: Hebrew University, 1992), 17—26 (Hebrew).

MALBIM'S APPROACH

359

Joseph according to their own reasoning and beyond the strict law. Malbim numbers these reasons: (1) "on account of our brother"—because he was kin; (2) "because we looked on at his anguish"—out of pity for his situation; (3) "as he pleaded with us"—because of his entreaties. It was the brothers' disregard for these reasons that led to their current punishment. Reuben, in contrast, argues that Joseph did not deserve to die, and in his speech Malbim finds an additional three reasons for why this brother dissented from the others: "Do no wrong to the boy"—he was a boy, and did not deserve punishment; "you paid no heed"—I warned, but you did not listen; "also his blood"—even according to your argument that he was liable punishment, he did not deserve to die (or to become a slave, which is like death). Now with the benefit of hindsight, the brothers themselves, and to an even greater extent Reuben, speak of the grave error of their actions that would have entailed the killing of their brother. (vi) Gen 49:4-7: Malbim leaves the censuring nuance in Jacob's blessing to Reuben, and then to Simeon and Levi, and makes no attempt to obscure it. As regards Reuben, Jacob succinctly presents his sin: "by your acting as hastily as running water, in your unbridled haste [. . .] and by the transposing of the couch, only twelve tribes remained" (v. 4). Regarding Simeon and Levi, he strongly asserts: "They, too, are not worthy of such high position, for they are brothers in the trait of anger and revenge [. . .] and conspiracies of violence found a permanent home and dwelling within their hearts. Their extermination of the city of Shechem and what they did to Joseph, too, was motivated by ire, anger, and vengeance" (v. 5). Later in his commentary he speaks of their "cruelty" (v. 6). Nonetheless, he interprets the punishment that Jacob metes out to Simeon and Levi ("I will divide them in Jacob, scatter them in Israel" [v. 7]) in a surprising way, removing the dimension of punishment. He does not understand the verbs as referring to the two sons, but to "their anger" and "their wrath," arguing that the capacity for anger and inflicting punishment was concentrated within them, and that Jacob sought to diffuse this trait among all the tribes (a decision which Malbim considers necessary). (vii) Gen 50:17: In the brothers' request of Joseph after their father's death: "Forgive, I urge you, the offense and guilt [DDKOni] of your brothers who treated you so harshly," they unequivocally admit the crime against him. Malbim's close reading of the verse significantly weakens the force of the sin reflected in their words by arguing that the wording NOn indicates inadvertent action, and hence their behavior was both unintended as well as willful: the sale was a (i.e., willful), but since they thought that Joseph was persecuting them and wanted to evict them from their father's house, this made their behavior "inadvertent." "Who treated

360

AMOS FRISCH

y o u so harshly" reflects their past reasoning: they thought that they w e r e acting harshly in response to similar harsh conduct. M a l b i m presents a farfetched reading of their self reference as "the servants of the G o d of y o u r father," n a m e l y that it reflects their great advocative influence. H e already attributes the divine realm of dual causality (of w h i c h J o s e p h will speak in the following verse) to the w o r d s of the brothers: they did not act out of free choice, but were agents in the realization of the divine plan. 2 1

4. TWO EXAMPLES FROM THE FORMER PROPHETS B e f o r e examining the findings, I w i s h to discuss two further significant examples f r o m M a l b i m ' s c o m m e n t a r y o n the F o r m e r Prophets that will afford us a m o r e complete picture of M a l b i m ' s interpretive m e t h o d . T h e first example is f r o m D a v i d ' s major sin, and the second, f r o m the sin of Solomon.

THE EPISODE OF DA VIDAND BATHSHEBA (2 SAM 11-12) In his c o m m e n t a r y to v. 3 of the narrative, M a l b i m presents the position of Abrabanel, a c o m m e n t a t o r to w h o m h e frequently refers: The prince R. Isaac Abrabanel greatly accused David, and explained that he sinned from five aspects: (a) In that he [David] sinned with a married woman, and he did not agree with the teaching of the Rabbis (b. Sabb. 56a) that she was divorced from Uriah, which is against the simple meaning of Scripture, (b) In that he [David] sought that Uriah would lay with his wife and the son who would be born would be thought to be his [i.e., Uriah's], and his name would be cut off from his father's house [i.e., from David]. This is besides the intermingling of families that would come forth from this, with a brother marrying his sister, of which it is said (Lev. 19:29), "and the land be filled with depravity." (c) In that he commanded that Uriah be placed in the front of the fierce fighting, so that he would be killed, for no evildoing on his part; it would have been better if he had been delayed and troubled until Bathsheba would 21 Such an explanation is already given by R. Jacob ben Asher (the author of the Tur) in his "Long Commentary" to the Torah, in the name of R. Joseph Kimhi. It is noteworthy that the far-fetched suggestion that "and he lay" in Gen 35:22 refers to Jacob, and not Reuben, also appears in R. Jacob ben Asher's commentary, albeit in a form slightly different from that of Malbim (see above, the third example of "Malbim's Criticism"). R. Jacob ben Asher suggests Jacob wanted to lay with Bilhah. I do not expressly maintain that Malbim was familiar with the interpretation of R. Jacob ben Asher, but we should perhaps search for additional instances of similar explanations shared by them both.

MALBIM'S APPROACH

361

give birth secretly, with the child being given to a wet nurse, with no one knowing, (d) In that he killed him by the Ammonites' sword, and many good Israelites were killed with him [i.e., with Uriah], when he [i.e., David] could have caused him to be killed by an Israelite in secret, (e) His immediately taking Bathsheba to his house, as if he were still pursued by his desire. It is his [= Abrabanel's] opinion that in truth he [= David] was greatly guilty, but by his repenting his sin was forgiven, he received punishment, and he was cleansed.

Malbim does not agree that David committed five sins in this narrative. Immediately following his presentation of Abrabanel's reading, Malbim states: "But with the correct viewpoint, the opinion of our Sages, of blessed memory, is necessary." According to Malbim, Abrabanel stands in opposition to the Rabbis, who in fact offer the correct reading. His reference is the well-known dictum of R. Samuel bar Nahmani in the name of R. Jonathan in b. Sabb. 56a: "Whoever maintains that David sinned is merely in error." What better way to respond to Abrabanel than with questions: For if she were a married woman, how could he later marry her, since she would be forbidden to the one who engaged in relations with her [while she was still married]? And how could he have fasted and prayed for the life of the son to be born, who would be a mam^er? How could his repentance be accepted, with the woman who was forbidden to him by Torah law being in his house, which would be as immersing with a reptile in his hand? And how could the Lord have chosen from the offspring that came from this woman a tribe of rulers, "and he was named Jedidiah," and "the Lord favored him" [2 Sam 12:25, 24]? All this clearly teaches that Bathsheba was not forbidden to David.

As Malbim continues his commentary, he dismantles these difficulties one after the other, and explains why, in his opinion, David did not commit the sins that Abrabanel charges him with. Malbim's reasoning is based on the reading of an Amora, R. Samuel bar Nahmani in the name of R. Jonathan, that Uriah had divorced his wife before setting out to battle, and afterwards rebelled against the king and was therefore liable to the death penalty. 22 1 will not set forth all the details of Malbim's argument, but will provide an

22 In accordance with the halakhic conception that a king is entitled to execute anyone defined as rebelling against him. See, e.g., t. Ter. (ed. Lieberman) 7:20; b. Meg. 14k, b. Sanh. 49b, cf. Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hi/. Melakhim (Laws of Kings) 3:8.

362

AMOS FRISCH

illustrative example f o u n d in his response to the fourth c h a r g e — t h a t m a n y in Israel died together w i t h Uriah: David was precise in his words, that he be placed where the fighting was the fiercest, for the fighting continued even with out this. Even without this order, the valiant men would necessarily stand in the thick of the fighting, to turn back the battle at the gate. The order was to place Uriah there, he did not order that he be brought to a dangerous place for the purpose of Uriah being killed. Rather, they fought normally, and he ordered that Uriah be placed where the fighting was the fiercest among the valiant ones who risked their lives. This was so that the others who would be killed [would die] in the course of the war, since they fought there in the normal manner. Only, what is written: "then fall back" (11:15)—that they not save Uriah, thereby leading to his death, and he [Uriah] was liable the death penalty. H o w e v e r , while it initially appears that M a l b i m d e f e n d s David as a matter of principal, w h e n w e go back and examine his c o m m e n t a r y to the beginning of the narrative w e see that he ascribes a series of transgressions to D a v i d through his close reading of the biblical text: "At the turn of the year"—this alludes that the king remained in his house and did not go forth himself to fight the war of the Lord, and therefore this episode could happen. So that you would not say that he was weary and weak from the previous war, Scripture says, "at the turn of the year." So that you would not think that it was not a fitting time to go forth because of the cold and rain, it says, "when kings go out [to battle]," for this was in the [spring] month of Sivan, when all the kings of the world go forth to battle. So that you would not say that this was a minor war, and beneath the honor of the king to go forth by himself, it says, "he sent Joab," the military commander, "with his officers," who were all the military commanders and the valiant warriors, "and all Israel with him." It was fitting that their king go before them. "And they devastated Ammon and besieged Rabbah," which took much time; nonetheless, "David remained in Jerusalem," and did not come "to the aid of the Lord among the warriors" (Judg 5:23). M a l b i m therefore reads verse 1 in a m a n n e r that levels several criticisms at David (and h e continues this critical reading in v. 2): (a) " A t the turn of the y e a r " — a year had passed since the last war, there w a s n o excuse of weariness f r o m the wars; (b) " w h e n kings go o u t " — t h i s is the season during w h i c h w a r s are usually fought, there w a s no excuse of inclement weather; (c) " h e sent J o a b with his officers and all Israel w i t h h i m " — t h i s

MALBIM'S APPROACH

363

describes the total mobilization of all the men of fighting age, and it is only fitting that the king should take part in a war of this scope; (d) "And they devastated Ammon and besieged Rabbah"—this describes prolonged activity, but David did not come that entire time. It is noteworthy that Malbim's interpretation preceded several contemporary scholars, who also were attentive to the suggestions of criticism in 2 Sam 11:1, including Meir Sternberg and Menahem Perry in their ground-breaking article published in Hebrew in the summer of 1968.23 At this juncture we should take note of Malbim's literary sensitivity. Abrabanel was critical of David's actions in this narrative, but he did not engage in as close a reading as did Malbim, nor did he voice any criticism of David in v. 1. Malbim gave thought to the criticism intimated in the verse that begins the narrative, as did before him R. Samuel Laniado (16th century), the author of Kelt

Yakar

on the Former Prophets.

Both

commentators exhibit great literary sensitivity and defend David's conduct in the main body of the narrative, but are also capable of complex reading. 24 We would expect that a commentator who defends David throughout the narrative, even when the king's sin is presented openly, would ignore any possible hints of criticism in v. 1. The attention, however, that Laniado and Malbim devote to each word in the verse (such as the second time reference: "when kings go out," that follows the first such reference: "At the turn of the year") led both to presume that the verse contains veiled criticism of David.

23 M. Perry and M. Sternberg, "The King Through Ironic Eyes: The Narrator's Devices in the Biblical Story of David and Bathsheba and Two Excursuses on the Theory of the Narrative Text," Hasifrut 1 (1968), 267-68 (Hebrew); the later English version: M. Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative: Ideological Literature and the Drama of Reading (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985), 186—229; cf. A. B. Ehrlich, Mikra ki-Pheschuto, vol. 2 (Berlin: Poppelauer's, 1900), 209; R. Polzin, David and the Deuteronomist: 2 Samuel (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1993), 109-10. For the different view that this exposition is not critical of David, see M. Garsiel, The Kingdom of David: Studies in History and Inquiries in Historiography (Tel Aviv: Don and Israel Society for Biblical Research, 1975), 100-5 (Hebrew). 24 This is an example of an exposition that does not merely offer a neutral presentation of the data, but is also judgmental (either expressly or implicitly). Additional examples of such expositions with an implicit judgment: 1 Sam 28:3b, 1 Kgs 21:1. On judgmental exposition, see: Y. Zohar, "The Exposition in the Biblical Narrative" (Ph.D. diss.; Bar-Ilan University, 2005), 38-47 (Hebrew).

364

AMOS FRISCH

SOLOMON'S MARRIAGE TO PHARAOH'S DAUGHTER (1KGS 3:1 AND 11:1) Malbim responds to Solomon's marriage to Pharaoh's daughter in a similarly complex manner; in this case, however, he does so by reacting to the same episode differently in two places. In his commentary to chapter 3, he presents the marriage to Pharaoh's daughter in a positive light: (v. 1) "Solomon married"—after he established the kingdom among his people, he established it against the kings of the lands around him. He did so by his having marital bonds with a great king, a great ruler in those days, and by this he would find help against his external troubles, (v. 2) "Only the people"—the word "only" means that the kingdom was established domestically and externally, only there was still one lack as regards their worship of God, that they offered sacrifices at the high places, that is, the Temple had not been built.

However, in his commentary to 11:1—2, Malbim discusses this marriage as an instance of Solomon's marriages to foreign women, and so finds fault with the marriage to Pharaoh's daughter. He cites Abrabanel (with whom he agrees): [...] In that he took many wives, for the king is commanded not to have many wives, not even [wives as righteous] as Abigail. [. . .] And Pharaoh's daughter was the first with whom he began to be corrupted. Even though he converted them, they were "from the nations of which the Lord had said" (v. 2), and it was forbidden to marry with them, "lest they turn your heart away to follow their gods."

What, then, is his position? Presumably, we could say that he presents two contradictory views, and unwittingly contradicted himself in his commentary to chapter 11. I think, however, that his commentary might express a more complex position, one that flows with the spirit of the text: In the beginning of chapter 3, where Solomon is presented in a positive light, Malbim concentrates on the political significance of the marriage, in accordance with the nature of the verse, which lacks any critical religious assessment and is followed by verses that express a positive view of Solomon. 25 However, in chapter 11, which consists of a survey of the king's religious sin, and where the verse quoted levels itself explicit criticism of Solomon, Malbim also reveals the sin involved in the marriage to Pharaoh's 25 It should be stressed that Malbim's commentary to 3:1 not only refrains from finding fault with Solomon for his marriage to Pharaoh's daughter, but it also contains a definitely positive evaluation of the political significance of such a union.

MALBIM'S APPROACH

365

daughter. This marriage can be viewed as a political achievement and at the same time, a religious failure. I suspect Malbim is not a commentator who would contradict himself in such a short range of chapters. This is supported not only by the above explanation, but also by Malbim's complete avoidance in chapter 3 of any judgment of this marriage. His silence in chapter 3 speaks volumes, since he was well aware of Abrabanel's lengthy discussion on this issue. Abrabanel presents a clear challenge: "Dichotomy is unavoidable here: either we say that Solomon sinned by his marital bond with Pharaoh king of Egypt, or this was no sin at all." He presents a complex answer: If I were drawn by plain logic to the simple meaning of Scripture, I would say that Solomon did not sin at all in this and that the marriage was not forbidden, and I would respond to the five questions that I raised regarding this opinion as follows [ . . . ] .

Then, however, he presents a decisive point: But our Sages, of blessed memory, received [the tradition] that the true [interpretation] of the Torah commandments that I mentioned is different [. . .] Now, I have shown you the way of our Sages, of blessed memory, which is the received and true [tradition]. Accordingly, we should choose the path of the answers to the questions that I raised that corresponds to their tradition, because they did not raise these questions, and made no effort to resolve them.

Thus, in chapter 3 Abrabanel offers a literal advocative interpretation, which he rejects in favor of the critical interpretation of the Rabbis. Since this is connected to his interpretation of the commandments of the Torah, and not merely his understanding of the narrative, Abrabanel finds himself committed to the interpretation of the Rabbis, even though this is not the literal meaning. 26 Malbim, in contrast, divides his view between the biblical texts: with regard to chapter 3 he does not voice criticism but offers positive statements about Solomon in light of adjoining passages; whereas in chapter 11 he then expresses clear criticism. In my opinion, Malbim's interpretation is in keeping with the internal logic of the narrative of Solomon's reign, in which a clear distinction is drawn between the positive first part and the critical second part.27 26 For a discussion of the Rabbis' mainly negative attitude to this marriage, see: G. Sasson, "A King and Layman—The Sages' Attitude towards King Solomon" (Ph.D. diss.; Bar-Ilan University, 2004), 142-65 (Hebrew). 27 See: A. Frisch, "The Narrative of Solomon's Reign in the Book of Kings" (Ph.D. diss.; Bar-Ilan University, 1986), 52-63 (Hebrew); idem, "Structure and Its

366

AMOS FRISCH

5. CHARACTERISTICS AND ASSESSMENTS We turn now to an analysis of our findings. I wish to examine several characteristic features of Malbim's attitude to the progenitors of the Jewish people. (i) The first characteristic: the tendeny for advocay. Despite some significant exceptions, I do not seek to contradict the basic attitude attributed to Malbim on this question. He is defensive of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs and other outstanding biblical characters. 28 This is not a simple process, though. In some instances, his tendency to defend these biblical characters softens the criticism but does not cancel it, and there are cases in which this apologetic inclination is not expressed (as in ascribing sin to Jacob for tarrying in fulfilling his vow). Regardless, this is not the sole characteristic of Malbim's approach, and several others should be noted: (ii) The second characteristic: consideration given to explicit judgment in the text. When the text is expressly judgmental, and levels criticism at an important figure or at a certain action, Malbim is more inclined to adopt the criticism than in instances where the Bible does not contain any outright evaluation, and where criticism comes exclusively from the feelings of the readers who do not identify with the action. Criticism in the text can come from the narrator, the sinning figure who confesses his sin, or another character. An analogous instance is one in which the text speaks of punishment (or of tribulation that is perceived as punishment), and Malbim attempts to reveal the sin for which the punishment has been inflicted. Yet even when the narrator is decidedly judgmental, this does not mean that Malbim will accept this attitude at face value and in all its severity. He may allay it to a significant degree (as he did for the David-Bathsheba narrative, despite the explicit criticism found in 2 Sam 11:27). (iii) The third characteristic: Malbim does not view the biblical text as it is, he also perceives it through the prism of the Rabbis. This additional lens is extremely important for him, and he reveals his loyalty to the Jkabbis in different ways. A prime example is his disagreement with Abrabanel concerning the David-Bathsheba narrative, where he states: "But with the correct viewpoint, the opinion of our Sages, of blessed memory, is necessary." A second example is his explanation of Abraham's going down to Egypt, in which he openly mentions the Rabbis on one point (the trial), but also implicitly refers to them in the continuation ("he did not rely on Significance: The Narrative of Solomon's Reign (1 Kings 1-12.24)," JSOT 51 (1991), 3-14, esp. 13-14. 28 This characteristic is of course not unique to Malbim, but it is mentioned here as a basis for the whole construction of his attitude on this issue.

MALBIM'S APPROACH

367

miracles"). This is also the case in other instances, as, for example, regarding '"Judah went down'—he was punished by descending from the level of his brothers." Notwithstanding this, he also permits himself on certain points not to follow the Rabbis, for example when he refrains from criticizing Solomon in chapter 3.29 (iv) The fourth characteristic: a feature that has until now gone unnoticed, but in my opinion is original and significant. The second example from the Former Prophets is quite consistent with what we saw of Malbim's position in several instances in Genesis: namely, the two phases of his evaluation. On occasion he is not critical in the first phase, when action that took place at the time of the narrated event is described, but he does find fault in a later, retrospective verse. In the three cases in Genesis— namely, the brothers' remorse and Reuben's accusation; Jacob's words regarding Simeon and Levi; the brother's request of Joseph after their father's death—different assessments are voiced by the narrator and by the character (the brothers and Reuben; Jacob; the brothers when they speak to Joseph). We actually have four instances here, since what Jacob says to Simeon and Levi relates not only to their attitude to Joseph, but also to their actions in Shechem. In contrast to the criticism voiced by Jacob himself in Gen 49 (which Malbim does not dismiss), Malbim consistently seeks to justify all that the brothers did in Shechem in his commentary on Gen 34. It seems that the portrayal of the event in real time as reported by the reliable narrator, the "member of enactment," in Sternberg's terminology, 30 is the most important place in the text, which leads Malbim to defend the honor of the biblical characters in it. The "member of report," the description of the event uttered by one of the characters, is not on the same temporal plane and also constitutes subjective retrospective thought, of which Malbim is more receptive to critical evaluation.

That said, even in this instance he manifests a certain loyalty to the Rabbis by adding to his interpretation of 11:3: "And Pharaoh's daughter was the first with whom he began to be corrupted." Such a conclusion is not inevitable, since it could be argued that chapter 11, as well, does not voice criticism of Pharaoh's daughter, and that it mentions her apart from the other women ("King Solomon loved many foreign women in addition to Pharaoh's daughter"—11:1). A striking fact is the lack of any mention of Solomon's building a shrine for her, even though we could expect that, if Solomon built shrines for his wives from less dominant peoples ( w . 7—8), he certainly would have done so for Pharaoh's daughter, the foreign woman of such senior standing. 30 On the "member of enactment" and the "member of report," see Sternberg, Poetics, 376. 29

368

AMOS FRISCH

The first example from the Former Prophets, that of David and Bathsheba, too, could reflect this characteristic, but with a certain change. Here, Malbim's critical eye appears in the first phase, and his positive assessment in the second. In this case, however, we are speaking of a single narrative, and not of an event and its report. The positive perception is reserved for the main unfolding of the events, while criticism is leveled at the actions, and mainly at the failure to take necessary action, in the beginning of the story line. These are of secondary importance in relation to the grave events at the center of the plot, namely, adultery and killing. (v) The fifth characteristic: the identity of the characters. The earlier the time frame—the life of the Patriarchs (and Matriarchs) themselves—the greater, so it seems, Malbim's tendency for advocacy. Most of our examples of critical assessment relate to the sons of Jacob (five of nine) and to later individuals in the history of the Jewish people (an additional two examples). Interestingly, the four critical examples from the life of the Patriarchs are all from the third generation—Jacob and Rachel—which requires further thought and explanation. 31 I defined these findings as "characteristics," and not as definitive rules, since our expectations are not met in each instance. Thus, for instance, as regards the episode of Reuben and Bilhah, I do not find any fundamental difference between Malbim's interpretation at the time of the event and his commentary to Jacob's later words relating to this episode. So we see that Malbim has a complex and balanced perspective on this issue. I do not have at this stage—and perhaps will not later establish— a formula for which elements Malbim employs in each case and their relative weight. It seems, however, that in a comprehensive discussion of his methodology regarding this issue, as well as in attempts made to explain his motives in each specific case, attention should be given to these five characteristics. Malbim's explanation of a specific instance might combine more than a single characteristic—as, for example, when four of the five characteristics come into play in his explanation of the deed of Reuben: He 31 We should take note of a similar phenomenon: Seforno's critical attitude regarding Joseph, which was indicated by Rachimi, "Exonerating Unconventional Behavior," 616—617. Rachimi sees this as the result of an anti-Christian polemic, given the Christian exegesis that viewed the narrative of Joseph and his brothers as a préfiguration of Jesus and his life. Mention should be made, however, of Abigail Rock's identification of the opposite phenomenon in her Ph.D. dissertation, where she notes R. Joseph Ibn Caspi's pronounced defense of Joseph; see: A. Rock, "R. Yosef Ibn Kaspi's Biblical Exegesis: Exegetical Methodology and a Critical Annotated Edition of Mazref Lakesef on Genesis" (Ph.D. diss.; Bar-Ilan University, 2007), 104-11 (Hebrew).

MALBIM'S APPROACH

369

begins his commentary by agreeing with the positive opinion of the Rabbis (the third characteristic); he limits Reuben's sin, leaning towards advocacy (the first characteristic), to the extent that he removes the literal meaning from the statement "he lay with Bilhah, his father's concubine" and has it refer to Jacob. Malbim nevertheless ascribes some guilt to Reuben, and even introduces the word "sin" that does not appear in the biblical text. His basis for this can be found in Jacob's judgmental attitude expressed in his blessing of Reuben (the second characteristic), while also taking account that this is the generation of the sons of Jacob (the fifth characteristic). The fourth characteristic (i.e., the two phases) is not expressed in this instance, since Malbim's first-phase judgment, in chapter 35, is identical to his judgment in the second phase (49:4). Acknowledging these five characteristics, together with the fact that they present some tension between them, might be a starting point for appreciating the complexity of Malbim's personality. The conventional perception of Malbim tends to be one-dimensional, seeing him as a conservative Orthodox rabbi who zealously fought against Reform Judaism. But in my view, we should also take note of some of the innovative aspects of his life and activity, which were anything but one-dimensional. 32 Two commentators, contemporaries of Malbim, are representative of the two different approaches to the subject of our inquiry. R. Jacob Zvi Meklenburg generally defends the forefathers of the Jewish nation, so that

This issue deserves a separate discussion, which I hope to conduct elsewhere. Here, I will briefly mention four aspects of Malbim's writing that contradict the above-mentioned one-dimensional portrayal of him: 1) the incorporation of old and new that is characteristic of his life and goals: "Malbim's entire commentary was a reaction to the developing world of haskalah and reform. It was the work of a man who wanted to fight these tendencies with their own tools" (D. Berger, "Malbim's Secular Knowledge and His Relationship to the Spirit of the Haskalah," Yavneh Review 5 [1966], 36). 2) Contrary to the traditional view, that—in Harris' succinct formulation—"The laws were traditions from Moses; the derashot were dismissed as asmakhtot, and nothing more" (J. M. Harris, How Do We Know This?: Midrash and the Fragmentation of Modern ]udaism [Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995], 221), Malbim argued the complete opposite, namely, that the source of the halakhot is to be found in Rabbinic exegesis, that brings them into being directly from Scripture. 3) A certain degree of familiarity with modern philosophy and veiled references to it in his commentary (see Rosenbloom, Malbim, 165—206), alongside his drawing upon Kabbalistic sources (see above, n. 17). 4) Creative literary writing—the allegorical play HS^D! blVD that he published in Paris at the age of fifty-eight. 32

370

AMOS FRISCH

no sin may stain their names. 33 R. Samson Raphael Hirsch, in contrast,34 wrote a few times of the importance of acknowledging Scripture's depictions of sin, with no attempt to sweep wrongdoing under the carpet. 35 The disparate approaches of these two commentators from Malbim's own time, who contended with the same challenges that he faced, teach us that in the search for a causal explanation we must also consider the commentator's personality. Malbim is not likely a person who issued declarations of principle on this question, but rather someone who preferred to interpret events on a case-by-case basis. An examination of his commentary places him in an interim position between these two commentators.

See, e.g., his explanations to the verses: Gen 15:2, 8; 16:5, 6; 21:10; 25:31; 27:19, 35; 30:16; 35:22; 37:2, 18. 34 For a comparison of the two on this issue, see: Frisch, "Jacob Zvi Meklenburg's Method," 115-19. 35 See especially his fundamental declarations in his commentary to Gen 12:1013; 25:27; 27:1; and on this Frisch, "Hirsch's Method." 33

DOUBLE MEANING IN THE PARABLE OF THE POOR MAN'S EWE (2 SAM 1 2 : 1 - 4 )

JOSHUA BERMAN BAR-ILAN UNIVERSITY In this article I offer a new solution to an age-old interpretive crux: the meaning of the parable of the poor man's ewe (2 Sam 12:1—4) in light of the surrounding narrative of the David and Bathsheba account of 2 Sam 11—12. Ever since the Middle Ages commentators to this passage have noted the apparent incongruity between the elements of the parable on the one hand and the elements of the surrounding narrative on the other. 1 Although some scholars have suggested readings that attempt a close mapping of equivalents between parable and narrative, most opinions have resisted such a close mapping and have opted instead for what I will refer to here as the "conventional approach" to the issue. 2 In the first part of this study, I review the merits and demerits of that approach. From there I stake out my own interpretation of the issue: namely, that the conventional approach has much merit and cannot be discarded. At the same time, however, I claim that it must be supplemented and that the proper meaning of the parable is 1 See the comments of the fifteenth century Spanish rabbinic exegete, Don Isaac Abarbanel, Commentary to the Former Prophets (Jaffa: Torah Va-Daat, 1955), 344 (Hebrew). 2 Some scholars have attempted to identify a more precise mapping but these efforts have not received much enthusiasm. See R. Polzin, David and the Deuteronomist: 2 Samuel (Bloomington: Indian University Press, 1993), 123—25, for whom the rich man is none other than God himself. See also D. Daube, "Nathan's Parable," NopT 24 (1982), 277-88, and the critique in H. S. Pyper, David as Reader: 2 Samuel 12:1-15 and the Poetics of Fatherhood (Leiden: Brill, 1996), 98-99. Most recently, Jeremy Schipper has ventured an attempt to demonstrate how David may have erroneously mapped the parable onto the account, with Joab featured as the rich man. See J. Schipper, "Did David Overinterpret Nathan's Parable in 2 Samuel 12:16?" JBL126/2 (2007), 383-91.

371

372

JOSHUA BERMAN

best grasped by discerning within it two simultaneous and complementary strands of interpretation. 3

THE CONVENTIONAL APPROACH AND ITS LIMITATIONS At first blush, the correspondence between the parable and the surrounding narrative seems clear: the rich man is David, whose kingly "riches" Nathan details in 12:7—8. The second of the two men in the city is Uriah, who, by contrast, is relatively poor. Uriah has a pet ewe to whom he is greatly attached—presumably a reference to his wife Bathsheba. 4 Ruthlessly, the rich man steals the poor man's ewe and slaughters it, a reference to David's rape of Bathsheba while fully cognizant that she is Uriah's rightful wife (11:3—4).5 While these correspondences seem clear enough, incongruities between the parable and the surrounding narrative have dogged exegetes for centuries: To begin with, the wayfarer in the parable seems to have no equivalent in the surrounding narrative of David and Bathsheba. Furthermore, the parable maintains that the rich man stole the ewe because he did not wish to suffer a loss from his own flock. In the target narrative, however, David faces no such dilemma. He takes Bathsheba because he desires her, causing loss to Uriah. Yet, David had no alternative course of action that would have caused him loss, had he only been willing to suffer it. This mapping of equivalents between the parable and the surrounding narrative addresses only one part of the episode. David indeed took Bathsheba unlawfully. The surrounding narrative, however, dedicates even greater attention to David's second malfeasance—his plot to kill the innocent Uriah. The rape of Bathsheba covers all of four verses (11:1—4).6 Unless otherwise specified, all translations are my own. J. P. Fokkelman, Narrative Art and Poetry in the Books of Samuel (4 vols.; Assen: Van Gorcum, 1981), 1:79; Polzin, David and the Deuteronomist, 123. 5 In this study, I employ the term rape as defined by the Oxford English Dictionary: "the crime, typically committed by a man, of forcing another person to have sexual intercourse with the offender against their will." I do so with an eye toward the experience of the character Bathsheba in her encounter with the king. This sense of victimization is an important component of the text, even as the modern application of the word "rape" also inheres juridical implications that may have been foreign to biblical law. 6 Although the initial verses of chapter 11 are ambiguous about Bathsheba's agency in her encounter with David, I maintain that we must conclude that she is an innocent victim. There is no overt censure of Bathsheba anywhere in the 3 4

PARABLE OF THE POOR MAN'S EWE

373

The plot to kill Uriah and take Bathsheba as wife spans fourteen, w . 14—27. When the prophet Nathan turns to direct censure of David following the parable his focus is upon this iniquity and not the initial rape of Bathsheba (12:9—10): "Why then have you flouted the command of the Lord and done what displeases him? You have put Uriah the Hittite to the sword; you took his wife and made her your wife and him killed by the sword of the Ammonites . . . because you spurned me by taking the wife of Uriah the Hittite and making her your wife." The "taking" of Bathsheba cannot refer to the rape of 11:4. In verse 9, Nathan accuses David with the words bpnn NU7ni INn VKU7H b~[, "And his wife, you took for a wife"; and in v. 10 he declares, numV ~]b nvrf? ^nnn nniN nU7N nK npni, "and you took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be for you a wife." Nathan focuses upon David's audacity to marry Bathsheba after murdering her husband. Nathan does not address the initial rape, which appears to be the episode mapped out by the parable. 7 These incongruities between the parable and the surrounding narrative have given rise to somewhat of a consensus in the scholarship. According to this approach, we commit a hermeneutical error if we search too closely for a connection between parable and the surrounding plot. The purpose of the parable is not, in primary fashion, to shed light upon or comment upon David's various infractions. Rather, the parable is, in the first place, a vehicle used by the prophet Nathan to elicit certain reactions from the errant king. 8 For instance, Jan Fokkelman claims that the purpose of the parable is to remind David of his good side—his sense of righteousness and pity.9 Uriel Simon says that Nathan sought to bring David to confession and penitence. 10 Robert Polzin and Shimon Bar Efrat see the parable as a ruse to trick David into issuing his own sentence. 11 Two narrative. Moreover, she alone from among David's wives emerges as the mother of the heir to the Davidic dynasty. It would be incongruous for the author to so sternly censure David while so entirely exonerating his mistress for the very same adulterous act. For extensive arguments in this vein, see R. M. Davidson, "Did King David Rape Bathsheba? A Case Study in Narrative Theology," ]ournal of the Adventist Theological Society 17/2 (2006), 81—95. 7 U. Simon, "The Poor Man's Ewe-Lamb: An Example of a Juridical Parable," Bib 48 (1967), 207-242 (233). 8 Many have tried to assess the genre of the parable, identifying it as juridical parable, prophetic parable, or a limited allegory, with affinities to other biblical passages. See the discussion in Schipper, "Did David Over-interpret," 383—386. 9 Fokkelman, Narrative Art and Poetry, 1:79. 10 Simon, "The Poor Man's Ewe-Lamb," 232. 11 Polzin, David and the Deuteronomist, 121; S. Bar-Efrat, Samuel (2 vols.; Miqra Le-

374

JOSHUA BERMAN

points are common to all of these versions of the conventional approach. First, all maintain that the case the prophet brings before the king must have verisimilitude and is meant to lead the unsuspecting king to pass judgment on himself. Second, and critically for our purposes, these commentators maintain that the parable must contain "disinformation," so that the king does not prematurely note the similarity between the offenses in the parable and those he committed himself. 12 The incongruities, therefore, are intentional and necessary. The parable is not entirely, detached from the cycle of David's misdeeds, but refers to them obliquely. As mentioned, the parable may be read as an allegory of David's adulterous taking of Bathsheba. More generally, it incorporates elements of murder, deprivation and the severance of a loving bond. 13 I am sympathetic to the conventional approach and find merit in it. I agree that the parable must be read in terms of what Nathan hopes to achieve by its telling. It is imperative that the correlation between the parable and the actual events themselves not be too apparent. Implicit in the conventional approach, however, is a hermeneutical move that goes unstated; namely, that the parable can be read solely as a communication between prophet and king. However, at the same time that the prophet addresses the king, there is a second axis of communication at work: that between author and reader. Nathan's parable addresses the king, as the conventional approach emphasizes. Yet, the text of the Book of Samuel simultaneously addresses an audience of readers and of listeners. We must allow for the possibility that there are literary allusions at play in the parable that interact with the surrounding narrative. These are textual elements to which only readers and listeners familiar with the textualized presentation of the episode will be privy. 14 Not so, however, for the character of the king within the story, who does not have access to the author's textualized presentation of the account. By underestimating or even ignoring this phenomenon, scholars adopting the conventional approach implicitly create an artificial limitation Yisrael/Tel Aviv: Am Oved, 1996), 2:118. 12 Simon, "The Poor Man's Ewe-Lamb," 221; Pyper, David as Reader, 101. The notion of disinformation at play here was first introduced by the fifteenth century Spanish rabbinic exegete Don Isaac Abarbanel (see above, note 1). 13 Pyper, David as Reader, 100. 14 On this aspect of the parable, see also E. Eynikel, "The Parable of Nathan (II Sam. 12,1-4) and the Theory of Semiosis," in S. L. McKenzie and T. Römer (eds), Rethinking the Foundations: Historiography in the Ancient World and in the Bible: Essays in Honour of John Van Seters (BZAW, 294; Berlin: de Gryuter, 2000), 71-90, especially p. 88.

PARABLE OF THE POOR MAN'S EWE

375

to our understanding of the text. According to this approach, because Nathan's communication with David can only obliquely suggest the latter's own actions it is imperative, therefore, that we forego the search for any close correlation between parable and surrounding narrative. I would maintain that inasmuch as only the reader—and not the literary character, David—is aware of the literary texture of 2 Sam 11, exegetes can well mine the text for allusions between the parable and the surrounding narrative without compromising the need for the parable to be oblique to the king who hears it.

MAPPING OUT THE PARABLE: THREE INITIAL OBSERVATIONS In spite of the incongruities listed earlier the oblique references to the adultery episode of 2 Sam 11:1—4 are still clear: David, the rich man, denies Uriah, the poor man, of his beloved possession, or lamb, namely his wife Bathsheba. Some commentators have noted in this regard the consonance between the depiction of the ewe as the poor man's daughter iV TPI, which resonates with the name "Bathsheba." 15 I would like to exploit the incongruities mentioned earlier to suggest that the parable bears a second concomitant equivalence to the narrative of 2 Samuel 11 and offers commentary to it. To appreciate how this works, I offer three initial observations about the narrative before us. The first concerns the peculiar activity of the rich man in the parable. Note that the rich man does not himself devour the poor man's ewe. In fact, it would appear that the only reason the rich man pilfered and slaughtered the poor man's ewe was to fulfill the cultural obligation of providing for a wayfarer that had suddenly appeared at his doorstep. Had the wayfarer not come his way, perhaps he may have never stolen the ewe at all. Put differently, the figure of the rich man presents us with a complex character. On the one hand he is pitiless and steals his neighbor's beloved possession. Yet, he does so not to satisfy his own appetite but in order to perform a good deed—to provide for a traveler passing through. Let the complexity be fully clear: it is not, simply, that sometimes the rich man does terrible things and at other times good things. The rich man confronts us with a figure which, when seeking to fulfill a cultural obligation—providing for the wayfarer—perpetrates a heinous crime, stealing and slaughtering his neighbor's beloved ewe. Even as his behavior seems bizarre, we reserve judgment and will take it as a clue of what we are to look for in the narrative of 2 Sam 11. 15

Fokkelman, Narrative Art and Poetry, 79.

376

JOSHUA BERMAN

My second observation concerns the multiple stages of crisis that Bathsheba endures throughout the ordeal. To properly construe the parable and the way it maps onto the narrative of 2 Sam 11, we need to appreciate the different identities that Bathsheba assumes as events swiftly carry her from crisis to crisis. At the outset of the narrative she is, simply, the wife of Uriah the Hittite. The first shift in identity occurs in verse 11:4, where she becomes the victim of a sexual assault, violated as a woman, and perhaps on an additional level, as a married woman. This identity intensifies in v. 5, when she discovers that she is pregnant. She will never be able to put the traumatic event behind her, and the seed that she carries will potentially be a living reminder to her for the rest of her life of the trauma that she endured. The pregnancy, however, foists upon her a new and even more foreboding identity: the stigma of a woman who will be suspected of adultery. There is no indication in the text of 2 Samuel 11 that Bathsheba shared her ordeal with anyone. It would seem that after returning home (v. 4), she kept the issue quiet. As readers, we are beckoned to explain this silence in the text.16 She presumably hoped that the ordeal would be behind her, and that she would continue on in her life, keeping the ordeal a secret to herself. Indeed, she had little other choice. She could hardly accuse the king of the crimes he actually committed with no evidence to substantiate her claim. At best, she would have been dismissed as a liar, or as delusional. At worst, she risked incurring the wrath of a court potentially eager to silence her. One passage of Deuteronomy, 22:24, expects a betrothed woman in an urban setting to scream if attacked. Bathsheba cannot even claim that she was raped by a stranger, for no one heard her screams. Once she discovers her pregnancy, she is despondent as she has no credible explanation for the pregnancy. The pregnancy, then, dooms Bathsheba to bear the stigma of a woman who betrayed her husband, precisely when he was serving valiantly on the front lines of battle. As Yehuda Keel notes, her situation is analogous to that of Tamar in Gen 38. Tamar was to have been married to Shelah. When her pregnancy is discovered Judah orders for her to be burnt at the stake, as the pregnancy represented prima facie evidence that she had committed adultery (Gen 38:24). 17 Tamar is exonerated only 16 As several commentators have noted, the text of 2 Sam 11 is fraught with gaps, particularly concerning the motivations of the dramatis personae. Perforce, readers are obliged to impose coordinates of meaning that explain the actions taken by these literary characters. See A. A. Anderson, 2 Samuel (WBC, 11; Dallas: Word Books, 1989), 155; A. Campbell, 2 Samuel (FOTL, 8; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 115. 17 Y. Keel, Samuel (2 vols.; Da'at Miqra; Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook, 1981),

PARABLE OF THE POOR MAN'S EWE

377

because of the material evidence she possesses incriminating Judah as the father (38:25). Bathsheba possesses no such evidence to incriminate the king. Desperate, she discreetly turns to David, informing him of the pregnancy (11:5). Surely she had some reason for doing so, yet the text here is silent. The gap is well explained if we understand the message as an implicit plea for protection. This was the understanding of the eleventh century French rabbinic exegete R. Joseph Kara: "I am with child—She intimated to him her desire: 'Save me from this shame! Recall my husband from the battlefield that he may lie with me and let the unborn child be attributed to him'." 18 While the narrative of 2 Sam 11 records the extraordinary measures David took to get Uriah to visit his home, it is nowhere suggested that Bathsheba was aware of any of this. Put differently, her missive to the king, "I am pregnant" (v. 5) is met, from her perspective, with a response of deafening silence. As the days of royal silence pass, her despair can only grow; as her pregnancy progresses, her only hope is that her husband will return home from the front in a timely fashion. Then, suddenly, the worst of all hap pens: she learns that he has fallen in action (11:26). The mourning that she expresses in 11:26 can be understood as being for two people: for her deceased husband, as the text of v. 26 expressly states, but also in a way for herself as well. With her husband never to return and the king apparently deaf to her message, it will now only be a matter of time before her pregnancy is discovered. At best she will have to bear the stigma of an unexplained pregnancy. If the Tamar episode is any barometer, she could even face death. In the final twist of fate, precisely when all seemed lost, the king sends for her and takes her in marriage, redeeming her from all repercussion (11:27). Bathsheba occupies more roles than any other figure in the story: she is wife, rape victim, fugitive, and finally wife again. Finally, I would like to clarify what is at stake for the king when he learns of Bathsheba's pregnancy. With nearly one voice, exegetes have assumed that David now fears that he will be incriminated. He therefore seeks a cover for Bathsheba's pregnancy so that accusing fingers will not be directed at him. The text nowhere says this explicitly. This is yet another gap in the story that readers must fill in order to make sense of the story. Yet, while this thesis is plausible it is also problematic. David's behavior in the opening verses of the chapter is cavalier and reveals no concern to satisfy his lusts in full secrecy. A small handful of people know about 2:415 (Hebrew). 18 The glosses of R. Joseph Kara to the Book of Samuel are found in all editions of the Miqra'ot Gedolot anthology of medieval rabbinic commentaries to this book. Translation is my own.

378

JOSHUA BERMAN

David's malfeasance. In v. 3 he sends an emissary to inquire about the identity of the beautiful woman. In v. 4 messengers (in the plural!) are sent to fetch her. David seems to make no efforts to ensure their silence. To be sure, David does not want it to be known that he has slept with Uriah's wife. It would seem, though, that he has no concerns of the issue being leaked because his men are loyal to him. Bathsheba's pregnancy does little to raise the stakes for the king. The men who are in the know had knowledge of the affair even before Bathsheba becomes pregnant. If his men are loyal to him and were even complicit in his act adultery, why would they turn on him when his mistress became pregnant? The only potential way for Bathsheba's pregnancy to create a liability for David would be if she were to speak up. Yet as we already noted, if she were she to do so there would be no compelling reason for her to be believed. In Gen 38, it seems that Tamar would not have been believed on the basis of her word alone without the incriminating evidence. The very fact that Bathsheba sends a discreet message to David suggests that she herself realizes that going public will not serve her interest. David here emerges as a man of power who has engaged in a sexual escapade with a woman only to impregnate her. Upon receiving the missive, "I am with child," David could have simply ignored her plea and shrugged it off as "her problem," and left it at that. In such circumstances the burden of proof falls upon the woman to substantiate her claim. Instead, I would propose an alternative motive for David's actions. It is not David who is imperiled by the pregnancy, but Bathsheba. She knows this and appeals to him. As R. Joseph Kara writes in his comments to v. 8, David instructs Uriah to return home to his wife, so as to save Bathsheba from her predicament. David could have done the truly righteous thing in this circumstance and confess his guilt. This, however, would have cost him a dear price in terms of his public stature, a price the narrative implies he was apparently unwilling to pay. At the same time, David feels compelled to save Bathsheba from the predicament of his own making, and grants her the protection that she seeks. His ruse to get Uriah home would have served David well. When that fails, however, we discover a shocking move: all-consumed by his sense of responsibility for Bathsheba's welfare, David perpetrates a dastardly deed in its service. He arranges Uriah's death so that he can marry her and thereby save her from the stigma of an accused adulteress, and possibly even from death at the stake.

PARABLE OF THE POOR MAN'S EWE

379

NATHAN'S PARABLE: A NEW MAPPING With these understandings I return to the parable of the poor man's ewe. A wayfarer appears at the rich man's doorstep seeking shelter. Filled with a sense of his responsibility, the rich man seeks to provide his guest his needs. Yet rather than parting with a lamb from his own flock the rich man performs a ruthless deed, stealing his neighbor's beloved ewe and slaughtering it for the sake of the guest, who is, apparently, oblivious to the criminal acts perpetrated by the rich man on his behalf. The mapping of the parable upon the narrative of 2 Sam 11 is clear: The wayfarer who appears at the rich man's doorstep is Bathsheba seeking protection from David upon learning of her pregnancy. The rich man wishes to provide for his guest, even as David wishes to do the right thing and assume responsibility for Bathsheba's welfare. The rich man could have taken from his own flock but instead performed the cruel deed of stealing his neighbor's ewe and slaughtering it for the sake of the wayfarer. Similarly, David could have protected Bathsheba by paying a price himself and confessing his infractions. 19 David, though, was unprepared to pay a price in his stature as king and instead does a dastardly deed in the service of a warped sense of responsibility to Bathsheba: he slaughters Uriah. The equivalence between the wayfarer seeking shelter and Bathsheba seeking protection appears not only on the level of motif, but on the lexical plane as well. Note the prevalence of the root .K.I.3 in the description of the wayfarer (11:4):

r™1? rnwi?1? npnai nxsa nnp1? ^»m -pws?n w 1 ^ -f7n nti v ^ x i o n . w x 1 ? n w s n w i n w x n n u n s n x np 1 ! i1? i o n A wayfarer came to the rich man, but he was loath to take from his sheep or from his cattle to provide for the guest who had come to him, and so he took the poor man's ewe, and dressed it for the man who had come to him. 19 Note that it is not obvious, (as per Polzin, David and the Deuteronomist, 123) that the rich man's "abundant flocks and herds" (12:1) refer to David's numerous wives. Rather, from Nathan's explanation of the parable in 12:7—8, it would appear that the rich man's (i.e., David's) riches are the totality of his kingdom: "That man (i.e., the rich man) is you! Thus said the Lord, the God of Israel: It was I who anointed you king over Israel and it was I who rescued you from the hand of Saul. I gave you your master's house and possession of your master's wives; and I gave you the House of Israel and Judah; and if that were not enough, I would give you twice as much more" (my translation here follows NJPS).

380

JOSHUA BERMAN

This is significant, because in the narrative of chapter 11, Bathsheba "comes to" the "rich man," namely, David (11:4): "She came to him (vVn from) and he lay with her," thus establishing a lexical equivalence between the wayfarer and Bathsheba. Within this mapping, Uriah emerges as the slaughtered ewe of the parable. 20 Although the ewe is feminine and Uriah a man, the text establishes an unmistakable lexical equivalence between them. Nathan claims that the ewe would "eat of his bread, drink of his cup and lay in his bosom (ODUTnjp'rDI ,nnU7n 1P3P1 VjKn m a p ) . " These three actions of the ewe—eating, drinking, and laying intimately—are precisely those ascribed by the author to Uriah and his married life in chapter 11. Although Uriah presently refuses to visit his home, he describes what would normally go on at home in a language using these very same terms, as the formulation of v. 11 shows: "How can I go home and eat, and drink, and lay w i t h m y w i f e ? " (TIU7N DJ) SJUfrl mnU^Vl V j k V ^ n O Vn KHK ^ N l ) .

This

triad of terms appears nowhere else in the Hebrew Bible, and suggests an intentional mapping between Uriah and the ewe.21 We have established, therefore, a new line of equivalences: the rich man is David. The wayfarer is Bathsheba. The ewe slaughtered for the sake of the unwitting wayfarer is Uriah, who is slaughtered by David for the sake of Bathsheba, yet unbeknownst to her. Who, then, is the poor man? We already saw that 2 Sam 12:3 informs us that the ewe would lie in the poor man's bosom. That would suggest that the "ewe" in the narrative—Uriah— lays in the bosom of the equivalent to the poor man, namely Bathsheba. 22 But is not Bathsheba already assigned a role within this new mapping as the wayfarer? I would claim that the lexical equivalence that establishes an identity between Bathsheba and the poor man is on the mark. Bathsheba 20

Along a different set of equivalences, other scholars have also understood the ewe to be Uriah, in spite of the gender distinction between the feminine ewe and the warrior male, Uriah. See P. Chibaudel, "David et Bethsabée: Une tragédie de l'abstention," VSpir 143 (1989), 75-85 (79); L. Delekat, "Tendenz und Theologie der David-Salomo-Erzählung," in Das Ferne und nahe Wort: Festschrift Leonhard Rost %ur Vollendung seines 70. Lebenjahres am 30. November 1966 (Berlin: Töpelmann, 1967), 33; J. W. Wesselius, "Joab's Death and the Central Theme of the Succession Narrative (2 Samuel 9-Kings 20)," U T 4 0 (1990), 336-51 (346-47 n. 15). 21 P. Coxon, "A Note on Bathsheba in 2 Samuel 12, 1-6," Bib 62 (1981), 249; Polzin, David and the Deuteronomist, 123. Cf. Schipper, "Did David Overinterpret," 388 n. 24. 22 Along a different set of equivalences, this suggestion is already raised by Schipper, "Did David Overinterpret," 388.

PARABLE OF THE POOR M A N ' S EWE

381

can inhabit two roles in the parable because the ordeal she suffers transports her through multiple identities across the story. The full equivalence may be expressed thus: Rich Man = David Poor Man = Bathsheba as Uriah's wife Wayfarer = Bathsheba seeking shelter from David Poor Man's Ewe = Uriah, husband of Bathsheba At the outset of the narrative, Bathsheba inhabits but a single role: she is the wife of Uriah the Hittite (11:3). Yet in the continuation of the story her primary interaction is with David, to whom she urgently turns, seeking protection.

TWO SINS, TWO EQUIVALENT MAPPINGS, TWO PROPHETIC CENSURES Even as I propose a new mapping of the equivalences between the parable of chapter 12 and the narrative of chapter 11, I am at pains to underscore that I do not deny the correspondence proposed by the conventional approach, namely that the rich man is David, the poor man, Uriah and the ewe, Bathsheba. Rather, these two mappings complement each other. In this section, I demonstrate that these two mappings correspond to the two sins that David committed. I demonstrate as well that the dual nature of David's sin and the double meaning of the parable are clearly evident in the content and structure of Nathan's double censure in 12:9—12. David committed two sins. The first is that of adultery, as reported in 11:4. This sin gains expression in the correspondence as classically understood by the conventional approach:

The Parable of Adulterous

Rape

Rich Man = David Poor Man = Uriah Ewe = Bathsheba Within this mapping, the focus is entirely on David's adulterous taking of Bathsheba. David—the rich man—took advantage of the fact that Uriah was a subordinate to him and was also far away from home, and slept with

382

JOSHUA BERMAN

his wife. Yet, as pointed out, many incongruities remain when this is the sole axis of explanation. This created the opening for us to seek a second axis of interpretation, one that we may now see refers to David's second sin, the murder of Uriah:

The Parable of Murder Rich Man = David Poor Man = Bathsheba as Uriah's wife Wayfarer = Bathsheba seeking shelter from David Poor Man's Ewe = Uriah, husband of Bathsheba, who is slaughtered for her sake Notice that this second axis of interpretation is the more complete one. It accounts for all four figures in the parable—rich man, poor man, wayfarer and ewe, whereas the first axis of interpretation, that which sees Nathan's parable as a parable for adulterous rape accounts for three of the characters, the rich man, the poor man and the ewe, but not the wayfarer. I would suggest that this resonates with the relative weight given each sin in the narrative of chapter 11. As already noted, David's adulterous taking of Bathsheba, while vividly portrayed, takes up verses 1—4 only. By contrast, David's efforts to have Uriah killed so that he could marry Bathsheba occupy 14 verses, w . 14—27. A careful examination of Nathan's censure in w . 9—12 likewise reveals that there are two meanings to the parable and that they correspond to David's two sins. An understanding of a biblical convention is helpful here. In several other biblical passages a prophet issues a parable and then upon concluding the parable, immediately addresses the target audience, opening with the introduction, niiT "ION i"D, "Thus says the Uord." The formulaic introduction always represents the crossover from the parable to its mapping and the subsequent oratory points the target audience to the proper understanding of the parable (see, e.g., 1 Kgs 20:42; Jer 13:9; Ezek 24:6). What is curious about Nathan's censure is that the introductory formula of "thus says the Uord" appears twice—once in v. 9, and then again in v . l l . priori, it would seem that Nathan's censure is of one cloth, and represents a continuous oratory. I would suggest, however, that Nathan punctuates his censure with two introductory calls, because he offers two mappings of the parable for David to consider. Note that following David's outburst in v. 6, the prophet does not immediately declare, "thus says the Uord." Rather, the prophet first indicts David, proclaiming, "You are the

PARABLE OF THE POOR M A N ' S EWE

383

man!" Only once Nathan has established David's identity as the rich man of the parable, does he then declare—twice—"thus says the Lord." I would suggest that Nathan splits his oratory into two, because he wishes to draw David's attention to two separate axes of interpretation of the parable. He wishes for David to ponder the full range of his activity as the 'rich man' of the parable, both as adulterer and as murderer. This clearly emerges through a close reading of v. 9—12. In v. 9, the prophet opens his charge sheet: "You have put Uriah the Hittite to the sword; you took his wife and made her your wife and him killed by the sword of the Ammonite. And now, the sword shall not desist from your house, because you spurned me by taking the wife of Uriah the Hittite and making her your wife." Notice that there is no mention here of the rape episode of 11:4. As mentioned earlier, the syntax surrounding the verb V.p.n. can imply only "taking" in the sense of marriage, and refers only to the taking of Bathsheba in marriage following Uriah's death in 11.27. The subject of the prophet's censure matches the axis of interpretation that I referred to earlier as the "Parable of Murder." The rich man (David) slaughters the ewe (Uriah) of the poor man (his spouse, Bathsheba), so that he may provide for her, by covering for her pregnancy through marriage, even as the rich man slaughtered the ewe to provide for the wayfarer. The rich man refused to part with a lamb from his own flock (his "riches"), even as David refused to confess his guilt and suffer the consequences to his kingship, the "riches" that Nathan delineates in w . 7—8. Verse 12:11, however, also begins with "thus says the Lord," and seems to continue in its censure of David. But a careful reading reveals that the prophet's ire now attends to a different topic (12:11—12): "Thus said the Lord: I will make a calamity rise against you from within your own house; I will take your wives and give them to another man before your very eyes and he shall sleep with your wives under this very sun. You acted in secret, but I will make this happen in the sight of all Israel and in broad daylight." What David did "in secret" was that he slept with another man's wife, a reference to the events of 11:1—4. The punishment—measure for measure—is that David's own wives will be raped by another man. Note that within this censure there is no mention of the killing of Uriah and no mention of David's taking Bathsheba for a wife after murdering her husband. The censure fully explains the parable according to the first axis of interpretation, that understood classically by the conventional approach, and what I call here the parable of adulterous rape: David (the rich man) took the beloved ewe (Bathsheba) from the poor man (Uriah), and raped her.

384

JOSHUA BERMAN

A curious facet of the prophet's double censure is the order in which he presents the two mappings. To read the narrative of 2 Sam 11 is to be struck by the sequence of events, of how David cascades from one depth to yet a deeper one. The chronology of events is crucial to understanding how David stooped so low. One might have expected, therefore, that the prophet's censure would adhere to chronological order. That is, first he would charge David with adultery, and then follow up with the charge of murder for the sake of marrying the victim's wife. Yet, Nathan inverses the order and charges David first with the murder of Uriah and only then with the adulterous taking of Bathsheba. I would suggest that Nathan does this because the murder of Uriah bears subtleties that require elucidation and emphasis. Note that the prophet is emphatic that the infraction here was not only the murder of Uriah, but the taking of Bathsheba as wife as well. Yet, why should the taking of Bathsheba as wife constitute a defamation of the Lord? After all, Uriah was now dead, and the marriage lawful. Moreover, by doing so, was not David acting mercifully, now saving the pregnant Bathsheba from the stigma of bearing an illegitimate child, and perhaps even from death on account of adultery? David himself may have rationalized things thus. Certainly, Israelites aware of the new marriage would have applauded the king's move, a seeming act of grace toward the widow of a fallen war-hero. Yet, precisely because the marriage was technically lawful, and because from an ethical side there is merit to David's sense of responsibility to provide for Bathsheba's welfare, the prophet needs to rip the mask off of David's actions and reveal the atrocity for what it is. When an innocent man is murdered, the heinous nature of the crime cancels out any residual good that may come of it. The ends can never justify the means.

THE TIMING OF NATHAN'S CENSURE At what point in the narrative does the prophet Nathan confront David with the parable and its attendant censure? The issue receives scant attention in most contemporary discussion, yet I would claim that a clear understanding of this issue is critical for a full understanding of the parable's force. Let us consider the possibility that the prophet confronts the king immediately following the series of wrongdoings; that is, following the death of Uriah, and the taking of Bathsheba for a wife. A close reading of 2 Sam 11:27—12:1 suggests otherwise: After the period of mourning was over, David sent and had her brought into his palace; she became his wife and she bore him a son. But the Lord was displeased with what David had done, and the Lord sent Nathan to David . . .

PARABLE OF THE POOR MAN'S EWE

385

The narrative suggests that Nathan came to the king not immediately after his marriage to Bathsheba, but only some seven, or eight months later, once the child was born. Some might aver that we have here a telescoping of time: that the narrative of chapter 11 rounds off the issues raised in that story—namely the issue of Bathsheba's pregnancy, by noting the child's birth, but that, in fact, Nathan approached the king at an earlier time, much closer to the time of the infractions themselves. The narrative that concludes Nathan's censure, however, suggests otherwise (12:14—15): "Since you have spurned the enemies of the Lord by this deed, the child that has been born to you shall die. Nathan went home, and the Lord afflicted the child that Uriah's wife had borne to David." The censure, then, follows the birth of the child.23 Yet, why would the prophet tarry in his censure until the birth of the child? Scripture relates no action to David during this time and, seemingly, the rebuke would have been most apt in the immediate aftermath of David's wrongdoing. One could posit that the prophet wished to grant David a grace period in which to "come clean," as it were. With no penitential overtures taken by the king, the prophet acts. Yet, it can be no coincidence that the prophet times his censure to coincide with the arrival of the child. We may speculate that the child's birth represented a moment of closure for David on the entire episode. Surely, David was aware that he had sinned. One can well imagine David adopting a mental or spiritual posture during this time reminiscent of Adam in the garden of Eden following the sin, just waiting for the proverbial shoe to fall. The arrival of a healthy child, then, would signal to

The key phrase in 12:14 is "TlVri pl"l, which is translated in Tg. Ps-J, LXX, and in nearly all modern English commentaries as "the son that is born to you," that is, as a phrase that does not suggest a definitive temporal orientation either of a birth that has occurred, or of a birth still yet to occur. Some modern renderings of the phrase read "the child who will be born to you" (NJPS; Andersen, 2 Samuel, 158). I have followed here, however, the reading of the medieval exegetes Qimhi and Abarbanel, who render "TlVTI p i l in v. 14 as "the child who has been born to you." This reading is also adopted by Bar-Efrat, Samuel, 2:115, as well as by P. K. McCarter, II Samuel (AncBib, 9; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1984), 293. Verse 15 clearly suggests a single time-frame for Nathan's return home and for the smiting of the child by the Lord. Had the child not been born yet, we would expect the narrative to state that Nathan returned home, that Bathsheba gave birth, and that the Lord smote the child. Taken together, the evidence from 11:27, announcing the birth, and from 12:15, relegating all of the action to a single time-frame, all support the understanding that Nathan confronted the king only after the birth of the child. 23

386

JOSHUA BERMAN

David that indeed the Lord had granted him clemency and that the episode was behind him. We may also speculate that in going to extraordinary measures to save Bathsheba David was also, concomitantly, acting out of an additional impulse: to save the life of his own child. With Uriah dead, David was able to marry Bathsheba and achieve his goal vis-a-vis her. His goal of saving his own progeny however, would remain unfulfilled. With its arrival, healthy and sound, David had now completed his second goal. One may infer this from Nathan's censure in 12:14—15. The child is stricken because David had Uriah killed, in part, to save the life of the child—his child. Note, in this regard, that the prophet refers twice to the child as David's child: "the child that has been born to you" (v. 14); "the Lord smote the child that Uriah's wife had borne to David' (v. 15). With a newfound appreciation for the timing of Nathan's parable and censure, we may reflect anew on the equivalences implied between the parable and the surrounding narrative. Accepting the possibility that David strove to save both Bathsheba and, by extension, his own child from death, I suggest an additional, complementary, mapping of what I have called the parable of murder, with a new understanding of the identity of the wayfarer: Rich Man = David Poor Man = Bathsheba Wayfarer = David's unborn child Poor Man's Ewe = Uriah, husband of Bathsheba Within these coordinates, each character in the parable is equivalent to a separate and distinct character in the surrounding narrative. Bathsheba here occupies the role of the poor man alone, while the attention now focuses upon the unborn child for whom David seeks to provide shelter, even as the rich man in the parable strove to provide the wayfarer seeking shelter. The image of a wayfarer is an apt one to portray the unborn child destined to perish soon after birth. A wayfarer, by definition, is one who arrives on the scene, but quickly departs. By depicting the newborn child to David as but a wayfarer, Nathan wished to suggest to David that the child would be but a temporary presence in his life. 24 I earlier suggested, contrary to the conventional approach, that the effort to seek out close correspondences between the parable and the narrative was justified, as the parable is a communication not only between 24

My thanks to my student Yaron Za'ir for suggesting this interpretation.

PARABLE OF THE POOR M A N ' S EWE

387

prophet and king, but between author and reader as well. This effort may be justified as well from an additional standpoint. The conventional approach is indeed correct that as David heard the parable it was imperative that the references to his own misdeeds remain opaque. Yet with the denouement and the unmasking of the rich man as none other than David himself the parable takes on a new role. The parable now serves as a tool through which David may reflect on the various aspects of his nefarious behavior. It allows him to consider the various characters in the parable and how they might correspond to the people whose lives he so deeply affected through his wrongdoing. David strikes an undeniably penitent pose throughout chapter 12. Do we see, however, an indication that David has reflected upon, not only the censure of w . 7—12, but upon the parable of w . 1—4? Perhaps we do. As he rises from mourning, David states (12:23), "I am going toward him (VVN "[Vil but he will not return to me." He does not use the language of "going down" to the child (cf. Gen 37:35). The language of "going"( "[Vn) as a reference to moving from this world to the next in death and life, matches the use of the term "[Vil—wayfarer—to describe the fetus, one who is as of yet unborn, but on his way to this life. It is difficult to say for certain that the language of going ("[Vn) from life to death in David's reflection of 12:23 is a deliberate allusion to the language of going ("[Vn) used to describe the wayfarer, who may be a figure for the unborn child. What should be clear, though, is that once Nathan reveals to David that he is the rich man, the dynamics of the relationship between the parable and the episodes of David's malfeasance are reversed. As Nathan related the parable to the king, its connection to David's misdeeds needed to remain opaque. Once Nathan reveals to David that he is the rich man, it becomes incumbent upon the king to probe its complexity and appreciate its multi-faceted comment on his behavior.

CONCLUSION Some expositors who adopt the conventional approach are strident in condemning attempts to map the equivalences between the parable and the narrative. Jan Fokkelman writes, "because a parable is not a comparison, we need not look fanatically for a counterpart in David's reality to each of its elements." 25 David Daube describes the search for a close connection between the parable and the account as "pedantic." 26 In this study, I have 25 Fokkelman, Narrative Art and Poetry, 1:78. Cf. similar comments in J. Van Seters, The Biblical Saga of King David (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2009), 299, and in Simon, "The Poor Man's Ewe-Lamb," 223. 26 Daube, "Nathan's Parable," 275.

388

JOSHUA BERMAN

endeavored to show that the elements of the parable have been carefully crafted and are well integrated into the text of 2 Sam 11—12. The conventional approach still retains much that is worthy. It correctly identifies one axis of equivalence, that which I have called the parable of adulterous rape. It is correct, moreover, to insist that the parable remain opaque for David must hear it without suspecting that it is a commentary on his actions. The "disinformation," by my reading, does not stem from the inclusion of details that are random and irrelevant to David's actions, as claimed by the conventional approach. Rather the parable remains opaque at the moment of telling precisely because of its complexity and because it can only be understood fully by mapping it out twice. While this reading highlights the integral nature of these two chapters, it also highlights commentary to the story of David's wrongdoings that would perhaps go underappreciated. The conventional approach maintains that the purpose of the parable is to elicit indignation from the king. Yet surely, if this were the only aim the author could have crafted a simpler story, without the wayfarer, in which the rich man merely consumed the ewe to satisfy his own appetite. The conventional approach offers no satisfying explanation as to why the rich man emerges as a complex figure—as one who seeks to do good, but out of a warped sense of responsibility winds up committing an invidious injustice. By appreciating the complexity of the rich man's behavior and "pedantically" searching for a parallel in the surrounding narrative, we learn not only to identify the equivalence in the character of David. We also come to an appreciation of the complex motivations that lead to the murder of Uriah, of how the reactions of guilt and responsibility—appropriate in proper measure—can assume such overwhelming proportions that they themselves become the agents of destruction.

REVIEWS

María Teresa Ortega Monasterio, José Manueal Sánchez Caro, and Guadalupe Seijas de los Ríos, A TRAVÉS DE LOS SIGLOS: HISTORIA DEL TEXTO BÍBLICO (Estella (Navarra): Editorial Verbo Divino, 2012). Pp. 94. Softcover. €15.00. ISBN 84-9945-308-8. Revieired by -Andrés Piquer Otero Universidad Complutense de Madrid This brief volume is conceptually innovative: it turns what would have been an exhibit catalogue-leaflet into a book that addresses issues beyond the scope and possibilities of the exhibit itself. Two of the authors (Ma Teresa Ortega Monasterio and Guadalupe Seijas de los R'os) were the curators of the exhibit "A través de los siglos: Historia del texto bíblico," held in Seville in 2012 in tandem with the Third International Biblical Symposium of the Asociación Bíblica Española. From a collection of representative originals and facsimiles of biblical manuscripts and editions that illustrate the history of the biblical text, the authors have produced a brief but concentrated book of almost a hundred pages, whose aims are not just to provide descriptions for the materials shown in the exhibit, but also to provide the prospective visitor with a well-grounded history of the Bible in its widest sense. Therefore, the book surpasses its incidental value as catalogueguidebook and becomes a valuable self-standing useful tool for readers interested in a variety of topics concerning the Bible. These topics are extensive, even if as necessary given the length of the volume, this work 389

390

PERSPECTIVES ON HEBREW SCRIPTURES

provides only a brief introduction to them. This volume may well offer one of the quickest surveys of Bible-related issues from a holistic perspective. Remarkably, the book carefully combines two areas that are usually kept separate, the approach to the Bible as text and a vision of the Bible as artifact. This becomes evident through a quick glance at the table of contents: the chapters cover the following: (1) origins of the biblical text, both for the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament; (2) a history of the transmission of the Hebrew text in the Middle Ages; (3) the history of the Latin Bible; (4) Rabbinic and Polyglot Bibles; (5) Romance language translations since the Middle Ages; (6) illustrations of biblical manuscripts; (7) modern editions; and (8) modern translations. Besides the clear material-plastic approach of chapter 6, other chapters (mainly 2 and 3) also include sizeable sections on considerations of the Bible as an object, explaining materials, scribal and book-making techniques, and providing illustrations. The book clearly benefits from the editors' expertise. Beyond their proficiency as well-rounded biblical scholars, Seijas' and Ortega's own areas of specialization are Masoretic studies and Medieval Hebrew codicology. This clearly shows in the volume, both in its accuracy and ability to present these important and easilyoverlooked areas of biblical studies in a synthetic introductory language. The same can be said of the other chapters, which constitute brief outlines of basics in biblical studies. In generally chronological order (from the formation of the canonical text down to the world of modern versions of the Bible), the reader is given access to a quick summary of the panorama of the Bible in antiquity, which covers both the Hebrew text (with special attention to the Dead Sea Scroll biblical texts) and the Septuagint, then the New Testament. The presentation is correct and accurate for such a short and condensed format, although in some cases it would have been desirable to see more marked references to textual plurality, especially in the section on the text of the Septuagint. In addition, the authors seems to have assumed some previous knowledge. This could make for slightly confusion reading of the first chapter for those without any relevant background knowledge. I would have included a specific section dealing with the problem of the canon (both Jewish and Christian), given that references are made to canonical, deutero canonical, and apocryphal books. A short reference to the formation of biblical books would have been desirable in the section that deals with the Hebrew text of the Old Testament. While it certainly falls outside the main topic of the volume, which deals with the Bible as an already-formed collection of books, such a reference would have provided a more accurate context for a layperson

REVIEWS

391

who may confuse the "oldest text of the Hebrew Bible" with "oldest witness of a biblical text." The subsequent chapters basically split the tradition into the separate histories of the Hebrew and Latin texts, something relevant for a book that covers the history of both Jewish and Christian Bibles in the Medieval and Modern periods. These are then aptly joined in the discussion of the Polyglots, a great symbol of the Renaissance period. The last two chapters are a solid starting point for students and general readership interested in various aspects of the biblical text (from modern translations to editions of the originals and versions). These two chapters, together with a complete but not overwhelming bibliography and a list of useful websites (with a welcome stress on the presence of digital images of codices as opposed to purely textual information), turn the book into a starting reference work for students of the Bible in its many forms. The volume is attractive for a general readership. It can also be a useful tool for students starting out in biblical studies (especially as it covers aspects usually overlooked, like the aforementioned Bible-as-artifact line of inquiry) and for students in other disciplines who require introductory biblical knowledge. The scope of the book could appeal those with interests in art history, Spanish literature, or the history of media, to name a few. Its clarity of presentation, completeness of topics, and attractive format make it an ideal medium for initiating readers into the world of the Bible.

Ingrid

E . Lilly, Two BOOKS OF EZEKIEL: PAPYRUS 967 AND THE MASORETIC TEXT AS VARIANT LITERARY EDITIONS

(VTSup, 150; Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2012). Pp. xx + 372. Hardcover. $196.00. ISBN 978-9-00420-674-8. Reviewed by Venelope Barter University of St ^Andren