God's Love Story: Past, Present and Future in the Deuteronomistic Composition (Agypten Und Altes Testament, 112) 3963271787, 9783963271786

Citation preview

Ägypten und altes TestamenT 112 ÄAT 112 Galil • God’s Love Story

God’s Love Story Past, Present and Future in the Deuteronomistic Composition Gershon Galil www.zaphon.de

Zaphon

ÄAT-112-Galil-Cover.indd 1

17.09.2021 18:05:45

God’s Love Story Past, Present and Future in the Deuteronomistic Composition

Gershon Galil

ÄGYPTEN UND ALTES TESTAMENT Studien zu Geschichte, Kultur und Religion Ägyptens und des Alten Testaments

Band 112

Gegründet von Manfred Görg Herausgegeben von Stefan Jakob Wimmer und Wolfgang Zwickel

God’s Love Story Past, Present and Future in the Deuteronomistic Composition

Gershon Galil

Zaphon Münster 2022

Illustration on the cover: List of rations for captives, Nebuchadnezzar’s 13th year (592/1 BCE); VAT 16378, Bab 28186, © Staatliche Museen zu Berlin – Vorderasiatisches Museum, Photo: Olaf M. Teßmer. Cf. p. 125, n. 68. Rev. II’ 17’: 1/2 a-na mia-ku-ú-ki-nu DUMU LUGAL šá ia-ku-du 1 /2 (Seah) for Iakukinu (: Jehoiachin), the son of the king of Iakudu (: Judah)

Ägypten und Altes Testament, Band 112 Gershon Galil: God’s Love Story. Past, Present and Future in the Deuteronomistic Composition

© 2022 Zaphon, Enkingweg 36, Münster (www.zaphon.de) All rights reserved. Printed in Germany. Printed on acid-free paper. ISBN 978-3-96327-178-6 (Buch) ISBN 978-3-96327-179-3 (E-Book) ISSN 0720-9061

This volume is dedicated to my dear wife, Karnusha, my divine love story

Foreword This book examines the formation of the books included in the “Deuteronomistic Composition” (DC), and the historical and theological perceptions of the Deuteronomist (Dtr), who composed the DC during the Babylonia exile, and completed it ca. 560 BCE. In my opinion, the DC included not only the books of Deuteronomy, Joshua–Kings, but the book of Jeremiah as well. Deuteronomy is the preface to this composition, and Jeremiah seals it; in Deuteronomy the path is demarcated and the norms are fixed; the body of the composition, namely the books from Joshua to Kings, presents a detailed history of the relation between God and Israel, from the conquest of the good land to the destruction of the Temple and the loss of the land. The book of Jeremiah, which concludes the composition, discusses at length the decline and fall of Judah, analyzes the sins that brought about the destruction, and at the same time propagates the gospel of redemption among the exiles. Like Moses, who predicts exile but also redemption, Jeremiah is the prophet of destruction but also of redemption. So Dtr examines the past according to the principles of the “Torah of Moses” (Deuteronomy) – and delineates the future in light of God’s word in the mouth of His prophets – primarily Moses and Jeremiah. God’s eternal love for Israel is the main tenet of Dtr’s worldview. In his opinion, the bond between the Lord and Israel is endless. Its beginning is in the days of the Patriarchs but it will never end. As the relationship is everlasting, the nation of Israel is divine by nature: eternal and holy. The circular nature of the relationship between God and His people implies, in essence, a reality of closeness and distance, affection and anger, sin and repentance, punishment and salvation. Fulfillment of the word of God is one of the central motifs of the DC. Since the main message of Dtr is that God promises Israel a return to the land, eternal love and an everlasting covenant, the people may wonder whether God’s promises can be trusted. The answer comes in many scriptures that emphasize the fulfillment of the word of God and teach that God’s promises can always be trusted. Most chapters of the book, as well as the appendix, were written especially for this book, and are published here for the first time. Chapters II, IV and V are based on ideas and conceptions published in my following previous publications: Chapter II • The Chronological Framework of the Deuteronomistic History. Biblica 85 (2004): 413–421 (published by the Pontifical Biblical Institute, Roma); • Time and Memory in the Deuteronomistic History. pp. 179–195 in A. Frisch et al. (eds.), Studies in Bible and Exegesis X Presented to Shmuel Vargon: Bar Ilan University Press. Hebrew, 2009; • Dates and Calendar in Kings. pp. 427–443 in A. Lemaire and B. Halpern (eds.), The Books of Kings: Sources, Composition, Historiography and Reception. Leiden and Boston: Brill 2010. Chapter IV • Joshua and Moses in the Book of Joshua. Pp. 27–42 in A. Baruchi et al. (eds.), “Now It Happened in Those Days”: Studies in Biblical, Assyrian and Other Ancient Near Eastern Historiography Presented to Mordechai Cogan on His 75th Birthday. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns 2017; • The Formation of the Book of Joshua. Pp. 549–561 in I. Shai et al. (eds.), Tell it in Gath: Studies in the History and Archaeology of Israel. Essays in Honor of A. M. Maeir on the Occasion of his Sixtieth Birthday. Münster: Zaphon 2018; • The Exodus in the Book of Joshua. Beth Miqra 66 (2021): 33–76. Hebrew (published by Bialik Institute, Jerusalem). Chapter V • The Formation of the Book of Judges. UF 49 (2018): 147–167 (published by Ugarit-Verlag); • The Formation of Samuel and Judges and the Deuteronomistic Composition. VT 71 (2021): 566–590 (published by Brill, Leiden).

VIII

Foreword

I thank the following publishers and editors of the journals and volumes in which my articles were first published for permission to publish, in this book, a version based on ideas and conceptions published in my previous publications: Bar Ilan University Press (Mrs. H. Aharoni), Bialik Institute (Mrs. G. Cohen), Brill (Mrs. T. Cowall), Eisenbrauns and Penn State University Press (Dr. J. North), Pontifical Biblical Institute, and Ugarit-Verlag; as well as Prof. D. Bechard, Prof. M. Dietrich, Prof. A. Frisch, Prof. T. R. Kämmerer, Prof. A. Lemaire, Prof. D. Markl, Prof. D. Rom-Shiloni, Prof. A. Schellenberg and Dr. A. Baruchi. I thank Prof. Stefan Jakob Wimmer, Prof. Wolfgang Zwickel and Dr. Kai Metzler for accepting the book for publication in the publishing company Zaphon, in the series Ägypten und Altes Testament: Studien zu Geschichte, Kultur und Religion Ägyptens und des Alten Testaments. I also thank the Staatliche Museen zu Berlin – Vorderasiatisches Museum, for photocopying VAT 16378 (= Bab 28186) by the photographer Olaf M. Teßmer. I am very grateful to Dr. Kai Metzler for his friendship, efficiency and diligence, as well as for his helpful comments and great help in publishing the book. I also thank the Research Authority of the University of Haifa, and especially Ms. Noa Granot and Mr. Murray Rosovsky – for improving the English style of the book.

Gershon Galil Rehovot, November 2021

Contents Foreword .....................................................................................................................................................VII Contents ....................................................................................................................................................... IX I The Scope and Literary Structure of the Deuteronomistic Composition .............................................. 1 I.1 The Scope of the Deuteronomistic Composition ................................................................................. 1 I.2 The Literary Structure of the Deuteronomistic Composition .............................................................. 6 II The Chronological Framework of the Deuteronomistic Composition ............................................... 11 II.1 From the Exodus to the Establishment of the Temple ...................................................................... 11 II.2 From the Establishment of the Temple to its Destruction ................................................................. 15 II.2.1 From the Schism to Jehu’s Revolt ............................................................................................ 16 II.2.2 From Jehu’s Revolt to the Fall of Samaria ............................................................................... 18 II.2.3 From the Fall of Samaria to the Fall of Jerusalem .................................................................... 20 II.3 The Seventy-Years Era and Jehojachin’s Release............................................................................. 22 III The Formation of the Book of Deuteronomy ...................................................................................... 25 III.1 Doublets and Contradictions in the Book of Deuteronomy ............................................................. 25 III.1.1 Two Introductions ................................................................................................................... 25 III.1.2 The Borders of the Land .......................................................................................................... 27 III.1.3 Was Transjordan Included in the Land of Israel or in Moab? ................................................. 27 III.1.4 Moses: Sin and Punishment ..................................................................................................... 28 III.1.5 The Names of the Mountain of God ........................................................................................ 28 III.1.6 The Cities of Refuge ................................................................................................................ 28 III.1.7 Joshua in the Book of Deuteronomy ....................................................................................... 29 III.1.8 The Centralization of Worship in the Book of Deuteronomy.................................................. 29 III.1.9 Pillars in the Book of Deuteronomy ........................................................................................ 29 III.1.10 The Relations with Edom, Moab and Ammon ...................................................................... 29 III.1.11 Exile and Redemption in the Book of Deuteronomy ............................................................. 29 III.1.12 Deuteronomic and Deuteronomistic Phraseology in the Book of Deuteronomy................... 30 III.2 The Layers of the Book of Deuteronomy ........................................................................................ 30 III.3 The First Edition of the Book of Deuteronomy (D) ......................................................................... 31 III.3.1 The Choice of the Place and the Concentration of Worship .................................................... 32 III.3.2 The Choice of Israel and its Holiness ...................................................................................... 32 III.3.3 Levites in Deuteronomy .......................................................................................................... 33 III.3.4 The Attitudes Towards Monarchy in Deuteronomy ................................................................ 34 III.3.5 Concern for the Poor and Weak in the Book of Deuteronomy ................................................ 36 III.3.6 “The Lord, our Lord, is One Lord:” The Uniqueness and Unity of the Lord in Deuteronomy........................................................................................................................ 37 III.3.7 The Land in the Book of Deuteronomy ................................................................................... 37 III.3.8 A Comparison of the Laws in the Deuteronomic Code with the Laws in the Book of the Covenant, the Priestly Source and the Holiness Code ................................................... 37 III.3.9 Northern Sources of the Book of Deuteronomy ...................................................................... 39 III.4 The Second Edition of the Book of Deuteronomy (Dtr) .................................................................. 40 III.4.1 The Opening Paragraph of the Book of Deuteronomy ............................................................ 41 III.4.2 The Preface to the Book of Deuteronomy (Deut 1:1 – 4:43)................................................... 44 III.4.2.1 The Appointment of Judges (Deut 1:9–18) .................................................................... 44 III.4.2.2 The Story of the Spies (Deut 1:19–46) ........................................................................... 44 III.4.2.3 From Kadesh-Barnea to Arnon River and the Conquest of Transjordan (Deut 2:1 – 3:29) ........................................................................................................... 45 III.4.2.4 A Preaching Sermon (Deut 4:1–40) ............................................................................... 46 III.4.3 A Deuteronomistic Opening to the Deuteronomic Code (Deut 4:44, 46–49) ......................... 46 III.4.4 The Concluding Literary Division of the Book of Deuteronomy ............................................ 47

X

Contents

III.4.4.1 The Covenant in Transjordan (Deut 29–30).................................................................... 48 III.4.4.2 Joshua in Deuteronomy ................................................................................................... 51 III.4.4.3 Repentance, Redemption and the Eternity of God’s Covenant with Israel ..................... 51 III.4.4.4 The Book of Torah .......................................................................................................... 52 III.4.4.5 Deut 31 ............................................................................................................................ 52 III.4.4.5.1 Speech No. 10 (Deut 31:1–8).................................................................................. 53 III.4.4.5.2 Speech No. 11 (Deut 31:9–13)................................................................................ 53 III.4.4.5.3 Speech No. 12 (Deut 31:14–23).............................................................................. 53 III.4.4.5.4 Speech No. 13 (Deut 31:24–29).............................................................................. 54 III.4.5 The Liturgical Speeches in Deuteronomy ............................................................................... 54 IV The Formation of the Book of Joshua .................................................................................................. 57 IV.1 Doublets and Contradictions in the Book of Joshua ........................................................................ 57 IV.1.1 The Conquest........................................................................................................................... 57 IV.1.2 The Borders of the Land.......................................................................................................... 57 IV.1.3 The Tribe of Judah .................................................................................................................. 58 IV.1.4 Joshua and Moses in the Book of Joshua ................................................................................ 58 IV.1.5 The Inheritance of the Tribe of Levi ....................................................................................... 58 IV.1.6 Different Styles and More Doublets ........................................................................................ 58 IV.1.7 Priests and Levites in Joshua ................................................................................................... 58 IV.2 Four Editions of the Book of Joshua .............................................................................................. 59 IV.2.1 The First Edition of the Book of Joshua: The Conquest of the Land (The Northern Edition) ........................................................................................................... 59 IV.2.2 The Second Edition of the Book of Joshua: The Conquest and Settlement (The Judean Edition)............................................................................................................... 62 IV.2.3 The Third Edition of the Book of Joshua (The Deuteronomistic Edition) .............................. 64 IV.2.4 The Fourth Edition of the Book of Joshua (The Priestly Edition) ........................................... 65 V The Formation of the Book of Judges................................................................................................... 67 V.1 Doublets and Contradictions in the Book of Judges ......................................................................... 67 V.1.1 Theocracy or Monarchy ........................................................................................................... 67 V.1.2 The Tribe of Judah .................................................................................................................... 67 V.1.3 The Tribe of Benjamin.............................................................................................................. 68 V.1.4 The Sins of Israel ...................................................................................................................... 68 V.1.5 “Major Judges” and “Minor Judges” ........................................................................................ 68 V.2 Four Editions of the Book of Judges ................................................................................................. 68 V.2.1 The First Edition of the Book of Judges (“The Book of Saviors”) ........................................... 69 V.2.2 The Second Edition of the Book of Judges (The Judahite Edition) .......................................... 71 V.2.3 The Third Edition of the Book of Judges (The Deuteronomistic Edition) ............................... 74 V.2.4 The Fourth Edition of the Book of Judges (The Priestly Edition) ............................................ 75 VI The Formation of the Book of Samuel ................................................................................................. 79 VI.1 Doublets and Contradictions in the Book of Samuel ....................................................................... 79 VI.1.1 Attitudes Towards Kingship .................................................................................................... 79 VI.1.2 Attitudes Towards David: Apology and Justification Versus Criticism ................................. 79 VI.1.3 Attitudes Towards Saul and Benjamin: Praise Versus Polemic and Criticism........................ 80 VI.1.4 Three Versions of Saul’s Coronation ...................................................................................... 80 VI.1.5 Attitudes Towards the House of Eli, Saul and Ebiathar the Priest .......................................... 81 VI.1.6 The Amalekites ....................................................................................................................... 82 VI.1.7 Additional Duplications and Possible Contradictions in the Book of Samuel ........................ 82 VI.2 The Book of Samuel: Sources and Editions .................................................................................... 82 VI.3 The Sources of the First Edition of the Book of Samuel ................................................................. 83 VI.3.1 The Book of Saviors ................................................................................................................ 83 VI.3.2 The Acts of Saul ...................................................................................................................... 83 VI.3.2.1 Saul’s Election and Legitimation .................................................................................... 83

Contents

XI

VI.3.2.2 Saul’s Victory Over the Philistines ................................................................................. 84 VI.3.2.3 Saul’s Victory Over the Amalekites ............................................................................... 84 VI.3.2.4 Summary of Saul’s Wars and Genealogy ....................................................................... 84 VI.3.3 The Acts of David ................................................................................................................... 85 VI.3.3.1 The Justification of David (The Apology) ...................................................................... 85 VI.3.3.2 The Legitimacy of David and the Delegitimizing of Saul .............................................. 86 VI.3.3.3 Criticism of Joab ............................................................................................................. 86 VI.3.3.4 Emphasizing David’s Military and Political Achievements ........................................... 87 VI.3.3.5 Attitudes Towards the House of Eli, Saul and Ebiathar the Priest .................................. 87 VI.3.4 The “Book of Jashar” .............................................................................................................. 87 VI.4 The First Edition of the Book of Samuel ......................................................................................... 88 VI.4.1 The Structure of the First Edition of the Book of Samuel ....................................................... 88 VI.4.2 The Tendencies of the Author of the First Edition of the Book of Samuel ............................. 89 VI.4.2.1 Attitudes Towards the House of Eli and Ebiathar the Priest ........................................... 89 VI.4.2.2 Attitudes Towards Saul and Benjamin............................................................................ 89 VI.4.2.3 Polemics Against Joab .................................................................................................... 90 VI.4.2.4 Attitudes Towards David and Solomon’s Elder Brothers ............................................... 90 VI.5 The Second Edition of the Book of Samuel (The Deuteronomistic Edition) .................................. 90 VII The Formation of the Book of Kings .................................................................................................. 93 VII.1 Doublets and Contradictions in the Book of Kings ........................................................................ 93 VII.2 The Sources of the Book of Kings ................................................................................................ 94 VII.2.1 The First Edition of the Book of Samuel ............................................................................... 94 VII.2.2 “The Book of the Acts of Solomon” ...................................................................................... 95 VII.2.3 “The Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah” ............................................................ 99 VII.2.4 “The Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel” .......................................................... 100 VII.2.5 Northern Prophetic Sources ................................................................................................. 102 VII.2.6 Southern Prophetic Sources ................................................................................................. 105 VII.2.7 Other Sources ....................................................................................................................... 105 VII.2.8 Glosses ................................................................................................................................ 105 VII.3 Deuteronomistic Editing in the Book of Kings ............................................................................ 105 VII.3.1 Scope and Content ............................................................................................................... 105 VII.3.2 Opening Formulas ................................................................................................................ 106 VII.3.3 Evaluations of the Kings of Israel and Judah ....................................................................... 107 VII.3.4 Were There Several Deuteronomistic Editors of the Book of Kings or Just One? .............. 109 VII.3.5 Reward, Punishment and the Message of the Book of Kings .............................................. 112 VII.3.6 The Literary Structure of the Deuteronomistic Edition of the Book of Kings ..................... 113 VII.4 Priestly Additions in the Book of Kings ...................................................................................... 126 VIII The Formation of the Book of Jeremiah ......................................................................................... 129 VIII.1 The Book of Jeremiah: Contradictions and Evidence of its Formation ...................................... 129 VIII.1.1 Attitudes Towards the Wandering in the Wilderness ......................................................... 129 VIII.1.2 The Future of David’s House ............................................................................................ 130 VIII.1.3 Jehoiakim and Jehoiachin ................................................................................................... 130 VIII.1.4 “The LORD is Our Righteousness” – The Name of a King or of a City? .......................... 131 VIII.1.5 Reward and Punishment in the Book of Jeremiah .............................................................. 131 VIII.1.6 Attitudes Towards Worship in the Book of Jeremiah ......................................................... 132 VIII.1.7 Internal Evidence for the Formation of the Book of Jeremiah ........................................... 133 VIII.1.8 The Greek Version and the Formation of the Book of Jeremiah ........................................ 133 VIII.1.9 Stylistic and Linguistic Differences in the Book of Jeremiah ........................................... 134 VIII.2 The Main Layers of the Book of Jeremiah.................................................................................. 134 VIII.3 The Literary Genres .................................................................................................................... 136 VIII.4 The Pre-Deuteronomistic Edition of the Book of Jeremiah ........................................................ 136 VIII.5 The Deuteronomistic Edition of the Book of Jeremiah............................................................... 138 VIII.6 The Chronological Data in the Book of Jeremiah ....................................................................... 138

XII

Contents

VIII.7 Struggle Against Idolatry in the Book of Jeremiah ..................................................................... 142 VIII.8 Concentration of Worship in the Book of Jeremiah .................................................................... 144 VIII.9 Social Injustices in the Book of Jeremiah ................................................................................... 144 VIII.10 Retribution and Repentance in the Book of Jeremiah ............................................................... 145 VIII.11 Punishment: Destruction, Death and Exile in the Book of Jeremiah ........................................ 147 VIII.12 Consolation and Redemption in the Book of Jeremiah ............................................................. 148 VIII.13 The Renewal of the Rule of the House of David ...................................................................... 151 VIII.14 Post-Deuteronomistic Additions in the Book of Jeremiah ........................................................ 152 IX The Historical Conceptions of the Deuteronomist ............................................................................ 155 IX.1 Dtr’s Attitude Towards his Sources ............................................................................................... 155 IX.2 The History of Israel ..................................................................................................................... 156 IX.2.1 The Patriarchs........................................................................................................................ 156 IX.2.2 Moses’ Age: The Exodus and the Wandering in the Wilderness .......................................... 157 IX.2.2.1 The Chronological Framework of Moses’ Age ............................................................ 157 IX.2.2.2 The Exodus ................................................................................................................... 158 IX.2.2.3 Appointment of Judges (Deut 1:9–18) ......................................................................... 158 IX.2.2.4 The Story of the Spies (Deut 1:19–46) ......................................................................... 159 IX.2.2.5 From Kadesh-Barnea to Arnon River and the Conquest of Transjordan (Deut 2:1 – 3:29) ........................................................................................................... 159 IX.2.3 Joshua and the Conquest of the Land .................................................................................... 160 IX.2.4 The Age of the Judges ........................................................................................................... 161 IX.2.5 David ..................................................................................................................................... 162 IX.2.6 Solomon ................................................................................................................................ 163 IX.2.7 From Jeroboam I to Omri (1 Kgs 12:1 – 16:14) .................................................................... 164 IX.2.8 The House of Omri ................................................................................................................ 164 IX.2.9 The House of Jehu ................................................................................................................. 165 IX.2.10 Ahaz, King of Judah ............................................................................................................ 165 IX.2.11 The Fall of Israel ................................................................................................................. 166 IX.2.12 Hezekiah .............................................................................................................................. 167 IX.2.13 Manasseh ............................................................................................................................. 167 IX.2.14 Josiah ................................................................................................................................... 167 IX.2.15 Destruction and Exile .......................................................................................................... 168 X The Theological Perception of the Deuteronomist ............................................................................. 169 X.1 God’s Eternal Love for His People Israel ....................................................................................... 169 X.2 God’s Eternal Covenant with the House of David ......................................................................... 170 X.3 Attitude Towards Monarchy ........................................................................................................... 171 X.4 The Temple ..................................................................................................................................... 171 X.5 The Worship of God: Centralization of Worship and Sacrifices .................................................... 172 X.6 Reward and Punishment.................................................................................................................. 173 X.7 The Struggle Against Idolatry ......................................................................................................... 174 X.8 Fulfillment of the Word of God ...................................................................................................... 175 X.9 One Torah ....................................................................................................................................... 175 X.10 Social Injustice .............................................................................................................................. 175 Appendix: The Deuteronomistic Phraseology ........................................................................................ 177 A.1 Eternal Love, Election and the Davidic Dynasty ............................................................................ 177 A.1.1 Eternal Love and Election ...................................................................................................... 177 A.1.2 The Davidic Dynasty .............................................................................................................. 177 A.2 Covenant and Inheritance of the Land ............................................................................................ 178 A.2.1 Exodus and Covenant ............................................................................................................. 178 A.2.2 Inheritance of the Land ........................................................................................................... 179 A.3 Faith, Loyalty and its Reward ......................................................................................................... 180 A.3.1 The Monotheistic Creed ......................................................................................................... 180

Contents

XIII

A.3.2 Loyalty to the Covenant and its Reward ................................................................................. 181 A.4 Centralization of Worship and the “Name” Theology .................................................................... 183 A.5 The Struggle Against Idolatry ......................................................................................................... 184 A.5.1 Warnings Against Foreign Worship ....................................................................................... 184 A.5.2 The Polemic Against Idolatry ................................................................................................. 185 A.6 Sin and Punishment......................................................................................................................... 186 A.6.1 Disloyalty ............................................................................................................................... 186 A.6.2 Punishment ............................................................................................................................. 188 A.7 The Fulfilment of the Word of YHWH........................................................................................... 189 A.8 Rhetoric Phraseology ...................................................................................................................... 190 A.9 The Priests the Levites .................................................................................................................... 192 Abbreviations............................................................................................................................................. 193 Bibliography .............................................................................................................................................. 195 Indices ........................................................................................................................................................ 225 Index of Authors .................................................................................................................................... 225 Index of Scripture .................................................................................................................................. 230 Index of Subjects ................................................................................................................................... 247

Chapter I The Scope and Literary Structure of the Deuteronomistic Composition

I.1 The Scope of the Deuteronomistic Composition The Deuteronomistic History is in the eyes of Noth a grim and pessimistic indictment with no hope, no comfort, and no mercy, whose purpose was to justify the law.1 In his opinion, the Deuteronomist presents the destruction of Jerusalem as a dead end, a final and absolute event, the termination of God’s relationship with Israel.2 In contrast to this pessimistic approach others scholars argue that: “The message of the Deuteronomistic History is one of hope and consolation: the merciful God, who has made an everlasting bond between himself and His elected people, forgave them in the past and he will forgive them in the future. The Exile did not mean the end of relations between God and His people. On the contrary, the Lord will rescue them and return them to their land.”3 If the message of the Deuteronomist was positive and optimistic, a number of questions arise regarding the scope and content of the Deuteronomistic History, as follows: a. The end of this work is puzzling, for there is no concluding speech or summary reflections in the book of Kings, nor any explanation for the destruction; the comment on the release of Jehoiachin is important but it is not a substitute for a concluding speech; nor are the brief accounts of the fall of Judah in 2 Kgs 17 or the short notes and sermons presented in 2 Kgs 21:8–16; 22:16–17; 23:26–27; 24:3–4. The absence of a concluding speech or summary reflections at the end of the book of Kings is especially problematic considering that the Deuteronomist (= Dtr) wrote concluding speeches or summary reflections at the end of all the periods in his “History:” at the end of the Desert period (Deuteronomy); at the end of the period of Conquest and Settlement (Josh 23); at the end of the age of the Judges (1 Sam 12); at the end of the days of the United Monarchy (1 Kgs 11:11–13, 32–39), and after the fall of the Kingdom of Israel (2 Kgs 17:7–23, 33–41). All these speeches summarize the past and also refer to the future; but at the end of the book of Kings – silence. No sermon at all, precisely where this kind of speech is required, even more than in the other places. For here the reader wonders if this is the end of God’s love story with Israel, or just a crisis – albeit major – in an everlasting relationship. The story of Jehoiachin’s release (2 Kgs 25:27–30) shows that this is not “the end of the History,” or the end of the relationship between God and Israel: therefore, scholars cannot assume that Dtr has completed his composition at this point, especially those who suggest that his message was positive. b. It is puzzling that the name of the great prophet Jeremiah is not attested at all in the book of Kings – especially considering that Dtr mentioned less important prophets in Kings, citing their words and presenting the wonders they wrought and their biographical stories. For example, the stories of Elijah and Elisha form one of the largest literary units in the book of Kings. So why is Jeremiah not mentioned even once in the book of Kings? And why is not even one fleeting sentence relating that Jerusalem fell “according the word of God presented by Jeremiah the prophet” found in the book of Kings? By contrast Jeremiah is mentioned four times in the book of Chronicles (2 Chron 35:25; 36:12, 21–22 cf. also Ezra 1:1). Note also that the name of Jeremiah appears nowhere in Jer 52, which is almost parallel to 2 Kgs 24:18 – 25:30. It is inconceivable that Dtr did not recognize Jeremiah or regarded him as an insignificant prophet – still less probable that the

1

Noth 1981: 97: “Clearly he [Dtr] saw the divine judgement which was acted out in his account of the external collapse of Israel as a nation as something final and definitive and he expressed no hope for the future, not even in the very modest and simple form of an expectation that the deported and dispersed people would be gathered together.” 2 This is the opinion of other scholars also, including Thiel 1973; 1981. 3 Galil 2004: 413; see also von Rad 1947: 52–64; 19602: 308–309, 339–340; Wolff 1961: 171–186; Brueggemann 1968: 387–402; Dietrich 1994: 171–172; Haran 2003: 277.

2

Chapter I

view of the editors of Joshua–Kings contradicted the view of the editors of Jeremiah (as claimed by Albertz and others).4 c. Equally puzzling is the fact that Dtr devoted only about one percent of his composition to the depiction of the last years of the Kingdom of Judah – a very short description compared with other periods in his composition. For example, Dtr devoted an entire book (Deuteronomy) to the description of the period of Moses’ leadership. This brief description of Judah’s last years and the destruction of Jerusalem, one of the major events in his work, stands in stark contrast to other works from the ancient Near East, including the annals and the summary inscriptions of the kings of Assyria, in which events close to the date of the writing of the History are indeed described in great detail, but events that occurred remote in time from the date of the writing are described relatively tersely.5 In view of these difficulties, and of the arguments presented below, it can be assumed that the great literary work known as the “Deuteronomistic History” (which I prefer to call: “the Deuteronomistic Composition” = DC) included the book of Jeremiah as well. According to this assumption, which has already been posited by scholars,6 Deuteronomy is the preface to the DC and the book of Jeremiah seals it; in Deuteronomy the path is demarcated and the norms are fixed; the body of the composition, namely the books from Joshua to Kings, presents a detailed history of the relation between God and Israel, from the conquest of the good land to the destruction of the Temple and the loss of the land. The book of Jeremiah, which concludes the composition, discusses at length the decline and fall of Judah, analyzes the sins that brought about the destruction, and at the same time propagates the gospel of redemption among the exiles. Like Moses, who predicts exile but also redemption, Jeremiah is the prophet of destruction but also of redemption. So Dtr examines the past according to the principles of the “Torah of Moses” (Deuteronomy) – and delineates the future in light of God’s word in the mouth of His prophets – primarily Moses and Jeremiah. Many scholars admit the existence of a Deuteronomistic editing in the book of Jeremiah, but distinguish it from the Deuteronomistic editing in the books of Joshua–Kings.7 We shall try to prove below that the book of Jeremiah is an inseparable part of the DC. Since the book of Kings is the most definitive Deuteronomistic book (apart from Jeremiah) most of the discussion will compare the book of Jeremiah and the book of Kings. 1. Researchers have elaborated on the considerable linguistic similarity between the book of Jeremiah and the books of Kings and Deuteronomy.8 I reexamined the subject, and found that of the 233 typical Deuteronomistic clichés, 121 are attested in Jeremiah as against 120 in Kings, but only 43 in Joshua, 14 in the Judges, and 18 in Samuel. An especially great linguistic affinity is evident between Kings and Jeremiah: of the 121 expressions in Jeremiah – 47 are shared with Kings, but only 11 with Joshua, eight with Samuel and seven with Judges. 2. Preaching speeches are present in the book of Jeremiah and in the books of Joshua–Kings: these sermons are influenced by the ideology and style of Deuteronomy. 3. In the book of Jeremiah, as in the other books of the DC, Dtr places speeches in the text, interrupting the sequence of description of the events, and using linking repetitions (cf. Jer 19:3–9 to Deut 28:25–26 and 1 Kgs 9:8).9 4. It is especially important that in the book of Jeremiah, and similarly in the book of Kings, there is a combination of different literary genres including prophecies, prose sermons, prayers, biographical narratives, chronicles, symbolic acts, prophetic visions and more.10 As is well known, about a third of the book of Kings is taken up by stories of the Prophets, Prophecies and Prayers; whereas in the book of Jeremiah about

4

Albertz 1989: 46–47. Galil 2001: 112–122. 6 See Jepsen 19562: 100–105; cf. also Römer 1990: 485–491; 1999: 194–198; Römer and De Pury 2000: 78, n. 230: “Römer had put forward the hypothesis that the first Dtr redaction of Jeremiah could have come from the same hands as the exilic edition of DH, while JerD2 would be later than Dtr2.” 7 See Thiel 1973; 1981; Weippert 1973: 165–167, 241–243, 628–629; Leuchter 2014: 208–227; Lemche 2020: 49–59, and others. 8 Weinfeld 1972: 320–365; 1992: 180–188; For Deuteronomistic phraseology see also Driver 19023: lxxviii–lxxxiv; 1965: 99–102, 275–277; Hoffman 2001: 46–48; and the appendix to this book. 9 Weinfeld 1992: 191. 10 For the literary genres in the book of Jeremiah see Garsiel 1973; Thompson 1980: 71–76; Holladay 1989: 65–68; Hoffman 2001: 46–48; Allen 2008: 4–6; Sze Wing So 2018: 126–148. 5

The Scope and Literary Structure of the Deuteronomistic Composition

3

a quarter of the book’s Deuteronomistic layer consists of historiography and preaching prophecies combined with biographical stories. 5. In the books of Deuteronomy–Kings and Jeremiah it is sometimes difficult to distinguish sources from edited texts because in much of his writing Dtr deliberately blurs the differences between the two kinds. Particularly, they are barely distinguishable in the books of Deuteronomy and Jeremiah; researchers’ confusion here indicates that Dtr succeeded in his mission, namely writing in the spirit of Jeremiah’s and Moses’ prophecies and ideas. 6. In the books of Kings and Jeremiah, Dtr seeks to grasp the factors that led to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, and to draw the necessary lessons from this difficult event. 7. In these two books (Kings and Jeremiah) the sins that led to the destruction are identical, and even formulated literatim: Dtr mentions in both of them the sins of Manasseh (Jer 15:4 = 2 Kgs 21:21)11 and other sins, including burning incense to other gods, shedding of “clean blood,” burning sons with fire, and more (cf. 2 Kgs 22:16–17 = Jer 19:3; 44:3).12 8. In Kings and Jeremiah, the destruction is not presented as a final event, but as an intermediate station in God’s relationship with His people, after which salvation will come. This is said clearly in the prayer of Solomon (1 Kgs 8:47 ff.), as well as in the consolation prophecies in Jer 30–33, and in Deut 30:3: “the LORD thy God will turn thy captivity, and have compassion upon thee, and will return and gather thee from all the peoples, whither the LORD thy God hath scattered thee.” 9. In Deuteronomy and in Jeremiah Dtr points out that in the future God will write the faith in Him on their hearts. The book of Deuteronomy uses the term “circumcise thy heart” (“And the LORD thy God will circumcise thy heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live” – Deut 30:6). The wording is close to Jer 32:40: “and I will put My fear in their hearts;” see also Jer 31:32–33: “I will put My law in their inward parts, and in their heart will I write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.” The meaning of these scriptures is similar: God will prepare their hearts to love and fear Him (but He will not deprive them of their freedom of choice).13 10. God’s eternal love for Israel is the main tenet of Dtr’s worldview. Dtr says in Moses’ name that the Lord “loved thy fathers, and chose their seed after them” (Deut 4:37); and in a liturgical speech presented by Dtr in Deut 10:15 he writes: “Only the LORD had a delight in thy fathers to love them, and He chose their seed after them, even you, above all peoples, as it is this day.” In 1 Kgs 10:9, Dtr puts these words in the mouth of the Queen of Sheba to Solomon: “Blessed be the LORD thy God, who delighted in thee, to set thee on the throne of Israel; because the LORD loved Israel forever.”14 God’s love for Israel is mentioned by D in the Preface to the Deuteronomic code, especially in Deut 7:6–8: “For thou art a holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be His own treasure, out of all peoples that are upon the face of the earth. The LORD did not set His love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people – for ye were the fewest of all peoples – but because the LORD loved you, and because He would keep the oath which He swore unto your fathers;” see also in the Deuteronomic code: “but the LORD thy God turned the curse into a blessing unto thee, because the LORD thy God loved thee” (Deut 23:6). These writings, which emphasize God’s emotional, warm, and informal relationship with His people, are probably among the northern elements attested in Deuteronomy, and are known for their close connection with the prophecies of Hosea, which often mention God’s love for His people: “even as the LORD love the children of Israel” (Hos 3:1); “When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and out of Egypt I called My son … I drew them with cords of a man, with bands of love” (Hos 11:1, 4); “I will love them freely” (Hos 14:5). This element of the eternal love of God for His people is also attested in Jer 31:2: “Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love; therefore, with affection have I drawn thee.” See also Jer 31:19: “Is Ephraim a darling son unto Me? Is he a child that is dandled? For as often as I speak of him, I do earnestly remember him still; therefore, My heart yearneth for him, I will surely have compassion upon him, saith the LORD.” 11

For the idea that the sins of Manasseh led to the destruction see Carroll 1986: 319–321; Weinfeld 1992: 170, 211; Hoffman op. cit.: 349–350, 362; Allen op. cit.: 176; Cogan 2019: 655–659. 12 Weinfeld op. cit.: 211. 13 For Jer 31:32 in comparison with Deut 6:6 see Nicholson 1970: 82–83; Thiel 1973: 91, 122, 146, 152; Thompson 1980: 579–581; Carroll 1986: 609–616; Holladay 1989: 197–198; McKane 1996: 826; Hoffman 2001: 603; Allen 2008: 355–356; Eggleston 2016: 91–92, 100–101; Mastnjak 2016: 198, 203. 14 See Cogan 2019: 218.

4

Chapter I

In Dtr’s opinion, the bond between the Lord and Israel is never-ending. Its beginning is in the days of the Patriarchs but it has no end. Therefore, the destruction is indeed a highly traumatic event: the most difficult moment in God’s relationship with his people. But just as there have been hard times in the past, this time too Israel will have a rebirth: the destruction and separation are temporary – see Jer 3:1: “... saying: If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and become another man’s, may he return unto her again? Will not that land be greatly polluted? But thou hast played the harlot with many lovers; and wouldest thou yet return to Me! saith the LORD.” Likewise, Dtr emphasizes in Jer 3:7: “And I said: After she hath done all these things, she will return unto me!” The eternity of the covenant between God and His people Israel is emphasized by Dtr in both the book of Samuel and the book of Jeremiah. In 2 Sam 7:24, Dtr writes: “And Thou didst establish to Thyself Thy people Israel to be a people unto Thee forever; and Thou, LORD, becamest their God.” In Jer 32:40, Dtr writes: “and I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; and I will put My fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from Me.” See also the prophet Jeremiah’s words in 50:5: “Come ye, and join yourselves to the LORD in an everlasting covenant that shall not be forgotten.” Moreover, in Jer 31:34–35 Dtr likens the eternity of the relation between God and Israel to the eternity of the laws of nature: “Thus saith the LORD, Who giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, who stirreth up the sea, that the waves thereof roar, the LORD of hosts is His name: if these ordinances depart from before Me, saith the LORD, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before Me forever.”15 11. The historical horizon of the book of Jeremiah corresponds to the timing of the completion of the DC – ca. 560 BCE: Jer 44:30 foretells the death of the Pharaoh Hophra (Apries) – who actually died in 570 BCE; and the book of Jeremiah close with the story of Jehoiachin’s release, in 561 BCE (Jer 52:31–34).16 12. The book of Jeremiah is sealed with a chapter corresponding to the last chapter of Kings. Despite some differences, this similarity indicates the way Dtr links various literary units of his composition through repetitive references, as in Judg 2:6–10, and more.17 13. The placing of the book of Jeremiah as a concluding unit of the DC is similar to Dtr’s inserting poems at the end of Deuteronomy (Deut 32:1–43; 33:2b–29) and Samuel (2 Sam 22–23). 14. The general literary structure of the DC without the book of Jeremiah is defective and lacking, since there is an introduction, and the main body, but no concluding division. 15. The special structure of Jer 44 correlates with the structure of other literary divisions in the DC. Jer 44 is divided into three parts: the first and last set forth the words of the prophet and are formulated as two speeches. In the middle of the structure Dtr places the words of the people with whom he seeks to argue. The chapter’s triangular structure which emphasizes the central idea is similar to the structure of Joshua’s farewell speech in Josh 24: there Joshua’s words too are interrupted by the talk of the people (16–18, 21). Josh 24 is also divided into three circles, with a clear message: a demand to remove the idols and to worship only God. 16. Additional similarities are attested between the book of Jeremiah and the book of Deuteronomy, which serve as the opening and closing literary units of the DC: a. In either book the history of only one generation is described: in Deuteronomy the generation of the desert, in Jeremiah the generation of destruction; b. These two generations are destined to die outside the borders of the Promised Land, and only their children are entitled to redemption; c. The generation of the desert lasted forty years, and the period of Jeremiah’s prophecy lasted about 40 years; d. Moses and Jeremiah are commanded to write down the words of the Lord in the book, and in both cases those written words were broken or burned, and later written: the tablets of the covenant were broken by Moses in Horeb, and the first scroll of the book of Jeremiah was burned by Jehoiakim in Jerusalem; e. The DC opens in Egypt, and Jeremiah’s final words are recited there; f. Similarities feature between the descriptions of the dedications of Moses and Jeremiah, and between them and the text in Deut 18:18: “I will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee; and I will put My words in his mouth:” verbally this matches Jer 1:9: “Behold, I have put My words in thy mouth,” and rein-

15

Nicholson 1970: 83; Thiel 1973: 198; Thompson 1980: 582; Carroll 1986: 617–618; Holladay 1989: 198–201; McKane 1996: 828–831; Brueggemann 1998: 295–298; Hoffman 2001: 604–605; Allen 2008: 356–358. 16 Haran 2003: 251; cf. Thompson op. cit.: 696–697; Begg 1986b; Carroll op. cit.: 774–775; McKane 1986: 1141–1144; Allen op. cit.: 470–471. 17 See Cogan 2019: 702–719; de Waard 2020.

The Scope and Literary Structure of the Deuteronomistic Composition

5

forces the link between Jeremiah and Moses; g. Of great importance is the arrangement of the book of Jeremiah being similar to that of Deuteronomy: both are set in a genre-thematic-chronological order, unlike the chronological arrangement of the books of Joshua–Kings. This is natural, since the arrangement of the introduction and the concluding units are not like the arrangement of the main body of the composition; h. In either books 14 speeches were made out of the 56 speeches presented in the overall DC. 17. The book of Jeremiah, like the book of Kings, is divided into five major divisions (see table 1 below). The two books open with an introduction (1 Kgs 1–2; Jer 1) and close with a concluding chapter – actually almost the same chapter (Jer 52 // 2 Kgs 24:17 – 25:30; see more details below). In sum, Dtr is a skillful historian, with a deep and original understanding of the past, who allows himself to redesign Israel’s history with the intention of teaching his audience a moral lesson; but he is also a great writer, with a clear theological agenda, a commentator on Jeremiah who uses the revered seer’s prophecies to shape the future and to guide the exiles, persuading them to be patient and remain loyal to the God: for redemption will come at the end of a Babylonian hegemony of “seventy years.” Dtr edited and adapted the sources for his composition in various ways. However, diverse editing methods in different sections are not evidence of several editors: in the book of Chronicles various editing methods are used in the three main divisions of the book (introduction, the reigns of David and Solomon, the Kingdom of Judah). Dtr invests considerable effort in collecting and preserving his sources, yet he nevertheless argues with his sources, settles inconsistencies, and pours sources into patterns he has prepared in advance (in the books of Kings and Judges: see below). He does not cite all his sources but presents them selectively, as is evident from the common pattern attested in the book of Kings (“Now the rest of the acts of PN, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of …”), and also from the fact that he begins his work with the Exodus, not with Abraham or Jacob/Israel.

Deut 1–4 Preface Josh 1 Preface Judg 1:1– 2:5 Preface 1 Sam 1–3 Preface 1 Kgs 1–2 Preface

Deut 5–11 Introduction

Deut 12–28 Deuteronomic Code

Deut 29–34 Concluding Unit

Josh 2–12 Conquest of the Land Judg 2:6–23; 3:4–6 Introduction

Josh 13–19; 22:1–8 Inheritance and Settlement Judg 3:7 – 16:31 The Judges

Josh 23–24 Concluding Unit Judg 17–21 Appendices

1 Sam 4–15: Before David

1 Sam 16 – 2 Sam 20 King David

2 Sam 21–24 Appendices

Jer 1 Preface

Jer 2–24; 25:1–13 Prophecies to Israel

1 Kgs 16:15 – 2 Kgs 8:29 House of Omri Jer 26–29 Preaching prophecies combined with biographical narratives

2 Kgs 18:1 – 24:16 From Hezekiah to Jehoiachin Jer 34–45 Preaching prophecies combined with biographical narratives

1 Kgs 3–11 Solomon

1 Kgs 12:1 – 16:14 From Schism to Zimri Jer 46–51; 25:15–38 Prophecies to the Gentiles

2 Kgs 9–17 From Jehu to Hosea Jer 30–33 Prophecies of consolation

Table 1: The Literary Structure of the Deuteronomistic Composition

2 Kgs 24:17 – 25:30 Concluding Unit Jer 52 Concluding Unit

6

Chapter I

The books of Deuteronomy, Joshua–Kings, and Jeremiah contain post-Deuteronomistic texts that were added to the DC mainly in the Persian period. At that time, a Priestly edition of these books was prepared, with the dissolution of the DC: Deuteronomy was added to the Pentateuch and the book of Jeremiah was separated from the book of Kings by the book of Isaiah. In my opinion, the DC included only a short version of the book of Jeremiah, preserved now in the LXX, which includes about 86% of the Masoretic text. The post-Deuteronomistic additions in the book of Jeremiah are also “Deuteronomistic” in content and style and were composed during the period of the Babylonian exile – but they were not composed by Dtr. In sum, Deuteronomy is the preface to the DC, and Jeremiah seals it; in Deuteronomy the path was charted and the norms were fixed. In the main body of the composition, the books of Joshua to Kings, a detailed account of the history of the relationship between God and Israel was presented, from the conquest of the land to the destruction of the Temple and the loss of the good land. The book of Jeremiah, which concludes the composition, discusses at length the decline and fall of Judah, analyzes the sins that led to the destruction and at the same time dispatches the gospel of redemption to the exiles. Like Moses, who predicts exile but also repentance and salvation, Jeremiah is the prophet of destruction but also the prophet of redemption. So one should not wonder why the destruction is described briefly in the book of Kings and why no concluding speech is presented at the end of this book; the answers are clear: the fall of Judah and Jerusalem are described extensively in the book of Jeremiah, where Dtr sets the concluding speeches that point out the message of DC as a whole: a message of hope and consolation: the merciful God loves Israel His chosen people and has made an everlasting bond with them. He has forgiven them in the past and will forgive them in the future. The Exile is not the end of relations between God and His people. On the contrary, the Lord will rescue them and return them to the good land. I.2 The Literary Structure of the Deuteronomistic Composition The DC consists of six main literary units: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, and Jeremiah. The books of Deuteronomy and Jeremiah serve as the opening and the concluding units, presenting the period of Moses in opposition to the period of Jeremiah. The books Joshua–Kings are arranged chronologically from the crossing of the Jordan and conquest of the land until the fall of Jerusalem and the loss of the land. Noth rightly emphasized that: “The linguistic evidence remains the most reliable basis for attributing parts of the various traditions to Dtr.”18 He pointed out the importance of the seven speeches and summary reflections that are placed at the end of the main periods: four speeches were presented by three leaders: Joshua (Josh 1:10–15; 23); Samuel (1 Sam 12); and Solomon (1 Kgs 8:14 ff.); and three summary reflections were introduced by Dtr himself (Josh 12; Judg 2:11 ff.; and 2 Kgs 17:7 ff.).19 Weinfeld showed that in addition to the speeches and summaries observed by Noth, the “Deuteronomists” inserted dozens of speeches into the books of Joshua to Kings and Jeremiah.20 In my opinion, 56 speeches and summary reflections are presented in the DC, which provides further proof of its unity: 4 were cited from D, and the other 52 were composed by Dtr. They constitute approx. 40% of the texts Dtr composed, and include approx. 93% of his typical phraseology. 14 speeches are placed in Deuteronomy, 14 in Joshua–Samuel, 14 in Kings, and 14 in Jeremiah (see table 2 below). In Deuteronomy, ten speeches are attributed to Moses, one is presented by the Lord, and three are liturgical: in two of them, the “speaker” is “Israel” (6:20–25; 26:5–11); in the third, it is Dtr himself (10:12–26). Moses’ ten speeches are divided into two groups, each containing 5 speeches: the first group is incorporated in Deut 1–28, the second in Deut 29–34. Instead of one concluding speech at the end of the book of Kings, Dtr inserted 14 concluding speeches in the book of Jeremiah. These speeches are also divided into two groups, each with 7 speeches: the first group is incorporated in Jer 1–25, the second in Jer 26–52. Most speeches and summary reflections are attributed to the following 12 prophets: Moses (10), Joshua (4), Jeremiah (3), Samuel (3), Ahijah the Shilonite (2), Nathan, Elijah, Huldah, Jehu son of Hanani, and three anonymous ones, a grand total of 29 speeches and summary reflections. The other 27 are mostly attributed to the Lord (17); 4 are delivered by 3 18

Noth 1981: 5. Noth op. cit.: 5: “Dtr brings forward the leading personages with a speech, long or short, which looks forwards and backward in an attempt to interpret the course of events, and draw relevant practical conclusions about what people should do.” See also idem, op. cit.: 6. 20 Weinfeld 1992: 196–233. 19

The Scope and Literary Structure of the Deuteronomistic Composition

7

kings: David (2), Solomon, and Hezekiah; in two cases, the “speaker” is “Israel;” and 4 summary reflections are presented by Dtr himself (see table 2 below).

1

2

Deuteronomy

Joshua–Samuel

Kings

Jeremiah

Deut 1:6 – 4:40

Josh 1:1–9

1 Kgs 2:3–4

Moses

The Lord

David

Jer 7:2*–26, 32–36

Deut 5:1b – 26:19* Moses [D]

Josh 1:10–15

1 Kgs 8:14–61

Joshua

Solomon

The Lord

The Lord Jer 11:1–6, 9–14, 17

3

Deut 6:20–25

Josh 10:25

[Liturgical Speech] 1 Kgs 9:3–9

Israel

Joshua

The Lord

The Lord

4

[Liturgical Speech] Deut 10:12–22

Josh 12

1 Kgs 11:11–13

Jer 16:9–15

Dtr

Dtr

The Lord

The Lord

[Liturgical Speech] Deut 26:5–11

[Summary Reflections] Josh 22:1–5, 8

Jer 17:19–27

Israel

Joshua

1 Kgs 11:32–35, 36b, 38–39

[Liturgical Speech] Deut 27:1–8 Moses [D]

Josh 23

1 Kgs 14:7–11, 14–16

Jer 19:3–9

Joshua

Ahijah the Shilonite

The Lord

[Summary Speech] Judg 2:11–23; 3:4–6

1 Kgs 16:1–4, 7

Jer 25:3–7

Jeremiah

5

6

7

Deut 27:9–10 Moses [D]

Ahijah the Shilonite

Jer 13:10–11

The Lord

Dtr

Jehu son of Hanani

Deut 27:11 – 28:68

[Summary Reflections] Judg 10:11–14

1 Kgs 21:20b–24

Jer 29:10–14

Moses [D]

The Lord

Elijah

The Lord

Deut 29–30

1 Sam 2:31

2 Kgs 9:7–10a

Jer 32:16–25

Moses

A Man of God

One of the children of the prophets

Jeremiah

10

Deut 31:1–8

1 Sam 7:3–4

2 Kgs 10:30

Jer 32:26–35

Moses

Samuel

The Lord

The Lord

11

Deut 31:9–13

1 Sam 12:6b–16a, 19b, 20b–22, 24

2 Kgs 17:7–23, 33–41

Jer 33:2–11

Dtr

The Lord

8 9

Moses 12

13

14

Samuel

[Summary Reflections]

Deut 31:16–21

[Summary Speech] 1 Sam 15:28–29

2 Kgs 19:15b, 19b

Jer 35:12–17

The Lord

Samuel

Hezekiah

The Lord

Deut 31:24–29

2 Sam 7:13, 16

[Liturgical Speech] 2 Kgs 21:10–15

Jer 44:1–14

Moses

Nathan

His servants the prophets

The Lord

Deut 32:45–47

2 Sam 7:22–29

2 Kgs 22:17b, 19b, d

Jer 44:20–23

Moses

David

Huldah

Jeremiah

Table 2: The Speeches and the Summary Reflections of the Deuteronomistic Composition * The three liturgical speeches (no. 3–5) interrupt Moses’ second major speech. Dtr attributed great importance to his composition’s literary design. This is indicated, among other things, by the great attention he devoted to the frameworks, especially the opening and closing patterns that he com-

8

Chapter I

posed for the various literary units in his work. He chose, as stated, to end the books with poetry: in Deuteronomy Moses’ blessing and song are presented in the concluding section (Deut 32:1–43; 33:2b–29), and poetry is also inserted in the appendices of the book of Samuel (2 Sam 21–24). Moreover, many poetic prophecies are included in the book of Jeremiah, which concludes the entire composition. Dtr built each book as a separate literary unit, with a central motif and a clear literary structure. Each book was designed as a sub-unit of the grand composition. The scope of the books is first and foremost a function of the sources available to Dtr. At the same time, it reflects the changes he made in his sources as deriving from his historiographical and theological views. His intention was to write a composition of high literary quality.21 The book of Deuteronomy is a series of speeches mainly by Moses on the eve of his death, which reviews the first 40 years of Israel’s history, during the wandering in the desert. The speeches present the Deuteronomic code; preaching the preservation of the covenant, and focusing on the actions of Moses the great prophet and leader. This is a clear and crystallized literary division which is sealed with Moses’ death. The book of Joshua also focuses on a defined age: the conquest of the land west of the Jordan and its division to the tribes of Israel. This book also concludes with the death of its chief protagonist Joshua. The book of Judges describes the age of the charismatic leaders who functioned before the establishment of the monarchy. It opens with a description of the period of the elders who lived after Joshua’s death, and closes with appendices that emphasize the need for a king. The book of Samuel focuses on the reign of David. The first fifteen chapters of the book are an introduction to this reign: they partly overlap with the period described in the book of Judges.22 The book of Kings starts with the reign of Solomon, the builder of the Temple, and concludes with the destruction of the Temple. The book of Jeremiah focuses on the generation of destruction and the prophetic activity of Jeremiah (hence a chronological overlap between it and the book of Kings). I have deliberately presented the six books in three pairs, for this is how Dtr placed them in his composition. The chronological overlap between the two last pairs is not coincidental, and there is a close relation between each book and the next, and between the first and the last. The books were arrayed in chronological order. Dtr sometimes made fundamental changes in the structure of his sources. In other cases, he retained the previous structure but added an introduction and a closing unit; and sometimes he rebuilt the book. On this issue too, the structure of the DC as a whole is of great importance, and there is a connection between his methods in his first two books (Deuteronomy and Joshua), and a difference between them and the following two books (Judges and Samuel) and the latter two (Kings and Jeremiah). In Deuteronomy and Joshua Dtr preserves the overall structure of the sources (D, and the second edition of Joshua). These two sources are divided into three main parts: D includes a Historical Introduction (5–11), the main body of the source (the Deuteronomic code [12–26]), and a closing unit (27–28). The book of Joshua (second edition) includes the book of Conquest (2–11) and the book of the Inheritance and Settlement (13–19), with the kernel of chapter 24, which concludes the book (see table 1 above). To both books Dtr has added mainly a concluding unit and an introduction or a preface. In Deuteronomy the preface is presented in chapters 1–4, and the closing unit in chapters 29–34. In Joshua the preface is chapter 1, and chapter 23 was added by Dtr to the closing unit (Josh 23–24). The book of Judges (second edition) is set in a format similar to that of the book of Deuteronomy: (a) Preface, (b) Introduction (c), the main body of the book (3–16), and (d) the concluding unit (the appendices [17–21]). Dtr added an introduction to the book, that includes a connecting paragraph and a programmatic speech (2:6–23; 3:4–6). He also expanded the frames to the stories of the Judges, adding the motif of sin at the head of each story. In Dtr’s eyes, the body of the book is divided into two main subdivisions: from Othniel to Gideon (3–8) and from Abimelech to Samson (9–16) – four successful Judges (Othniel, Ehud, Deborah, Gideon) vis-à-vis three failed leaders: Abimelech, Jephthah, Samson. Dtr also added the book’s chronological frameworks. In the book of Samuel, Dtr has made two important changes in the first edition of Samuel: a. he transferred 1 Kgs 1–2 from the first edition the book of Samuel to the book of Kings; b. he created a concluding division in the book of Samuel (the appendices [2 Sam 21–24]), while transferring passages from the main body of 21 22

Haran 2003: 283. Brueggemann 1990: 1–2.

The Scope and Literary Structure of the Deuteronomistic Composition

9

the book to the new division. The introduction to the book remains unchanged, and includes the story of the birth and dedication of Samuel, which also contains the song of Hannah. Dtr treated the books of Kings and Jeremiah differently from the first four books, actually he rebuilds them. In the book of Kings, Dtr prepared opening and closing patterns for most kings of Israel and Judah – and poured into them the book’s sources: “The book of the acts of Solomon;” “The book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel” and “The book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah;” Northern and Southern prophetic sources; and more. The book is divided into five main divisions, and arranged in chronological order: (a) the reign of Solomon (1 Kgs 3–11); (b) Israel and Judah from the schism to the rise of Omri (1 Kgs 12:1 – 16:14); (c) the House of Omri (1 Kgs 16:15 – 2 Kgs 8:29); (d) from Jehu to Hosea (2 Kgs 9–17); (e) from Hezekiah to Jehoiachin (2 Kgs 18:1 – 24:16). 2 Kgs 24:17 – 25:30 closes the book and includes the story of the destruction and the exile, but also the Gedaliah affair, and an account of Jehoiachin’s release. These appendices are very short relative to the size of the book. Dtr also inserted an introduction to the book of Kings (I Kgs 1–2), which also serves as an opening to the description of Solomon’s reign. The book is set in chronological order, but the large divisions (such as the descriptions of the reign of Solomon or of the House of Omri) are arranged in literary-chronological order, and combine different literary genres: Elijah’s stories are presented before Elisha’s stories, but each division itself is set primarily in literary and not chronological order. The Deuteronomistic edition of the book of Jeremiah is preserved in the LXX. The structure of this edition is sophisticated, and it is characterized by methods of editing and setting used by Dtr in the books of Kings and Deuteronomy (see table 3 below). The book is edited in a genre-thematic-literary-chronological order, having first been set in a genre-thematic-literary order. Next the chronological data were inserted (some of them shaping the book’s literary structure, namely chronological order within each sub-literary unit). Jer 1 serves as an introduction, and includes the title and the dedication. Jer 52 is the concluding unit, with three components: the destruction, the other exiles, and the story of Jehoiachin’s release. The body of the book of Jeremiah is divided into five parts, similar to Kings: the first division (2:1 – 25:13) includes prophecies for Israel and Judah, which are followed by prophecies to the Gentiles (in the following order: 46–51; 25:15– 38). This arrangement of the first two divisions preserves the order as in the book’s pre-Deuteronomistic edition. Literary units three and five are preaching prophecies combined with biographical narratives: unit three focuses on the dispute between Jeremiah and the false prophets (26–29); and unit five is a chronological sequence of preaching prophecies combined with biographical stories from the time of Jehoiakim and Zedekiah, through the Gedaliah affair and ending with Egypt (34–44; ch. 45 is an appendix to this unit). In the middle, between units three and five, Dtr placed prophecies that in his opinion were the most important in the book: the prophecies of consolation (30–33). In the Masoretic text of the book of Jeremiah, which reflects its post-Deuteronomistic edition, most prophecies to the Gentiles are shifted to the end, and the edition is set in chiastic order: the first division (2:1 – 25:12) is accompanied by an appendix (25:13–38); and the last unit (5) contains the other prophecies to the Gentiles (46–51). In the middle, units 2 and 4 are placed between units 1 and 5; and the prophecies of consolation are incorporated in the center of this structure. Dtr incorporated in the DC many sources, including: D (Deut 5–28); the second edition of the book of Joshua; the second edition of the book of Judges; the first edition of the book of Samuel; “the book of Solomon’s acts;” “the book of the chronicles to the kings of Judah;” “the book of the chronicles to the kings of Israel;” the pre-Deuteronomistic edition of the book of Jeremiah; Northern and Southern prophetic sources inserted in the book of Kings, and more. The earliest sources were composed in Solomon’s time: the second edition of the book of Judges; the first edition of Samuel (these two sources were composed by one person); and the “book of Solomon’s acts.” The literary legacy of the days of Solomon is therefore an important component of the DC. Before and after these ancient works, Dtr preserved, in the books of Deuteronomy, Joshua and Kings, the Judahite literary heritage of the days of Hezekiah/Josiah: D, the second edition of the book of Joshua; “the book of the chronicles to the kings of Judah;” “the book of the chronicles to the kings of Israel,” Northern and Southern prophetic sources, including the collection of the stories of Elijah and Elisha. The literary crop of the last days of the kingdom of Judah, and of the beginning of the exilic period, was mostly set forth in the book of Jeremiah.

10

Chapter I

The Pre-Deuteronomistic Edition of Jeremiah (ca. 590 BCE) Jer 2:2b – 23:32 Prophecies to Israel

Jer 46:2b – 51:64a; 25:15–29 Prophecies to the Gentiles

Jer 30:4 – 31:22 Prophecies of consolation

The Deuteronomistic Edition of Jeremiah: LXX (ca. 560 BCE) Jer 1 Preface

Jer 2:2b – 25:13 Prophecies to Israel

Jer 46:1 – 51: 64; 25:15–38 Prophecies to the Gentiles

Jer 26–29 Preaching prophecies combined with biographical narratives

Jer 30–33 Prophecies of consolation

Jer 34–44 (+45) Preaching prophecies combined with biographical narratives

Jer 52 Concluding Unit

The Post-Deuteronomistic Edition of Jeremiah (ca. 540 BCE) Jer 1 Preface

Jer 2–25 Prophecies to Israel

Jer 26–29 Preaching prophecies combined with biographical narratives

Jer 30–33 Prophecies of consolation

Jer 34–45 Preaching prophecies combined with biographical narratives

Jer 46–51 Prophecies to the Gentiles

Table 3: The Formation of the Book of Jeremiah

Jer 52 Concluding Unit

Chapter II The Chronological Framework of the Deuteronomistic Composition Dtr recognized the importance of chronology.1 He constructed a chronological framework spanning 880 years from the Exodus to the fall of Jerusalem, dividing it into two sub-periods: 480 years from the Exodus to the establishment of the Temple (1 Kgs 6:1); and 400 years from the beginning of the Temple to its destruction. II.1 From the Exodus to the Establishment of the Temple The chronology of the period from Moses to Samuel and the correlation between the chronological data in Deuteronomy–Samuel, as well as the schematic framework in 1 Kgs 6:1, have been discussed extensively in the literature. Scholars have formulated many hypotheses for the resolution of the complicated chronological problems of this period, without producing any generally accepted solution. Many scholars are of the opinion that 480 years is a round calculation of a period of 12 generations of 40 years each, based on the Priestly tradition in 1 Chron 5:29–37 [ET: 6:1–15], which counted 12 generations from Aaron to Azariah, who served in Solomon’s Temple.2 However, this common claim is clearly wrong, for there is not even one evident “Priestly tradition” that numbers precisely 12 generations from Aaron, the first priest, to Azariah, the priest in the time of Solomon. Actually, there are many “Priestly traditions” in 1 Chron 5–6, and in Ezra 7:1–3, and they are self-contradictory. Only one “tradition” mentions explicitly that Azariah, “is the one who served as priest in the house that Solomon built in Jerusalem” (1 Chron 5:36 [ET: 6:10]). Yet, this “tradition” counted 15, not 12 generations from Aaron to Azariah, who served in Solomon’s Temple.3 Other scholars hold that 440 years, read by the LXX for the MT’s 480 in 1 Kgs 6:1, should be preferred, and that it is based on eleven generations between Aaron and Zadok, mentioned in 1 Chron 5:29– 37 [ET: 6:1–15].4 However, as Rowley rightly pointed out, “there is not the slightest reason to suppose that the author of 1 Kgs 6:1 had access to the book of Chronicles, or that he had independent knowledge of the High Priestly genealogy.”5 Other researchers are of the opinion that most of the chronological data in Deuteronomy–Samuel was coordinated with the schematic framework in 1 Kgs 6:1, but their proposals are unconvincing. Moore excludes from his calculations most of the years of foreign domination, as well as the years of the “usurpers” (Abimelech and Saul), basing his chronological scheme mainly on the tenures of the Israelite leaders of this period.6 He proposes the following figures for the main Israelite leaders of the pre-monarchic period: Moses – 40 years, Joshua – 40, Othniel – 40, Ehud – 80, Barak – 40, Gideon – 40, the Minor Judges with Jephthah – 76, Samson – 20, Eli – 20 (=LXX), Samuel – 40. This proposal is mistaken: one cannot claim that Dtr, on the one hand, composed the theological framework of the book of Judges, and on the other excluded most of the periods of oppression, which are so important and central in the same theological framework. Noth suggests that Dtr sums up the whole chronology of the pre-monarchic period in 1 Kgs 6:1.7 In his opinion, Dtr was extremely and consistently interested in chronological questions, and this is further proof that Dtr is a single author whose work is self-contained. Noth assumes overlapping figures for the Philistine oppression and late interpolations added by post-Deuteronomistic editors. He points out that Dtr meant to provide an unbroken chronology, and offers the following chronological scheme: 40 years of wandering in the wilderness; five years for the conquest of Cis-Jordan; Cushan-rishathaim/Othniel – 48 years; Eglon/Ehud – 98; Jabin/Deborah – 60; Midian/Gideon – 47; Abimelech – 3; Tola and Jair – 45; Ammonite oppression –

1

For a list of chronological data in the DC see Galil 1996: 148–153; 2009; 2010b; see also chapters III–VIII. See Gampert 1917: 241–247; Wellhausen 1927: 225; Cogan 1992: 1005; 2019: 144. 3 For the emendation of 1 Chron 5: 35–36 (ET: 6: 9–10) and the assumption that the first-mentioned Azariah was a priest in the Temple of Solomon see Curtis and Madsen 1910: 128–129; Japhet 1993: 150; and cf. also Klein 2006: 172–177. But even if we accept this common opinion, we still count 13 and not 12 generations from Aaron to Azariah. 4 For this proposal see Gray 1963: 159; Jones 1984a: 163. 5 Rowley 1950: 95. 6 Moore 1895: xl–xliii. 7 Noth 1981: 18–25, 104–107. 2

12

Chapter II

18; Jephthah, Ibzan, Elon, Abdon – 31; Philistine oppression – 40; Saul – 2; David – 40; Solomon – 4 or 3, if Solomon’s first year coincided with David’s last. Noth’s proposals are problematic, as he himself had noticed. He claims that in two places Dtr uses an artificial conception in order to reach the total of 480. But in fact, the problem lies with Noth’s proposals not with Dtr’s system, since Noth omitted the period of Samuel from his calculations, as well as the years of the last stages of Joshua and the elders that outlived him. Richter proposed another solution.8 He also assumed overlapping figures for the period of the judges (mainly for the time of Samson and Eli), suggesting the following reconstruction of the figure 480: 46 years of the reigns of Solomon (4), David (40) and Saul (2); 136 years of “judges in the strict sense” (characterized by the formulae: ‫ וישפט את ישראל‬or ‫)והוא שפט את ישראל‬: Eli (40), Samson (20), and the “minor Judges” (76); 200 years of the “Savior” judges (characterized by the formula: ‫)ותשקט הארץ‬: Gideon (40), Barak and Deborah (40), Ehud (80) and Othniel (40); 53 years of oppression: before Gideon (7), Deborah (20), Ehud (18), and Othniel (8); 40 years in the desert; and only five years for the period of Joshua and the elders. This proposal, like Noth’s, is untenable, since Richter also omits the period of Samuel, and gives Joshua only five years. Moreover, he excluded from his calculations the 58 years of oppression by the Ammonites and the Philistines, and the three years of Abimelech.9 Moore, Noth, Richter, and others, are of the opinion that the series of the “Minor Judges” with the dates assigned to them, were included in the Deuteronomistic edition of Judges, and in the schematic framework in 1 Kgs 6:1. This is one of the main flaws in their systems, since, in my opinion, the notices of the minor judges were not included in the Deuteronomistic edition of Judges, and therefore cannot form part of Dtr’s chronology or of the schematic framework spanning 480 years from the Exodus to the fourth year of Solomon (see chapter V).10 The notices of the minor judges are clearly secondary in the book of Judges. They are devoid of any theological aspect: in these passages we find no sin, no repentance, and no forgiveness. Salvation is mentioned, but no salvation stories, not even the typical round figures. Moreover, the interpolation of these passages in Judg 10 and 12 evidently contradicts Dtr’s attitude towards the period of the Judges, since, in his opinion, the Israelites were deteriorating: “as soon as the judge was dead, they would relapse into deeper corruption than their forefathers” (Judg 2:19). Accordingly, the reaction of the Lord changed: “I will deliver you no more” (Judg 10:13), so there was no more room for prosperity and success, but just for judgment, decline, and oppression. Dtr divides the epoch of the judges into two main parts: the period of the four saviors, who succeeded in their mission (Othniel, Ehud, Deborah and Gideon), and the period of the three judges/leaders who disappointed: Abimelech, Jephthah and Samson.11 Dtr describes the period of these last three leaders as dark and cruel, without rest or peace, characterized by deep corruption, and one of the lowest points in the relationship between God and his chosen people. This is exactly the point where the post-Deuteronomistic editor of Judges inserted the notices of the minor judges, in an effort to balance Dtr’s harsh and gloomy description of the relations between God and the Israelites: “In the midst of escalating social chaos, the notices of the minor judges serve as a refreshing interludes of order, family growth and prosperity.”12 I would now like to present my reconstruction of the correlation between the note in 1 Kgs 6:1 and the chronological data in Deuteronomy–Samuel. The discussion will be divided into three main parts: a. The chronological information relating to the beginning and to the closing of the period from the Exodus to the establishment of the Temple; b. The chronology of the period from Cushan-rishathaim to the Philistine oppression; c. The correlation between these two periods. It is generally held that the wandering of the Israelites in the wilderness lasted 40 years (Deut 1:3; 2:7; 8:2, 4; 29:4). The Exodus was the starting point of the DC. Similarly, the chronology of the final period of the schematic framework of 480 years is clear: Dtr assigns David a reign of 40 years (1 Kgs 2:11, cf. 2 Sam 5:4–5), and the Temple was established in the fourth year 8

Richter 1964: 132–141; see also Boling 1975: 23. For another proposal to coordinate the chronological data in Deuteronomy–Samuel with 1 Kgs 6:1 see Sauer 1968: 1– 14. For a critical review of his suggestions see Bimson 1981: 83–84. 10 For the opinion that the series of the minor judges were added to the book of Judges by a post-Deuteronomistic editor see Budde 1897: ix, xvii, 78; Burney 1970: 289–290; Rowley 1950: 92, 97; Simpson 1957: 142–145; Gray 1967: 5–6, 327; Zakovitch 1983: 180–182. It is a common opinion that the series of the minor judges have been included in the book of Judges “to supplement the number of the ‘great judges’ to the conventional number of twelve, thus possibly to make the judges as representative as possible of all the elements of Israel” (Gray op. cit.: 327). 11 For the “disappointing judges” see Amit 1999b: 85–92. 12 Pressler 2002: 194. 9

The Chronological Framework of the Deuteronomistic Composition

13

of Solomon. It is mentioned explicitly that Solomon was crowned while David was still alive. This co-regency is important for understanding Dtr’s chronology of the monarchic period.13 In my opinion, Dtr used the postdating system for the reigns of the kings of the house of David, as was customary in the last years of Judah, a period with which he personally was closely familiar. It is reasonable to suppose that Dtr considered the last year of David as the accession year of Solomon, suggesting a few months of co-regency. The figure given for Saul’s reign in 1 Sam 13:1 (“two years”), is too low to be historically possible. It is generally considered to be a textual corruption.14 Still, in my opinion, Dtr found this date in his sources, which were written by scribes related to the house of David. These scribes intended to present Saul’s reign as a very brief and unsuccessful episode, between the glorious days of Samuel, and the climax in the reign of David. This brings the final period of the schematic framework of 480 years to a total of 46 years. The “period of the Judges” described in the Deuteronomistic edition of the book of Judges, lasted 314 years, 200 years of peace, 111 years of oppression by a foreign enemy, and the three years of Abimelech. This period is divided into seven sub-periods, as follows: four full theological cycles may be observed in Judg 3–8: a. The first cycle lasted 48 years: from the first period of sin and subsequent oppression by Cushanrishathain, which lasted eight years, to the people’s outcry, the deliverance by Othniel, and the 40 years of peace at the end of this cycle (Judg 3:8, 11); b. The second cycle of 98 years: including 18 years of the Moabite oppression (Judg 3:14), ending with salvation by Ehud, and 80 years of peace after the death of Eglon (Judg 3:30); c. The third cycle of 60 years: 20 years of subjection by Jabin, the Canaanite king, and 40 years of peace after the victory of Barak and Deborah (Judg 4:2–3; 5:31); d. The fourth cycle of 47 years: seven bad years of ravage by the Midianites followed by 40 years of peace in the time of Gideon (Judg 6:1; 8:28). These four temporal cycles were followed by three sub-periods, which came immediately after the death of Gideon: a. The short period of Abimelech (three years: Judg 9:22); b. 18 years of Ammonite oppression (Judg 10:8); c. 40 years of Philistine oppression (Judg 13:1). Rest and peace are not mentioned after Jephthah’s victory over the Ammonites; just the slaughter of 42,000 Israelites and sacrifice of his only daughter. Moreover, the Ammonite oppression was directly followed by 40 years of Philistine oppression, as stated in Judg 10:7: “The Lord was angry with Israel, and he sold them to the Philistines and to the Ammonites.” Note the order of the foes (first the Philistines), and the fact that this sentence is located in the introduction to the story of Jephthah. This indicates that in Dtr’s eyes, the Ammonite oppression and the Philistine oppression are one continuous epoch. The total of the figures discussed above is 400 years: 40 years in the desert + 46 years of Saul, David and Solomon = 86 years + 314 years of the period of the Judges. The difference between 480 and 400 is 80, and this is the time that Dtr probably reckoned for the two links that are missing in this puzzle: the period of Joshua and the elders on the one hand, and the time of Samuel on the other hand; each, in Dtr’s opinion, lasting 40 years. Two important questions are still unanswered: a. To when should we date the periods of Samson and Eli? b. Is the round figure of Israel’s 300-year settlement in southern Transjordan in accordance with Dtr’s system? The key to understanding the first question is Judg 15:20. It points out clearly that Samson’s 20 years are located within the period of the Philistine oppression: “Samson was judge over Israel for twenty years, in the days of the Philistines.” This fact is also reflected in Judg 15:11, and in the words of the angel to Samson’s mother in 13:5. Samson has nothing to do with the ending of the Philistine oppression, since no matter what damage he caused them, in the end he died as a prisoner of the Philistines. Actually, there is no evidence of the termination of the Philistine oppression until the defeat of the Philistines by the Lord in the time of Samuel (1 Sam 7:7–14; cf. also 1 Sam 4:9). The battle of Eben-ezer was fought about 21 years before Samuel’s victory over the Philistines. This view is clearly deduced from the ark tradition, especially from the chronological notes in 1 Sam 6:1 and 7:2. The ark had been in the Philistine cities for seven months (6:1), then in Beth-shemesh, probably for a short period (6:11–21), and finally in Kiriath-jearim for 20 years (7:2). The conclusion is manifest: the fatal defeat at Eben-ezer, and probably the destruction of Shiloh too, happened about halfway through the 40 years of Philistine oppression mentioned in Judg 13:1.15 Since Eli died of shock at the news of the defeat at Eben-ezer, it is clear that the last 19 years of Eli overlapped the first period of the

13

For co-regencies in Israel and Egypt see Thiele 1974; Ball 1977; Murnane 1977. For the chronological note in 1 Sam 13:1 see Noth 19602: 176–177; Hertzberg 1964: 103; Herrmann 1973: 182; Bartal 1982: 125–129; Klein 1983: 122–125; Long 1989: 71–75; Kitchen 2003: 83. 15 Noth 1981: 22. 14

14

Chapter II

Philistine oppression, just as Samson judged Israel “in the days of the Philistines.” Eli’s term of office goes back to the beginning of the long period of decline and oppression that started after the death of Gideon. This conclusion corresponds perfectly with the negative attitude of the author of the first edition of the book of Samuel to the house of Eli, expressed in detail in the first chapters of the book of Samuel (cf. 1 Sam 1:14; 2:12–17, 22–36; 3:11–14 – see chapter VI). Eli and his two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, are also described as leaders that disappointed, so the three of them joined the three other failed leaders: Abimelech, Jephthah and Samson, who were active during exactly the same period. The 61 years since the death of Gideon to the end of the Philistine oppression is divided in the book of Judges into three sub-periods (Abimelech [3]; Ammonite oppression [18]; Philistine oppression [40]). This period of 61 years corresponds to the 61 years from the beginning of the period of Eli to the beginning of the epoch of Samuel. This era is also divided into three sub-periods: 40 years of Eli (1 Sam 4:18); seven months of the ark in Philistia, and about 20 years of the ark in Beth-shemesh and Kiriath-jearim (see table 1). Judges

Samuel

[The Death of Gideon] Abimelech – 3 (Judg 9:22) Ammonite oppression 18 (Judg 10:8)

Philistine oppression 40 (Judg 13:1)

Samson 20 (Judg 15:20; 16:31)

Eli 40 (Judg 4:18)

The Battle of Eben-ezer (1 Sam 4:1–11)

The ark in Philistia – 7 months (1 Sam 6:1); and a short time in Beth-Shemesh (1 Sam 6:11–21) The ark in Kiriath Jearim 20 (1 Sam 7:2)

[The Rise of Samuel] Table 1: The History of Israel from the Death of Gideon to Samuel’s Rise Figures for the periods of Joshua and Samuel are missing in the MT. Yet, the suggestion that each epoch lasted 40 years corresponds perfectly with the chronological data in the books of Joshua and Samuel. Josh 14:7–10 indicates that the conquest of Cis-jordan took 5 years, since Caleb says that he is now 85 years old, and 45 years elapsed between the sending of the spies into Canaan (in the first year of the wandering in the wilderness) and the allotment of the land among the Israelites. Caleb’s age (85=40+45) may indicate that Joshua’s lifetime (110 years – Josh 24:29; Judg 2:8) was divided into three main periods: 40+40+30. He was 40 years old when he was sent as a spy to Canaan, like Caleb (“Forty years old was I when Moses ... sent me ... to espy out the land” – Josh 14:7); he lived 40 years in the desert; and he led the people of Israel for 30 years. Accordingly, he was 80 years old when he was nominated as leader, the same as Moses. To the 30

The Chronological Framework of the Deuteronomistic Composition

15

years of the leadership of Joshua, Dtr probably added a period of 10 years for the epoch of the “elders that outlived Joshua” (Josh 24:31). Judg 2:9–10 indicates that the period of the Judges started only after the death of all the generation of Joshua, just as the period of Joshua started only after the generation of Moses had passed away. Since only the Israelites who were born in the desert entered the land, and since at the end of the epoch of Joshua, his entire generation passed away, it is impossible to suppose that the period of Joshua lasted only five years. On the contrary, only a long period of 40 years would accord with all the traditions mentioned above. The conclusion is that the generation of Joshua passed away after 40 years, like the generation of Moses. As for the 40 years of the epoch of Samuel, it is important to look at the lifetimes of the leaders of Israel mentioned in the DC. There is a clear decline in the lifetime of these leaders, according to the schematic numbers mentioned by Dtr: Moses lived 120 years; Joshua – 110; Ehud – probably more than 100 years, since he was at least in his twenties when he defeated Eglon, and probably lived until the end of the 80 years of peace following his victory; Eli – 98 (1 Sam 4:15); Barzillai the Gileadite – over 80 years (2 Sam 19:32– 36); and David only 70 years (2 Sam 5:4). No king of the house of David reached the age of 70 (Manasseh [67], and Uzziah [68] were close). The age of Samuel matches this pattern well: he “judged” Israel for 40 years; about 21 years intervened between the battle of Eben-ezer to Samuel’s victory over the Philistines; and it is stated that Samuel was a teenager (‫ )נער‬at the time of Eli’s death (1 Sam 3:1).16 These calculations are also in harmony with the descriptions of Samuel as an old man in the last years of his period (1 Sam 8:1, 5; 12:2; 28:14). The 300 years of Israel’s settlement in Transjordan (Judg 11:26) is a round figure and should not be adhered to exactly. That said, it is clear that it corresponds perfectly to the chronological framework proposed above: 274 years passed from the beginning of the oppression of Cushan-rishathim to the end of the Ammonite oppression, so the end of the epoch of “300 years” falls on the period of Joshua. It is also obvious that the chronological data in Judg 11:26 contradicts the suggestion that the series of the minor Judges, with the dates assigned to them, were included in the DC. Adding the 45 years of Tola and Jair to the period of the Judges would place the end of the epoch of the “300 years” after the time of Joshua, namely about 19 years after Joshua and his entire generation passed away. II.2 From the Establishment of the Temple to its Destruction Dtr evidently meant to present an unbroken chronology for the entire period described in the DC, especially the epoch of the first Temple. In his opinion 400 years passed from the establishment of the Temple to the fall of Jerusalem. He divided this age into four sub-periods as follows: it opens with 36 years of the reign of Solomon, from his 4th to his 40th year, and is sealed with 134 years from the fall of Samaria to the fall of Jerusalem. The period from the schism to the rebellion of Jehu lasted 90 years, and from the rebellion of Jehu to the fall of Samaria – 140 years. On the one hand, Dtr made great efforts to preserve the dates found in his sources for this period, but on the other hand, in two cases he misunderstood his sources or fabricated figures in order to reconcile the chronological data found in his sources with his schematic 400-years framework: he counted the 40 years of Jehoash from the murder of Athaliah, not from the murder of Ahaziah his father; and claimed that Pekah reigned 20 years – even though he actually reigned only ca. 5 years. The difference of ca. 20 years between reality (380) and Dtr’s chronology (400) is related mainly to these two data. In my opinion, Dtr applied a systematic set of principles for his chronological calculations. Since he composed the DC in the mid-sixth century BCE, he was undoubtedly familiar with the customs of reckoning of the years in the last days of the kingdom of Judah. I posit that he made use of only three principles for his chronological system, as follows: a. The new year in the kingdom of Judah fell on 1 Nissan, and in Israel, on 1 Tishri. The text in Jer 36:22 attests that King Jehoiakim “was sitting in the winter-house in the ninth month; and the brazier was burning before him.” This demonstrates that in the last years of the kingdom of Judah the new year began on 1 Nissan, a fact undoubtedly well-known to Dtr, personally. In his opinion, or to his certain knowledge, this was also the practice in Judah during the entire period of the monarchy;17 b. In Judah postdating was the system used, while in the Northern Kingdom antedating was used until the mid-8th century 16

Josephus conjectured that Samuel was 12 years old when the Lord called him (Ant. V: 348). If we accept the chronological figure proposed by Josephus, then Samuel reached at least the age of 73 = 12+21+40. 17 For evidence for an autumnal new year in Israel see Clines 1974.

16

Chapter II

BCE, and postdating from the reign of Menahem onwards. The count of 23 years from the 13th year of Josiah, to the 4th year of Jehoiakim (Jer 25:1–3), cannot be reconciled unless we assume that postdating was the system used at times in Judah. Moreover, it is clearly possible to reconcile most of the synchronisms in the books of Kings and Jeremiah assuming a system of postdating for the kings of Judah and antedating for the kings of Israel; c. Some of the kings of Israel and Judah crowned their sons in their lifetime (co-regency), and the years of all the kings of the two kingdoms were counted from their coronation, whether they were invested during their predecessor’s lifetime or only after his death. In the first chapter of the book of Kings it is mentioned that Solomon was crowned while David was still alive. This co-regency is very important for understanding Dtr’s chronological system. In sum, 96% of the chronological data in the books of Kings and Jeremiah are in accordance with the three principles mentioned above, and can be reconciled with all extra-biblical chronological data related to this period. II.2.1 From the Schism to Jehu’s Revolt The period from the Schism to the revolt of Jehu lasted, in Dtr’s opinion, about 90 years. This period is divided into three sub-periods (see table 2): a. From the schism to the coronation of Asa, about 20 years; b. From the coronation of Asa to the coronation of Jehoshaphat, about 40 years; c. From the coronation of Jehoshaphat to the revolt of Jehu, about 30 years. Six discrepancies exist between the 39 chronological data that are mentioned in the book of Kings in relation to this period.18 Assuming that Dtr used the three principles given earlier, four of these six discrepancies may be reconciled. Dtr probably assumed a co-regency of three or four years for Jehoram and Jehoshaphat. In his opinion Jehoram was crowned in the 22nd year of his father Jehoshaphat, which was also the 5th year of Joram son of Ahab. By this assumption three of the six mentioned discrepancies may be reconciled (nos. 1, 5–6). If Dtr assumed a difference of six months between the beginning of the new year in Israel and in Judah, another problem mentioned above can be resolved, since the accession year of Abijam will fall on the first half of the 18th year of Jeroboam (see table 2 below). The only datum that contradicts Dtr’s system in this period is the one that fixes Joram’s coronation in the nd 2 year of Jehoram. With this determination, we are obliged to amend most of the biblical data relating to this period. It is preferable to assume that this datum is erroneous, and that it is one of the very few data in the DC that were corrupted for some reason. In my opinion, in reality, Jehoram son of Jehoshaphat was probably crowned in the 2nd year of Joram of Israel. A post-Deuteronomistic editor may have found in his sources a synchronism establishing the coronation of Joram in the 2nd year of Joram, erroneously presuming it referred to king Joram of Israel, and therefore that he was crowned in the second year of Jehoram/Joram of Judah. Dtr supposed that Ahaziah was crowned in the second half of the 11th year of Joram, assuming a coregency of about one year for Jehoram and Ahaziah (see table 2). According to Dtr’s chronology, it is also possible to fix Ahaziah’s coronation in the first half of Joram’s 12th year, yet it is clear that only one of these two possibilities is correct. Dtr probably calculated the unique synchronism contained in 2 Kgs 8:16: “And in the fifth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel, Jehoshaphat being then king of Judah, Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah began to reign.” He probably assumed that the 8th and last year of Jehoram covered the second half of the 12th year of Joram of Israel; counting backwards, the 7th year of Jehoram

18

For the 39 chronological data relating to the period from the schism to the revolt of Jehu see Galil 1996: 148–153, nos. 1–9, 20–24, 39–44, 51–60, 74, 91–92, 134–136. Following are the six contradictions in these data: 1. The count of the years of the kings of Judah from the schism to the revolt of Jehu is 95 years, but the count of the years of the kings of Israel in the same period is 98 years; 2. If Joram, king of Israel, was crowned in the second year of Jehoram, king of Judah (2 Kgs 1:17), it is impossible that the same Joram was crowned in the 18th year of Jehoshaphat (2 Kgs 3:1), and that Jehoram was crowned in the 5th year of Joram (2 Kgs 8:16); 3. Is it possible that Ahaziah was crowned in the 11th year of Joram and also in the 12th year of the same Joram (2 Kgs 8:25; 9:29)? 4. If Rehoboam and Jeroboam began to rule at the same time, and if Rehoboam reigned 17 years (1 Kgs 14:21), then Abijam should have been crowned in the 17th year of Jeroboam, and not in his 18th year (1 Kgs 15:1); 5. If Jehoshaphat was crowned in the 4th year of Ahab (1 Kgs 22:41), and Ahaziah son of Ahab was crowned in the 17th year of Jehoshaphat (1 Kgs 22:52), then Ahab ruled 21 and not 22 years (1 Kgs 16:29); 6. If Joram was crowned in the 18th year of Jehoshaphat (2 Kgs 3:1), and Jehoram was crowned in the 5th year of Joram (2 Kgs 8:16), then Jehoshaphat ruled 22 and not 25 years (1 Kgs 22:42).

The Chronological Framework of the Deuteronomistic Composition

17

coincided with the second half of the 11th year of Joram of Israel and the first half of his 12th year. Consequently, Jehoram’s accession year was fixed in the first half of the 5th year of Joram of Israel (see table 2). 400 Years Solomon

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

400 Years Solomon

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

400 Years Solomon Rehoboam Jeroboam

34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 38 39 40 Acc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

400 Years Rehoboam Jeroboam Abijam/Nadab Asa Baasha

50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 14 15 16 17 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Acc. 1 2 3 1 2 Acc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

400 Years Asa Baasha Elah

66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2

400 Years Asa Omri Ahab Jehoshaphat

83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Acc. 1 2

400 Years Jehoshaphat Ahab

100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

400 Years Jehoshaphat Ahab Ahaziah Joram Jehoram Ahaziah Jehu

114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 22 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Acc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Acc. 1 1 Table 2: From the Temple’s Constitution to Jehu’s Revolt

The words “Jehoshaphat being then king of Judah” were possibly not a copyist’s error but a comment of Dtr hinting at Jehoram’s coronation in his father’s lifetime. Dtr fixed Ahab’s death in the second half of the 114th year of the presumed era of 400 years, and Jehu’s coronation in its 127th year, assuming a spell of more than 13 years between the death of Ahab and the revolt of Jehu. This chronological framework did not reflect reality, since it is well known from the Assyrian sources that Ahab was one of the leaders of the alliance of kings who fought against Assyria in Qarqar in the 6th year of Shalmaneser III (853 BCE), and Jehu offered tribute to Assyria some twelve years later, in the 18th year of the same Assyrian king (841 BCE).19

19

Galil 2001: 27–41.

18

Chapter II

II.2.2 From Jehu’s Revolt to the Fall of Samaria In Dtr’s opinion the period from the fall of Samaria to the revolt of Jehu lasted 140 years. His calculations in this period undoubtedly run counter to the historical facts, since no more than 121 years passed from the revolt of Jehu (841 BCE) to the fall of Samaria (720 BCE). The book of Kings gives 48 chronological data between the revolt of Jehu and the fall of Samaria.20 These data seem confusing and contradictory, with eleven discrepancies in them.21 Assuming that Dtr used the three principles detailed above, it is possible to reconcile six of these eleven discrepancies (nos. 1, 5–7, 9–10). The other five (nos. 2–4, 8, 11) cannot be reconciled by any system, and it is reasonable to suppose that they are mistakes or late additions. The starting point for Dtr’s calculations of this period is the last siege of Samaria, determined in his sources as the 4th to 6th year of Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18:9–10). From this point he counted the years backwards to the revolt of Jehu. Since he knew that Hoshea, the last king of Israel, reigned nine years, he fixed the last siege of Samaria as this king’s 6th–9th years, assuming the following synchronisms between Hoshea and Hezekiah: 9 Hoshea || 6 Hezekiah; 7 Hoshea || 4 Hezekiah. Therefore, the coronation of Hezekiah was determined as the 3rd year of Hoshea, according to the postdating system. Since Pekah was crowned in the 52nd (and last) year of Uzziah, a date found in his sources, Dtr fixed the coronation of Ahaz in the 17th year of Pekah, assuming that Jotham was crowned in the same year as Pekah. These four synchronisms (between Hoshea and Hezekiah, and between Ahaz and Pekah), were calculated by Dtr.22 In Dtr’s opinion, in this period, four kings of Israel and Judah crowned their sons in their lifetime. Hezekiah was crowned in the 6th year of his father Ahaz (since Ahaz was crowned in the 17th year of Pekah, who ruled 20 years; and Hezekiah was crowned in the 3rd year of Hoshea). The following is a list of the other coregencies assumed by Dtr for this period: Amaziah / Uzziah = 13–14 years; Jehoash / Amaziah = 2–3 years; Joash / Jehoahaz = 1–2 years (see table 3 below).23 As mentioned above, Dtr’s chronology of this period does not reflect reality, since the period from the revolt of Jehu to the fall of Samaria lasted about 121 years and not 140 years. What is the reason for this difference? In my opinion, in the following two cases Dtr misunderstood his sources or fabricated figures to correspond with his chronological framework spanning 400 years from the establishment of the Temple to its destruction: a. Dtr counted the years of Jehoash from the murder of Athaliah, and not from the murder of his father. But I believe that Jehoiada, the priest, who was the de facto ruler in the kingdom of Judah at the beginning of the reign of Jehoash, did not recognize the validity of Athaliah’s rule. He counted Jehoash’s

20

For the chronological data relating to the period from the revolt of Jehu to the fall of Samaria see Galil 1996: 148– 153, nos. 10–19, 26–30, 45–50, 61–73, 75–78, 93–97, 138–143. 21 The following are the eleven discrepancies in the 48 chronological data relating to the period from the revolt of Jehu to the fall of Samaria: 1. The count of the years of the kings of Judah from the installation of Athaliah to the 6th year of Hezekiah is 166 years, and the count of the years of the kings of Israel in the same period (from the coronation of Jehu to the removal of Hoshea) is only 143 years and 7 months; 2. If Ahaz was crowned at the age of 20 and ruled 16 years (2 Kgs 16:2), and Hezekiah was 25 years old at his coronation (2 Kgs 18:2), then Ahaz was only 11 years old at the birth of his son; 3. If Jeroboam II was crowned in the 15th year of Amaziah (2 Kgs 14:23), who ruled 29 years (2 Kgs 14:2), then Uzziah was crowned in Jeroboam’s 15th and not his 27th year (2 Kgs 15:1); 4. The coronation of Hoshea in the 12th year of Ahaz (2 Kgs 17:1) contradicts the synchronisms between Hezekiah and Hoshea (2 Kgs 18:1, 9–10); 5. If Jehoash was crowned in the 7th year of Jehu (2 Kgs 12:2), and Jehoahaz son of Jehu was crowned in Jehoash’s 23rd year (2 Kgs 13:1), then Jehu ruled 29 or even 30 years and not 28 (2 Kgs 10:36); 6. If Jehoahaz was crowned in the 23rd year of Jehoash, and Joash was crowned in the 37th year of Jehoash (2 Kgs 13:10), then Jehoahaz ruled 15 and not 17 years (2 Kgs 13:1); 7. If Joash was crowned in the 37th year of Jehoash, and Amaziah in the 2nd year of Joash (2 Kgs 14:1), then Jehoash ruled 38 and not 40 years (2 Kgs 12:2); 8. If Jotham ruled 16 years (2 Kgs 15:33), it is not possible that Hoshea was crowned in Jotham’s 20th year (2 Kgs 15:30); 9. If Menahem was crowned in the 39th year of Uzziah (2 Kgs 15:17), and Pekahiah his son was crowned in the 50th year of Uzziah (2 Kgs 15:23), then Menahem ruled 12 and not 10 years (2 Kgs 15:17); 10. If Ahaz was crowned in the 17th year of Pekah (2 Kgs 16:1) who ruled 20 years (2 Kgs 15:27), and Hezekiah was crowned in the 3rd year of Hoshea (2 Kgs 18:1), then Ahaz ruled six or seven years and not 16 (2 Kgs 16:2); 11. If Pekah was crowned in the 52nd year of Uzziah (2 Kgs 15:27), and Jotham was crowned in the second year of Pekah (2 Kgs 15:32), then Uzziah ruled 53 and not 52 years (2 Kgs 15:2). 22 For the synchronisms between Hoshea and Hezekiah see Thiele 19833: 134–138, 174–175; Galil 2001: 72–76. 23 For these co-regencies see Thiele op. cit.: 118–123; Galil 1996: 58–59.

The Chronological Framework of the Deuteronomistic Composition

19

years from the death of his father, Ahaziah, who was murdered by Jehu during his bloody revolt;24 b. Pekah reigned as a sole ruler no more than five years, since about seven years elapsed between the giving of tribute to Assyria by Menahem, in the 8th year of Tiglath-Pileser III (738 BCE), and by Hoshea, in the 15th year of that Assyrian king (731 BCE). Even assuming that Menahem died in 738 BCE, and that Hoshea was crowned 400 Years Athaliah Jehoash Jehu

127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

400 Years Jehoash Jehu

141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

400 Years Jehoash Jehoahaz

155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

400 Years Jehoash Jehoahaz Amaziah Joash

169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 37 38 39 40 15 16 17 Acc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

400 Years Amaziah Uzziah Joash Jeroboam II

183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Acc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 15 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

400 Years Amaziah Uzziah Jeroboam II

197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 27 28 29 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

400 Years Uzziah Jeroboam II Zecharia

211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 6/12

400 Years Uzziah Menahem Pekahiah

225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Acc. 1 2 Acc. 1 2

400 Years Jotham Pekah 400 Years Jotham/Ahaz Pekah/Hoshea Hezekiah

238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 Acc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Acc. 1 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 15 16/Acc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 16 17 18 19 20/Acc.1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Acc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Table 3: From Jehu’s Revolt to the Fall of Samaria

24

For the opinion that the years of Jehoash were counted retroactively see Galil op. cit.: 47–48; 2010b: 436, with additional bibliography.

20

Chapter II

in 731 BCE, it cannot be accepted that Pekah ruled as a sole monarch for more than five years, for in the first two of those seven years Pekahiah the son of Menahem ruled. Dtr may have found the information on the length of Pekah’s reign in his sources, and misunderstood it: he counted his years from the murder of Pekahiah and not retroactively from his appointment as an official in the last years of Jeroboam II, as suggested by scholars. On the other hand, Dtr might have fabricated this round figure in order to reconcile the figures found in his sources with the chronological framework of 400 years. If so, it should be pointed out that this is probably the only datum relating to length of reign manipulated by Dtr. In reality the period from the establishment of the Temple to its destruction lasted about 380 years. The difference of about 20 years between reality and Dtr’s chronology is probably related to the periods of Pekah and Athaliah. From the investiture of Pekah in the 52nd year of Uzziah, Dtr counted backwards to the revolt of Jehu, and his calculations are in accordance with all the chronological data in the book of Kings, relating to this period: Pekahiah ruled from the 50th to the 52nd year of Uzziah, and Menahem from the 39th to the 50th year of Uzziah, assuming a difference of six months between the beginning of the new year in Israel and in Judah, and a postdating system in Israel from the reign of Menahem onwards (see table 3 above). Zechariah was crowned in the 38th year of Uzziah and assassinated in the 39th, ruling only six months. Again these figures, relating to the short period of Zechariah, are possible only if we assume a postdating system in both kingdoms, and a gap of six months between the beginning of the new year in Israel and in Judah. II.2.3 From the Fall of Samaria to the Fall of Jerusalem Dtr was personally familiar with the last years of the kingdom of Judah. He based his history of this period not only on his sources but also on his own recollections. The description of the fall of Jerusalem was probably his own composition, based on his own memory, without any written sources at hand. The last time that “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah” is mentioned is in 2 Kgs 24:5, in connection with the account of Jehoiakim. Dtr’s starting point is the date of the fall of Jerusalem, on the 7th (or the 10th) day of the 5th month of year 11 of Zedekiah, this being year 19 of Nebuchadrezzar (2 Kgs 25:2, 8; Jer 52:12). From this point, Dtr counts backwards to the next traumatic incident in the history of Israel, the fall of Samaria, basing his calculation on the tradition that fixed the last siege of Samaria in the 4th to 6th year of Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18:9–10).25 This period, according to Dtr’s calculation, lasted 134 years, exactly the span of time that passed according to Assyrian and Babylonian sources from the 2nd year of Sargon II to the 19th year of Nebuchadrezzar. Therefore, Dtr’s chronology for this period is not only coherent – it is also historically reliable. All the chronological data in the books of Kings and Jeremiah relating to the period from the fall of Samaria to the fall of Jerusalem can be reconciled, assuming only two principles: the system of reckoning of years was postdating; and the new year fell on 1 Nissan.26 In the DC the period from the fall of Samaria to the fall of Jerusalem is divided into two main sub-periods, by the coronation of king Josiah: the first period lasted 80 years, and the second 54 years (see table 4 below). Dtr calculated the first 80 years as follows: 23 years from the fall of Samaria in the 6th year of Hezekiah to his death in his 29th year. To this figure he adds the 57 years of the reigns of Manasseh and Amon. Dtr divides the second sub-period, spanning 54 years, in Jeremiah as follows: 12 years from the coronation of Josiah to the beginning of Jeremiah’s career in the 13th year of Josiah (Jer 1:1–3); 23 years from the 13th year of Josiah to the 4th year of Jehoiakim “that is the accession year of Nebuchadrezzar” (Jer 25:1–3); the last 19 years, which corresponded exactly to the first 19 years of Nebuchadrezzar, from the 5th year of Jehoiakim to the fall of Jerusalem in the 19th year of Nebuchadrezzar (Jer 52:12). The DC therefore concludes with a period of about 42 years, which Dtr assigns to the career of Jeremiah, just as it opens with a period of 40 years of the leadership of Moses.27 Dtr’s calculation of the career of Jeremiah, corresponds perfectly with my historical reconstruction of this period. This calculation is also very important to grasp the figures given by Dtr in the book of Kings for the reigns of the sons of Josiah. This same epoch of 54 years, from the coronation of Josiah 25

For the fall of Samaria see Galil 1996: 83–97, with earlier literature. For the chronological data relating to the period from the fall of Samaria to the fall of Jerusalem see Galil, op. cit.: 148–153, no. 31–38, 79–82, 84–90, 98–101, 103–111, 144–150. 27 For the chronology of the career of Jeremiah see Whitley 1964: 467–483; Holladay 1981: 58–73, 425–426; Carroll 1986: 90–93; Herrmann 1986: 19–27; McKane 1986: 3–4; Hoffman 2001: 21–23, 99–102. 26

The Chronological Framework of the Deuteronomistic Composition

21

to the fall of Jerusalem, is divided in the book of Kings into two main periods: the reign of Josiah and the reign of his sons. Each of these is divided again into two sub-periods as follows: 18 years from the coronation of Josiah to his reform; 13 years from the reform to the death of Josiah; 11 years of the reigns of Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, and Jehoiachin, to the 7th year of Nebuchadrezzar; and the last 12 years of the DC, covering the 8th–19th years of Nebuchadrezzar from the exile of Jehoiachin in his 8th year to the exile of Judah and Jerusalem in his 19th year. 400 Years Hezekiah Ahaz

267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 13 14 15 16

400 Years Hezekiah Manasseh

281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Acc. 1 2 3 4 5

400 Years Manasseh

295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

400 Years Manasseh

309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33

400 Years Manasseh

323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

400 Years Manasseh Amon/Josiah

337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 Acc. 1 2/Acc. 1 2 3 4

400 Years Josiah Jeremiah

351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1 2 3 4 5 6

400 Years Josiah/Jehoahaz Jehoahaz/Jehoiakim Jeremiah

365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 +/Acc. 1 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

400 Years 379 380 381 Jehoiakim/Jehoiachin 2 3 4 Zedekiah Jeremiah 21 22 23 Nebuchadrezzar Acc. 1

382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 5 6 7 8 9 10 11/+ Acc. 1 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

400 Years Zedekiah Jeremiah Nebuchadrezzar

396 7 38 15

393 4 35 12

394 5 36 13

395 6 37 14

397 398 399 8 9 10 39 40 41 16 17 18

391 392 2 3 33 34 11

400 11 42 19

Table 4: From the Fall of Samaria the Fall of Jerusalem One of the main chronological problems of this period is the date of Jehoiachin’s exile. On the one hand, he was exiled in the 8th year of Nebuchadrezzar (2 Kgs 24:12). On the other hand, he surrendered in the 7th year of Nebuchadrezzar, and there was a deportation from Judah in this same year (Jer 52:28). Since the term ‫( השנה הראשנית‬Jer 25:1) refers to the accession year (šanat rēš šarrūti) of Nebuchadrezzar,28 and we have clear synchronisms – the 10th and 11th years of Zedekiah with the 18th and 19th years of Nebuchadrezzar 28

Some scholars replace the form harishonit with harishonah, see McKane op. cit.: 618; Carroll op. cit.: 490. Other are of the opinion that the unique term ‫ השנה הראשנית‬refers to the accession year of Nebuchadrezzar and not to his official first year, see Lewy 1925: 27.

22

Chapter II

– we must assume that Dtr fixed the last year of Jehoiakim and the three months of the reign of Jehoiachin in the 7th year of Nebuchadrezzar, counting the accession year of Zedekiah from the 8th year of Nebuchadrezzar. From the historical point of view, it should be pointed out that the date of the surrender of Jehoiachin is established by all the scholars as the 2nd day of Adar, the 7th year of Nebuchadrezzar (March 16, 597 BCE), following the Babylonian chronicle (BM 21946, rev., ll. 11–13).29 This date was given in the Babylonian chronicle according to the Babylonian calendar. It is also generally held that the Babylonian calendar corresponded to the Judahite.30 Yet, since there was no fixed intercalation of years in Babylonia, it is certainly possible that at times the calendars diverged. In previous studies I have shown that in the 7th year of Nebuchadrezzar divergence was more probable than the possibility that the calendars corresponded and therefore the 2nd day of Adar, a date given in the Babylonian chronicle according to the Babylonian calendar, probably corresponded to the 2nd day of Nissan according to the calendar of Judah. This conclusion is in accordance with biblical data, which places the exile of Jehoiachin in the 8th year of Nebuchadrezzar.31 Dtr fixed the date of Sennacherib’s campaign in the 14th year of Hezekiah, about eight years after the fall of Samaria (2 Kgs 18:13). This date does not contradict Dtr’s chronology, yet it is not original, and does not reflect reality. Rather, it was calculated by Dtr, who bases this date on the following data found in his sources: a. Hezekiah ruled 29 years (2 Kgs 18:2); b. Sennacherib conducted his campaign during the time of Hezekiah; c. “In those days” (2 Kgs 20:1), i.e., in Dtr’s view, at the time of Sennacherib’s campaign, Hezekiah was sick unto death, and the prophet Isaiah informed him that he would live 15 years more. Dtr presumed that this prophecy was fulfilled, and concluded that Sennacherib’s campaign was conducted in the 14th year of Hezekiah. Dtr’s chronology of the period from the fall of Samaria to the fall of Jerusalem seems schematic, but it is not. The figures for this period seem round, like Dtr’s figures in the book of Judges; for example, 80 years from the fall of Samaria to the coronation of Josiah. In fact, this is just coincidence, and this figure reflects reality, as is clearly proven by a comparison with the external data. As mentioned above, 134 years indeed elapsed from the fall of Samaria to the fall of Jerusalem. Moreover, according to Dtr’s chronology, 115 years intervened from the fall of Samaria to the 4th year of Jehoiakim (80+12+23), and this is exactly the time span from the fall of Samaria in 720 BCE, to the defeat of the Egyptians by the Babylonians near Carchemish in 605 BCE (BM 21946; Jer 46:2).32 Yet the presumed figure of 400 years, from the foundation of the Temple to its destruction, is undoubtedly schematic, and so is the calculation that Samaria fell exactly 266 years after the establishment of the Temple, that is, after two-thirds of the 400 years had passed. II.3 The Seventy-Years Era and Jehojachin’s Release The 70-years era has been discussed extensively in literature.33 This era does not refer to the time of exile, but to the period of Babylonian rule: “these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years” (Jer 25:11). At the end of 70 years, two events will take place simultaneously: the destruction of Babylon and the redemption of Israel: a. “after seventy years are completed, I will punish the king of Babylon and that nation, the land of Chaldeans … making the land an everlasting waste” (Jer 25:12); b. “When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will visit you, and I will fulfill to you my promise and bring you back to this place” (Jer 29:10). A few scholars have claimed that Jeremiah meant an exact number, while others maintain that Jeremiah intends to an inaccurate period that will last about two or three generations: “All the nations shall serve him and his son and his grandson …” (Jer 27:7). It is possible that 70 is a typological number, as is the case in a few biblical scriptures (Zech 1:12; Ezra 1:1; 2 Chron 36:21–22; Dan 9:2). Weinfeld suggested that it is a scribal convention, which transforms the three generation reference into a conventional allusion of god’s anger with his land. Additionally, he also noted that an Esarhaddon inscription contains a reference to a 70-year period during which Babylon would be desolate. Marduk decrees 70-years against Babylon until such a time when he reconciles with the land he has punished. He also pointed out that 29

Wiseman 1956: 72–73. Galil 1996: 109. 31 Galil op. cit.: 113–115. 32 Wiseman 1956: 66–67. 33 For the 70-years era see Duhm 1901: 230; Carroll 1986: 493–496, 558; Appelegate 1997: 91–110; Hoffman 2001: 490–492, 496–498, with additional bibliography. 30

The Chronological Framework of the Deuteronomistic Composition

23

this looks like “the conventional numerical typology of the period, which appears to have been particularly employed by Mesopotamian scribes.”34 In my opinion, it is possible that Dtr meant exactly 70 years. The point of departure of the 70-years era is clear: Jehoiakim’s 4th year, which coincides with Nebuchadnezzar’s accession year (605 BCE; see Jer 25). Twenty years passed from the beginning of the 70-years era to the fall of Jerusalem; 25 years from Jerusalem’s fall to the 37th year of Jehoiachin’s exile, and 25 years is exactly the time left until the end of the era of 70 years, assuming it is accurate. The 70-years epoch begins in Nebuchadnezzar’s accession year (šanat rēš šarrūti), which coincides with Jehoiakim’s 4th regnal year. The first sub-period ends in Nebuchadnezzar’s 19th year, which is the 12th year of Jehoiachin’s exile, and the 20th year of the 70-years era (see table 5 below). 70-Years Era Jehoiachin’s Exile Nebuchadrezzar

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ... 45 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... 37 Acc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Table 5: The 70-years Era

So if Dtr aimed for exactly 70 years, then the epoch of the exile would last, in his opinion, 50 years, and at the end of this period God would return his people to their land. According to this calculation, the 37th year of Jehoiachin’s exile is exactly the 25th year of the fall of Jerusalem, which is exactly halfway to redemption.35 If the 70-year period is accurate, then the scriptures that seal the books of Kings and Jeremiah are not only a possible expression of vague hopes for future redemption of Israel, at an unknown time, but an accurate time mark that proves that the divine plan foretold by Jeremiah is miraculously fulfilled: the destruction of Jerusalem is not a dead end but just a crisis in the relationship between God and Israel, whose time is predetermined, and redemption will come at the end of this difficult time. The prophecy of Jeremiah will be fulfilled: he predicted not only the destruction but also the redemption of Israel, and just as 25 years have already passed, another 25 years will pass, and at the end of the 70-years era God will return his chosen people to the good land. Dtr saw Jehoiachin’s release, right in the middle of the exile era, as an important flicker of light in the midst of darkness, an exciting divine sign that foretold the release of Judah from exile and bondage. By pointing out this significant event, he encouraged the exiles, inspiring them with hope, and preached the gospel of redemption. In sum, Dtr describes in the DC an epoch that, in his opinion, lasted 880 years, from the Exodus to the fall of Jerusalem (see table 6 below). It opens with a period of 40 years of the leadership of Moses, and closes with a period of ca. 42 years assigned to the ministry of Jeremiah. He divides this epoch of the history of Israel into two sub-periods: 480 years from the Exodus to the establishment of the Temple, and 400 years from the beginning of the Temple to its destruction. The period of the Temple is divided into sub-periods as follows: it starts with 36 years of the reign of Solomon, from his 4th to his 40th year, and concludes with a time span of 134 years, from the fall of Samaria to the fall of Jerusalem (a grand total of 170 years). The period from the schism to the fall of Samaria lasted 230 years: 90 years from the schism to the revolt of Jehu and 140 years from the revolt of Jehu to the fall of Samaria.

34

Weinfeld 1972: 143–146, esp. 146. Is it just a coincidence that the date of Jehoiachin’s release mentioned at the end of the DC (Jer 52: 31): “… in the 37th year of the captivity of Jehoiachin king of Judah, in the 12th month, in the 25th day of the month …” is actually a kind of a mystical accounting equation: 37 – 12 = 25, since these numbers are the same as the numbers of years that passed from Jehoiachin’s exile to Jerusalem’s fall (12), and from Jerusalem’s fall to Jehoiachin’s release (25)? 35

24

Chapter II

80 Years Moses, Joshua and the Elders

Moses

480 Years From the Exodus to the Temple’s Constitution

314 Years The Judges

880 Years

86 Years Samuel, Saul, David and Solomon (4)

From the Exodus to Jerusalem’s Fall

36 Years Solomon

400 Years From the Temple’s Constitution to its Destruction

230 Years From the Schism to Samaria’s Fall

134 Years From Samaria’s Fall to Jerusalem’s Fall

20

Jeremiah

70 50

25

From the Fall of Jerusalem to Jehoiachin’s Release

25

From Jehoiachin’s Release to the Redemption

Table 6: The Chronological Framework of the Deuteronomistic Composition

Chapter III The Formation of the Book of Deuteronomy

The book of Deuteronomy is divided into four parts: a. Preface (1:1 – 4:43); b. Introduction (4:44 – 11:32); c. Deuteronomic code, which is divided into two parts: Laws (12–26); Blessings and Curses (27:1 – 28:68); d. Concluding division (28:69 – 34:12). The book has many duplications and expresses historiographical, geographical and theological contradictory views that cannot be reconciled, expressing different and opposing approaches of different authors, who wrote for various motives in different periods. These duplications and contradictions will be first discussed; later a reconstruction of the process of the book’s formation will be presented.1 III.1 Doublets and Contradictions in the Book of Deuteronomy III.1.1 Two Introductions The book of Deuteronomy opens with two introductions: 1:1 – 4:43 (henceforth: the “preface”); and 4:44 – 11:32 (henceforth: the “introduction”). There are overt duplications between the preface and the introduction, the purpose of which is not rhetorical. It is likely that the preface and the introduction were composed by different authors: both mention past events, aiming to learn from them a lesson for the future; and both include a sermon of allegiance to the covenant made at Horeb. The preface mentions the appointment of the judges and the giving of the Ten Commandments in Horeb (1:6–18; 4:10–15); the story of the spies (1:19– 46); the journey from Kadesh-barnea to Zered river, and from Zered to Arnon river (2:1–25; cf. Num 33:17, 20); and especially the conquest of Transjordan (2:26 – 3:29). Similarly, the introduction mentions events that took place in Horeb, including the acceptance of the Ten Commandments and the calf story (5:2; 9:8), as well as the story of the spies (9:23), and more. These historical reviews are clear duplications, and there are no harmonization attempts. The introduction does not open where the preface ends. On the contrary, Deut 3 is sealed with the geographical note: “So we abode in the valley of Beth-peor” (3:29), which is exactly where Moses delivers his last speeches; while Deut 5 returns to Horeb, and later, in Deut 9–11, additional events are mentioned during the forty years of wandering in the wilderness. Moreover, the review in Deut 1–3 is systematic and arranged in geographical and chronological order, focusing on events that occurred mainly in Horeb, Kadesh-barnea and Transjordan (see below). In contrast to the clear chronological order proposed in the preface – the introduction is arranged in a literary-ideological order. This section also begins with Horeb (Deut 5:2), but later on, the Exodus is repeatedly mentioned (Deut 5:6, 14; 6:12; 7:8, 18–19; 8:14; 9:7, 12, 26). The author of the introduction mentions the places in which the Israelites irritate the Lord (during the stay near Horeb [the calf sin: 9:8–21]; before Horeb [Massa and Meribah: 9:22, cf. also 6:16]; and after Horeb [Kadesh-barnea – the Spies: 9:23]). Later the author comes back to the Exodus (11:3–4), and then presents the episode of Dothan and Abiram (Deut 11:6, cf. Num 16). So it is clear that the introduction (Deut 4:44 – 11:32) is not arranged chronologically or geographically, but rather in a literary-ideological order, as opposed to the preface. Deut 1–4 first contain a historical survey and its moral lessons (1–3), followed by a preaching sermon (4). In Deut 4:44 – 11:32 the opposite order is presented: first came the preaching (4:44 – 9:6), followed by learning from the past (9:7 – 11:6) and again a preaching that concludes the introduction (11:7–25). Moreover, Deut 2–3 emphasize Moshe’s great military achievement: the conquest of Transjordan; and therefore 1

For the formation of the book of Deuteronomy see Driver 19023; Smith 1918; von Rad 1953; 19662: 118–120; Lohfink 1963; 1993; 2000; 2005; Nicholson 1967; 1986; 2014; Merindino 1969; Weinfeld 1972; 1991; 1992; 1994; Craigie 1976; Mayes 1981; Polzin 1980; Noth 1981; Clements 1989; Miller 1990; Millar 1999; Perlitt 1990; Christensen 1991; Lenchak 1993; Braulik 1994; 2003; McConville and Miller 1994; Merrill 1994; Olson 1994; Römer 1994; 2000; 2005; Nielsen 1995; Wilson 1995; Wright 1996; Levinson 1997; 2003; Sonnet 1997; Brettler 1999; 2000; Brueggemann 2001; McConville 2002a; 2002b; Nelson 2002; Richter 2002; Vogt 2006; Lundbom 2013; Haran 2003; McDonald 2003; Starckert 2007; Tigay 2016; Mastnjak 2016.

26

Chapter III

the moral lesson in the preface deals with Israel’s distrust of God, which involves fear of war with the inhabitants of the land (1:22–46). On the other hand, in Deut 4:44 – 11:32, the historical lesson concentrates mainly on a ritual problem: the calf sin (9:7 ff.); and three other stories: Massa and Meribah; the Spies; and Dathan and Abiram (9:22–23; 11:6). The forty years of wandering in the wilderness (Deut 1:3; 2:7) are divided in the preface into eight subperiods, which are presented in a chiastic structure of four and four periods, as follows (see table 1 below): a. from Egypt to Horeb (approximately two months); b. at Horeb (at least 120 days); c. from Horeb to Kadeshbarnea (11 days); d. at Kadesh-barnea (about 11 months); e. from Kadesh-barnea to Zered river (38 years); f. from Zered river to Arnon river (a few days); g. the conquest of Transjordan from Arnon river to Mount Hermon (a few months); h. staying two months at the valley opposite Beth-peor, listening to Moshe’s last speeches, and making the covenant there until the end of the 40 years of wandering in the wilderness. No. 1 2 3 4

Place From Egypt to Horeb Horeb From Horeb to Kadesh-barnea Kadesh-barnea

5

From Kadesh-barnea to Zered

6 7 8

From Zered to Arnon The conquest of Transjordan The valley opposite Beth-peor

Time [Two months] [Four months]+ 11 days “many days;” [11 months]+ “many days;” 38 years [A few days] [A few months] Two months

References Deut 1:3 Deut 1:6–18 Deut 1:2 Deut 1:46

Notes Cf. Ex 19:1 Cf. Deut 9:9–25; 10:10

Deut 2:1, 14 Deut 2:17–28 Deut 2:26 – 3:29 Deut 1:3

Table 1: The Chronology of the Forty Years of Wandering in the Wilderness (Deut 1–3) This description was intended to divide the period of Moses’ leadership into eight sub-periods, by creating a chiastic literary structure: the journey from Egypt to Horeb opens with a period of two months (cf. Ex 19:1) and is concluded with a two months stay in the valley opposite Beth-peor (Deut 1:3). In the second component the author placed the stay at Horeb, which lasted about four months (cf. Deut 9:9–25; 10:10), and in the seventh component, he placed the conquest of Transjordan, which apparently also lasted several months. The third component (the journey from Horeb to Kadesh) lasted 11 days (Deut 1:2), and the journey from Zered to Arnon was apparently also extended for a short period of time. The artificial separation between the wandering from Kadesh to Zered, and from Zered to Arnon, was intended primarily for the construction of the mentioned chiastic structure. At the center of this literary structure – the author placed two long periods, deliberately defined as “many days;” one lasted 38 years (a figure explicitly mentioned in Deut 2:14) and the other apparently 11 months. The first two chronological data and the last ones join for a period of one year (about six months plus another six months). Similarly, the third, fourth and sixth chronological data, add up to approximately one year. This timetable is meant not only to determine the internal chronology of the forty years, but also to enhance Moses’ swift and perfect victory over Sihon and Og, destroying all the Amorites in Transjordan without exception, and conquering the entire area from Arnon river to Mount Hermon. The historical review is cast into a chronological skeleton that extends over all forty years, but in fact the author focuses on a few major events that occurred during this period. The Exodus is mentioned many times – but a detailed description of the plagues and the crossing of the Sea are avoided. The main events described are Moshes’ series of speeches on the eve of his death; the appointment of the judges at Horeb; the spies sent from Kadesh-barnea; the journey from Kadesh to Arnon; the conquest of the kingdoms of Og and Sihon; and the fixing of the Transjordan refuge cities. In contrast, the only chronological figure mentioned in Deut 4:44 – 11:32 is forty. This figure is mentioned in these chapters twice in connection with the forty years of wandering in the wilderness (8:1, 4); eight times in connection with the number of days and nights that Moses stayed on the mountain (9:9, 11); and for the number of days and nights during which Moses prayed to God and begged him not to destroy Israel (9:18, 25) – each time the number forty is mentioned twice, for emphasis and rhetorical reasons.2 2

Deut 10:8–11 was composed by Dtr, cf. Driver op. cit.: 121–124; Weinfeld 1991: 420–424; Christensen op. cit.: 198–

The Formation of the Book of Deuteronomy

27

III.1.2 The Borders of the Land The book of Joshua contains three different conceptions regarding the northern border of the land, which is stretched to (a) the Euphrates River; (b) Lebo-Hamath; (c) Dan.3 There are also different approaches in the book of Joshua regarding the relation of Transjordan to the promised land (see a detailed discussion below), which are also expressed in the book of Deuteronomy. It is emphasized in two scriptures in Deuteronomy that the land extends as far as the Euphrates: in Deut 1:1–8, the children of Israel are required to ascend and inherit the land promised to the patriarchs, which extends as far as the Euphrates. A similar definition also appears at the end of the introduction, in Deut 11:24 (cf. Josh 1:3–4). The two territorial patterns mentioned in the book of Deuteronomy deliberately include Lebanon as well, and therefore there is no difference in the perception of the country’s borders between the author of the preface and the author of the introduction. Contrary to the aforementioned approach, the description in Deut 34:1–3 draws the northern border only as far as Dan. This difficulty should not be settled on the assumption that only areas that can actually be seen from Mount Nebo are mentioned, because the city of Dan can’t be seen from Mount Nebo, and mainly because these scriptures do not refer to areas that can be seen in practice; they are rather an expression of a theological perception. The emphasis on Lebanon’s connection to the land in Deut 1:7; 3:25 is most important: if the author of Deut 1–4 would have composed the description of the borders of the land in Deut 34:1– 3, it is likely that Lebanon would have been mentioned there, as well. The priestly school drew the northern border of the land only until Lebo-Hamath (Num 34 and more). This view is not explicitly expressed in the book of Deuteronomy, except for the general score “the Land of Canaan” (Deut 32:49), which refers to the priestly description in Num 34, without explicitly stating the borders of Canaan. The addition in Deut 34:1f–3 is post-priestly, since it is impossible that the priestly editor would define the Gilead as part of the promised land, because in his opinion, Transjordan was not included in the confines of the promised land (see Josh 22:9–34; Num 34:11–12; Ezek 47:18).4 III.1.3 Was Transjordan Included in the Land of Israel or in Moab? Moses delivered his last speeches near Beth-peor, which in many scriptures in the book of Deuteronomy is located in “the land of Moab” (1:5; 28:69; 32:49; 34:5–6) or in “the plains of Moab” (34:1, 8); and elsewhere in “Transjordan” (1:1, 5; 4:46). These differences are not accidental. The emphasis that Moses died in “the land of Moab” is consistent with the priestly view that sees the Jordan river as the eastern border of the land. According to this approach, both the priestly source in the Torah (P) and the priestly editor of the Torah (RP), calls the southern region of the Eastern Jordan Valley: “the plains of Moab” or “the land of Moab.” Dtr defines this area using the terms “Transjordan” or “the land of Sihon king of the Amorites.” The territorial term “the land of Moab” is incompatible with Dtr’s view, who emphasized the prohibition to inherit the land of Moab, since God gave the Moabites their land as an inheritance (Deut 2:9), noting that the area north of the Arnon river is included within the confines of the inheritance of the tribes of Israel (Deut 3). Therefore, Dtr could not have defined the region north of the Arnon river as “the land of Moab,” not even as a “geographical denotation” referring to the past (the ancient name of the land of Moab in the book of Deuteronomy is “Er” see 2:9, 29). In light of the aforementioned argument, it must be assumed that the term “the land of Moab” in Deut 1:5, as well as in 28:69, was added by a post-Deuteronomistic priestly editor, who should be identified with the editor of the Pentateuch (RP). Moreover, in Deut 1:5, the phrase “in the land of Moab” is superfluous, doubling the definition “in Transjordan,” and it is likely that in 28:69, the original wording was “in Transjordan” and not in “the land of Moab.” So, in my opinion, all the scriptures in the book of Deuteronomy that mention “the land of Moab” or “the plains of Moab” (1:5; 28:69; 32:49; 34:1, 5–6, 8) were added by the editor of the Pentateuch (RP).5 200; Merrill op. cit.: 200; Sonnet op. cit.: 66–67, 239–242; Brueggemann op. cit.: 123–124; McConville 2002a: 189– 193; Nelson op. cit.: 128; Lundbom op. cit.: 385–386; Tigay op. cit.: 331–332. 3 For the borders of the land in the book of Joshua see Galil 2017; 2018a; and cf. also the next chapter. 4 The Samaritan translation of Deut 34:1–3 is significantly shorter than the MT, and brings a very different boundary description from the description in the MT, as follows: “From the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates river, unto the utmost sea.” See McCarthy 2007: 168*. This version is nothing but an extended later interpretation of the MT, which is also, as stated, a late post-priestly addition. 5 Cf. Driver 19023: 417. For RP and the composition of the Pentateuch see Knohl 1993; Baden 2012.

28

Chapter III

III.1.4 Moses: Sin and Punishment A few scriptures in the book of Deuteronomy maintain that Moses sinned and God severely punished him by forbidding him to enter the Promised Land, “the land of Canaan,” which lies west of the Jordan (see Deut 32:48–52; 34:4; and cf. Num 20:12–13 [P]; 27:12–14 [P]). Moses therefore did not set foot in the Promised Land at all, and his victory over Sihon and Og was the result of an accidental collision and not of a divine plan. Similarly, in Num 32, the settlement of Reuben and Gad (and half of Manasseh), in Transjordan is presented in an apologetic manner, stemming from the request of the tribes of Gad and Reuben and not from a divine plan. According to the priestly conception, this settlement does not make Transjordan a part of the Promised Land, as emphasized in the story of Josh 22:9–34.6 Contrary to this view, there is another concept in the book of Deuteronomy, which states that Moses did not sin personally; yet God decided to punish him for the sin of the Israelites in the case of the spies (Deut 1:37). Moreover, not only was Moses’ sin reduced and presented as arising from his responsibility to Israel, and not as a personal sin; his punishment was also reduced: he got to enter the Promised Land, conquer all the land from the Arnon river to Mount Hermon, destroy all who lived there, and give the land to Reuven, Gad and half of Manasseh. However, he would not be allowed to cross the Jordan. According to this view, the Arnon river (not the Jordan) was the (south)eastern border of the Promised Land. This is a very different view, which states that Moses indeed entered the Promised Land, even conquered parts of it, transferred them to the tribes of Israel, and was buried in the Promised Land (Deut 2:24–31; 3:23–28; and especially Deut 3:27; 4:21–22 and 31:1–2).7 A similar approach is also evident in texts written by the author of the second edition of Joshua (in the days of Hezekiah). It is also said, in Joshua, that Moses conquered Transjordan, which was included in the Promised Land, and divided it into the tribes of Israel who dwell in Transjordan – meaning that Moses entered the Promised Land, but did not cross the Jordan (see Josh 12:6; 13:12). In line with this concept, the author of the second edition of Judges (who was also the author of the book of Samuel) also included Transjordan in the Land of Israel (Judg 21:1; 2 Sam 24:5–6).8 Deut 4:45–28:68 doesn’t mention Moses’ sin, although the author of these chapters had opportunities to address the subject, for example in Deut 6:16; 9:22, where the sin of the Israelites in Massa is mentioned; or in Deut 9:2, which describes Aaron during the calf sin (and not the story of Meribah, contrary to the position of the priestly scriptures mentioned above). III.1.5 The Names of the Mountain of God The “Mountain of God” (Mount Sinai) is called in the blessing of Moses, in Deut 33:2, “Mount Paran” or “Sinai,” similar to its name in the priestly source in the Torah (P): “Mount Sinai” (see Ex 24:16; 31:18; 34:29, 32; Num 3:1; 28:6; and this is also the name of this mountain in source J, see Ex 18:23; 19:11; 34:2, 4). However, in the other chapters of the book of Deuteronomy, the mountain is always called “Horeb” (as in source E, see Ex 3:1; and cf. also 1 Kgs 19:8: “The mountain of God – Horeb”). The geographical term Horeb is mentioned in Deuteronomy nine times, five times in the preface (1:2, 6, 19; 4:10, 15); twice in the introduction (5:2; 7:8); once in the Deuteronomic code (18:16); and once in the concluding unit (28:69). Another common definition of the mountain of God in the book of Deuteronomy is the “mountain” mentioned in connection with Horeb eight times: once in the preface (1:6); and seven times in the introduction (5:4, 5, 18; 9:9, 10; 10:4, 10). III.1.6 The Cities of Refuge In Deut 19:1–2, the children of Israel were commanded to distinguish three cities of refuge in the Land of Israel, west of the Jordan. In addition to these cities, they were commanded to add three more cities in the future (Deut 19:8–9); this command is clearly a reference to the cities in Transjordan (cf. Josh 20:7–8), suggesting that the author of the Deuteronomic code was not aware of the preface which notes that Moses had

6

Weinfeld 1991: 173–178; Galil 2018a. See Kallai 1986: 247–259; Weinfeld op. cit.: 170, 173–178; 1992: 50; Christensen 1991: 43; McConville 2002a: 86– 87, 96–97; Lundbom 2013: 205–206; Tigay 2016: 148–149, 171. 8 For the formation of the books of Joshua, Judges and Samuel see Galil 1994a; 1994b; 2012b; 2017; 2018a; 2018c; 2021a; and chapters IV–VI in this book. 7

The Formation of the Book of Deuteronomy

29

already distinguished three cities of refuge in Transjordan (Deut 4:41–43). These cities are mentioned as in Josh 20:7–8, along with the three cities west of the Jordan.9 III.1.7 Joshua in the Book of Deuteronomy Joshua is not mentioned in Deut 5–28, although there are opportunities to mention him (e.g., in 9:20; 10:6, and more). In contrast, in the other chapters of Deuteronomy he is mentioned 10 times: in the preface – three times (1:38; 3:21, 28), and in the concluding unit – seven more times (31:3, 7, 14 [twice], 23; 32:44; 34:9). In these chapters the author emphasized that Joshua would serve as Moses’ successor and conquer the land west of the Jordan. These references tighten the connection between the preface and the concluding unit, and support the assumption that their author is not the author of the introduction and the Deuteronomic code.10 III.1.8 The Centralization of Worship in the Book of Deuteronomy The Deuteronomic code emphasizes the importance of the centralization of worship – frequently using the phrase “the place that the Lord will choose.” The author reiterated the command to worship God only in the place he chooses and nowhere else (see for example Deut 12:13–14, and more).11 It is clear that the author was referring to Jerusalem, but for pseudo-epigraphic reasons, refrained from mentioning its name. At the same time, the only city mentioned in the book of Deuteronomy in a sacral context is actually Shechem and the two adjacent mountains, Ebal and Grizim. The children of Israel were commanded not only to write the Torah on large stones on Mount Ebal, but also to build an altar there and to “offer burnt offerings thereon unto the Lord thy God” (Deut 27:6; cf. also Deut 11:26–32; 27:1–8).12 III.1.9 Pillars in the Book of Deuteronomy The Deuteronomic code prohibits the erection of stone pillars (16:21–22; 26:1); but in Deut 27 the children of Israel were commanded to erect “large stones” which were actually nothing but stone pillars. So again the theological view of Deut 27 is inconsistent with the provisions of the Deuteronomic code. III.1.10 The Relations with Edom, Moab and Ammon There is a contradiction between Deut 2:28–29, which emphasizes that Moab (and Edom) provided the children of Israel with food and water (for a fee) during the journey from Kadesh-barnea to Transjordan; and the law in Deut 23:4, which states that Moab (and Ammon) “met you not with bread and with water in the way when ye came forth out of Egypt,” and that they even “hired against thee Balaam ... to curse thee.”13 III.1.11 Exile and Redemption in the Book of Deuteronomy The threat of spreading Israel among the nations, if they did not keep the Law of God, is indeed mentioned in 28:64. But this scripture does not address the question of the fate of Israel in exile, nor does it say anything about the future of the relationship between the people of Israel and their God. On the other hand, in Deut 4:25–31; 30:1–10, Moses prophesies not only exile but also redemption and return. These verses were 9

For Deut 4:41–43 see Driver 19023: 78–79; von Rad 19662: 51–52; Mayes 1981: 159; Christensen 1991: 96–98; Weinfeld 1991: 230–233; Merrill 1994: 136–137; Brueggemann 2001: 59; McConville 2002a: 114; Nelson 2002: 71–72; Haran 2003: 57–58; Lohfink 2005: 114; Vogt 2006: 75; Starckert 2007: 33, 37, 58–59; Lundbom 2013: 258–260; Tigay 2016: 221–222. 10 For Joshua in the book of Deuteronomy see Tigay op. cit.: 755–761. 11 For the idea of the centralization of worship see Kratz 2010. 12 For Deut 11:29–30 and 27:1–8 see Driver 19023: 132–133, 294–297; von Rad 19662: 86, 163–165; Mayes 1981: 218– 219: 340–343; Noth 1981: 16, 37–38, 87, 95; Miller 1990: 190–192; Weinfeld 1991: 452–455; 1994: 205–207; Christensen 1991: 222–223; Merrill 1994: 214–215, 340–344; Lohfink 2000: 267–278; 303–307; 2005: 114; Brueggemann 2001: 251–254; McConville 2002a: 206–207, 386–390; Nelson 2002: 140–141, 312–318; Haran 2003: 182–183, 186, 294–296; Vogt 2006: 169–170; Lundbom 2013: 411–413, 737–741; Tigay 2016: 352–353, 650–654. 13 For the contradiction between Deut 2:29 and 23:4 see Driver op. cit.: 261; von Rad op. cit.: 145–146; Mayes op. cit.: 316–317; Merrill op. cit.: 308–317; Brueggemann op. cit.: 227–230; McConville op. cit.: 349; Nelson op. cit.: 277–279; Lundbom op. cit.: 467–468; Tigay op. cit.: 55, 567–568.

30

Chapter III

presumably composed after the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BCE, and were meant to inspire hope in the hearts of the exiles (see discussion below). III.1.12 Deuteronomic and Deuteronomistic Phraseology in the Book of Deuteronomy There are linguistic differences in Deuteronomy, especially between Deut 5–28 and the other chapters of the book (see the appendix to the book). These differences also indicate the non-unity of the book. In sum, the book of Deuteronomy expresses historiographical, geographical and theological contradictory views that cannot be reconciled, expressing varying and opposing approaches of different authors, who wrote for different purposes in different periods. III.2 The Layers of the Book of Deuteronomy The book of Deuteronomy was formed over a long process, of which four layers are evident: a. “pre-Deuteronomy,” that is, the sources immersed in the book; b. the first edition (D); c. the second edition (Dtr); d. postDeuteronomistic additions. The two main layers are the second and third (namely, D and Dtr). The first edition of the book was probably composed in the days of Hezekiah or Josiah (see below). It included ancient sources originating from the Kingdom of Israel, including 11:29–30; 27:1 – 28:68. This edition (henceforth: D) opens with 4:45 and is divided into three parts: introduction (4:45; 5–11); the main body (“The Deuteronomic code:” Deut 12–26), and conclusion: blessings and curses (27:1 – 28:68). The second edition of the book was compiled by Dtr in the Babylonian exile, about 560 BCE. To the first edition, he added a preface (Deut 1–4) and a concluding unit (Deut 28:69 – 34:12; for a full list of the scriptures composed by Dtr in Deuteronomy – see appendix to this chapter). Dtr also included three liturgical speeches (a. 6:20–25; b. 10:12–22 [excluding: 10:15b]; and c. 26:5–11), and expanded on two others (21:8–9; 26:15). Moses’ song and blessing (32:1–43; 33:2b–29) were cited from pre-Deuteronomistic sources.14 Dtr quoted frequently from most Pentateuch sources (E, J, D), but not directly from P or H. E.g., in Deut 1–3, Dtr quoted mainly from J and E as follows: a. Deut 1:6, 24–25, 35–36, 41–44, which are an adaptation of Num 13:20, 22–23; 14:23–25, 39–45 (J); b. Deut 1:9–18, adapted from Ex 18:13–27 (E), and from Num 11:11–21 (J); c. Deut 2:24–35; 3:1–2, which are an adaptation of Ex 21:21–35 (E). In the Persian period, a few additions and glosses were added to the book of Deuteronomy, which constitute about one percent of its scope (the “fourth layer”). Most of these scriptures were added by the priestly editor of the Pentateuch (RP), as follows: Deut 1:5b, 8b, 39a; 4:37b; 10:15b; 32:48–52; 34:1b, d, 5b, 6b, 7–9. Glosses were inserted in chapters 10 (6–7) and 34 (1f–3). The territorial description in 34:1f–3 is a postpriestly addition, since it defines the Gilead as part of the promised land, and it is well known that in RP’s opinion, Transjordan was not included in the confines of the promised land (see above). These few scriptures are secondary additions, which do not change the structure and essence of the book of Deuteronomy designed by Dtr. No special discussion will be devoted below to these additions, but they will be examined in comparison with the scriptures mentioned in the two main editions of the book.

14

The scope of the major editions of Deuteronomy has been extensively discussed in research and many hypotheses have been raised. Noth (1981: 26–35) argued that Deut 4:44 – 30:20 should be separated from the framework composed by Dtr during the exile. Dtr emphasized the status of Joshua, and composed the following scriptures in Deuteronomy: 1–3[4*]; 31:1–8; 34:1*, 4–6, except the following post-Deuteronomistic additions: 4:3–4, 9, 15–21, 23b–24, 29–40. Mayes (op. cit.: 41–47) identified two Deuteronomistic editions: the first one included the passages mentioned by Noth, as well as 5:1 – 6:3; 9:9–12, 15–19, 21, 25; 10:1–5; whereas the latter included 4:1–40. In contrast, Weinfeld (1991, 13– 14) emphasized the affinity between 4:1–40 and 30:1–10, arguing that both were composed by Dtr during the exile, although the literary genre of Deut 1–4 differs from the historiography of the Former Prophets. Haran (2003: 40–93, 195–206), contrary to his predecessors, believed that there was no Deuteronomistic editing in Deuteronomy at all. In his view, D consists of four main parts composed by different authors: a. Deut 1:1 – 4:44; b. 4:45 – 26:19; 28:1– 69; c. 27; d. 29:1 – 32:47, 34:11–12. He also maintained that Deut 32:48 – 34:10 is composed of passages quoted by RP from the Pentateuch sources (P, E and J). Haran accepts Noth’s hypothesis about the time and scope of “Deuteronomistic History” – but claims that Dtr inserted Deut 1:1 – 32:47, 34:11–12 at the top of his DH as one unit without changing it, and his editing is evident only from Josh 1.

The Formation of the Book of Deuteronomy

31

III.3 The First Edition of the Book of Deuteronomy (D) This edition (D) opens with 4:45 and is divided into three parts: the introduction (4:45; 5:1 – 6:19; 7:1 – 10:5; 11:1–32); the main body (“The Deuteronomic code:” 12:1–21:7; 21:10 – 26:4; 26:12–15a, 15c–19); and conclusion: blessings and curses (27:1 – 28:68). Although there are some similarities between this structure and the structure of Hittite and Neo-Assyrian treaties – it is doubtful that the author of D was directly influenced by these texts.15 The formation of D has been discussed extensively in research. It is generally assumed that it was composed in the days of Josiah, and according to the “pious lie” hypothesis, it was actually written by the people who informed Josiah of its discovery (Hilkiah, the high priest; or Shaphan, the scribe; or other scribes on their behalf; see 2 Kgs 22:8–13). It is also argued that Josiah’s reform was in accordance with a book, but in the description of Hezekiah’s reform, no book is mentioned (2 Kgs 18:4, 22). This assumption is possible but problematic, since the aggressive, violent and uncompromising attitude of Josiah and his men towards the inhabitants of the north, especially of the area north of Bethel, is incongruent with the fact that the author of D incorporated northern traditions in his work, trying to build a common cultural platform for the residents of the Kingdom of Judah and the inhabitants of the north. The inclusion of the northern traditions, especially the Shechem traditions, is inappropriate for the days of Josiah; rather, it fits the days of Hezekiah, who made many efforts to bring the remnants of the north closer to him after the fall of the Kingdom of Israel. For instance, he held a joint Passover celebration in the “second month” (2 Chron 30), and even called his son, the heir to the throne, Manasseh, after the name of the largest and most important Israelite tribe. A similar conciliatory attitude is also evident in the second edition of the book of Joshua (see next chapter). Therefore, the date of the formation of the first edition of the book of Deuteronomy must be re-examined, and the possibility of its dating to the days of Hezekiah – must be considered.16 A national awakening occurred not only in the days of Josiah, but also during the revolt against Assyria (705–701 BCE), and even about ten years earlier, in the period of Jamani’s revolt in Ashdod, and Judah’s involvement in these events.17 Unlike Josiah, who violently forced his reform on the inhabitants of the north, and murdered the priests of the high places on their platforms in the “cities of Samaria;” Hezekiah sought to re-establish the great kingdom of David, pleasantly and with mutual consent, while giving a sense of partnership to the Israelites who remained in the north and were not exiled from the land. In the context of this policy, the combination of northern and southern contradicting traditions in Joshua and Deuteronomy, should be understood. Therefore, it is reasonable to suggest that the first edition of Deuteronomy (D) was composed in the days of Hezekiah, archived in the days of Manasseh and Amon, and found in the days of Josiah. According to 2 Kgs 22, the book was found by Hilkiah, who held the position of the High Priest, but it is not feasible that D was composed by priests – especially not the High Priest himself, since the Deuteronomic code contradicts the “Priestly code,” and mainly reflects the interests of the Levites. Although the concentration of worship in Jerusalem is also beneficial to the Jerusalem priesthood, the full participation of the members of the tribe of Levi in the sacramental work, and the lack of distinction between them and the priests, is inconsistent with the interests of the priests. It is therefore unlikely that D was compiled by priests. The first edition of Deuteronomy is not anti-monarchical. While there is a concern for the poor – this concern does not contradict the interests of the king – on the contrary, it is in line with the desired image of the ideal king, as well as with the king’s interests in maintaining a relatively balanced society, and preventing the enslavement of the lower stratum by the middle and upper strata. Moreover, the Levites, who probably composed this edition (see below), were part of the establishment, albeit a relatively frustrated and deprived group (relative to the priests), but still part of the establishment and ruling class in Judean society (see below on the concern for the weak and on the attitudes towards monarchy). The first edition of Deuteronomy does not mention the conquest of Transjordan. Passages that order the Israelites to destroy the inhabitants of the land refer to the Canaanites who dwell west of the Jordan (see, for example, 7:1–2, 16, 23–24; 9:1–3; and more). Although the author could have mentioned the extermination of the peoples of Transjordan in the days of Moses, he does not. On the other hand, in Deut 1–4, 29–34, the

15

For the affinity between Deuteronomy and the ancient Near Eastern treaties, especially the Hittite and Neo-Assyrian vassal treaties see Weinfeld 1972: 59–157; 1994: 9–10. 16 For dating the first edition of Deuteronomy to the days of Hezekiah see Lundbom 2013: 7; Tigay 2016: 54–55. 17 Galil 1992: 111–133; 2001: 77–99.

32

Chapter III

conquest of the Transjordan and the destruction of its inhabitants are often mentioned, both in the preface (2:32 – 3:9) and in the concluding unit (29:6; 31:4). Dtr does claim (following Source E) that the inhabitants of Transjordan, which were included in the kingdoms of Sihon and Og, were destroyed. However, he also states that some of the inhabitants of the land (especially in the land west of the Jordan) were not destroyed and the Israelites must be careful of the influence of these “remaining Gentiles” (Josh 23:4–7, 12, and more). In Transjordan, Dtr mentions three groups: a. the Amorites, the inhabitants of the kingdoms of Sihon and Og, who were utterly destroyed (Deut 2:32 – 3:6); b. the inhabitants of Edom, Moab, and Ammon, whom Moses did not harm, for God forbade him to do so (Deut 2:4–23); c. the Geshurites and the Maacathites, whom Moses and the children of Israel did not inherit, although Moses was not forbidden to do so (3:13; cf. also Josh 13:13). Vis-à-vis seven peoples of Canaan, Dtr mentions seven kingdoms of Transjordan: three in the south and east (Edom, Moab, and Ammon), and four in the center and north (Sihon and Og, Geshur and Maacah). The first edition of Deuteronomy lists four choices of God, emphasizing the verb “to choose”: the choice of the place, Israel, the Levites and the king. The choice of place is mentioned in the first edition of Deuteronomy 20 times (in the Deuteronomic code) and only once in the concluding unit composed by Dtr (31:11: “In the place which he shall choose;” see details and discussion below). The author clearly refers to Jerusalem, but as stated, its name is not mentioned in the book for pseudo-epigraphic reasons. The choice of Israel among the nations is mentioned in the first edition three times: twice in the introduction (7:6–7), and once in the Deuteronomic code (14:2). In the second edition it is mentioned in the preface (4:7) and in one of the liturgical speeches composed by Dtr (10:15). The choice of the tribe of Levi is mentioned twice in D (18:5; 21:5; see below); and the election of the king is mentioned once, in the law of the king (17:9). A total of 29 occurrences of the verb “to choose” in connection with the choices of God, of which 26 were presented in the first edition of the book, and the vast majority (24) in the Deuteronomic code, as follows: the choice of place (20), the Levites (2), Israel (1) and the king (1); and the minority (2) in the introduction (only the choice of Israel). Dtr mentioned the verb “to choose” three times: twice for the choice of Israel (4:47; 10:15); and once for the choice of the place (31:11). III.3.1 The Choice of the Place and the Concentration of Worship The choice of place is mentioned in the Deuteronomic code 20 times. The polemical nature of this command is already evident in Deut 12:13, which emphasizes the prohibition on bringing offerings to God everywhere (cf. Ex 20:20, which permits worship of God everywhere). It is well known, that the practice of worshiping God everywhere took place all through the Monarchic age, except two periods: Hezekiah and Josiah.18 III.3.2 The Choice of Israel and its Holiness The choice of Israel is mentioned in Deuteronomy five times: once in the preface (4:37), once in a speech in 10:15 (both composed by Dtr), and three times in D (Deut 7–14, see below). Deut 14:2 is an almost verbatim repetition of Deut 7:6. The choice of Israel stems from God’s love for Israel’s ancestors, for whom He lusted (4:37; 10:15). At first God loved the patriarchs and desired them, then chose them. The choice of Israel “of all nations” has no explanation, and must be understood against the background of God’s love for Israel, an emotional and deep relationship. Therefore, there is an actual re-use of the verb “to desire,” indicating a relationship between a man and a woman (compare the law of a beautiful woman in Deut 21:10–14). The divine choice does not stem from the greatness of the people of Israel (“… nor choose you because ye were more in number than any people, for ye were the fewest of all peoples”), just as human true love does not depend on anything, and is not driven by rational, but emotional reasons. The choice stems from God’s unexplained will, and from the fact that Israel is a “holy people” and a “treasured people” (Sĕgullâ) to God, special and holy, different and distinct from “all the nations which are on earth.” Three scriptures in Deuteronomy, which mention the choice of Israel, also mention God’s love for Israel (4:37; 7:7–8; 10:15). In 7:7–8, the verb “to desire” comes along with the verb “to love” in order to emphasize God’s special emotional attitude towards the children of Israel. God’s love for His people is mentioned twice more (7:12; 23:6), without using the verb “to choose.” In 4:37 the words “his seed after him” are probably a 18

For the theology of the name see von Rad 1953: 37–44; Weinfeld 1972: 191–198; Richter 2002; Tigay 2016: 363, 374–376.

The Formation of the Book of Deuteronomy

33

post-Deuteronomistic addition – cf. also 10:15: “their seed after them.” The original version was probably just: “and He chose you;” while the rest (“their seed after them”) is probably also a post-Deuteronomistic addition. The verb “to love” is mentioned 20 times in Deuteronomy (15 times in D, and five times in passages composed by Dtr). 17 of the 20 occurrences refer to the relationship between God and the people of Israel: five times God’s love for Israel is mentioned; and 12 times the love of Israel for his God: nine times Israel is commanded to love God (six times in D, and three times in Deut 30 [Dtr]); twice the divine reward is mentioned to his lovers (5:7; 7:9); and once an attempt to test whether Israel loves God (13:2–4). The remaining mentions refer to the love of the Hebrew slave to his master (15:16); God’s love for the “resident alien” (ger); and a commandment to love the ger (10:17–19). So the love motif is central in both editions of the book of Deuteronomy, and the purpose of this motif is to emphasize that God’s attitude towards Israel is not cold, formalistic and legalistic – but a special and emotional attitude, emphasizing God’s love for his people. This view is very essential in the relationship and alliance between God and his chosen people (for the choice of the tribe of Levi and the choice of the king see below).19 III.3.3 Levites in Deuteronomy The term Levi is mentioned in the book of Deuteronomy 26 times: most of the occurrences of this term (21) come in the Deuteronomic code (12–28), and a few in the introduction (twice in Deut 10, in the description of the calf sin), or in the concluding unit of the book – three times in Deut 31–33). Most of the mentions of the Levites in the book (23) thus come from scriptures composed by D; only two are from Dtr (31:9, 25); and one from the blessing of Moses – an ancient source inserted in the book by Dtr. The choice of the tribe of Levi from among the tribes of Israel is mentioned in Deuteronomy twice – both in the Deuteronomic code (18:5; 21:5). The term “Levi” is in seven cases related to “priests:” five times in the phrase “the Levitical priests” (17:9, 18; 18:1; 24:8; 27:9); and twice in conjunction with “the priests the sons of Levi” (21:5; 31:9). In three other cases the term appears in the plural (18:7; 27:17; 31:25). The phrase “the tribe of Levi” appears twice (10:8; 18:1), and the other 14 references are in the singular (“Levi”).20 D emphasizes twice that the tribe of Levi was chosen from among the tribes of Israel to serve God (18:5; 21:5). It raises two main claims concerning the Levites: a. a requirement to take care of the Levites in the country towns, whose economic situation is difficult, similar to the situation of the “orphan and widow” (14:29; 16:11, 14; 26:12, 13), emphasizing that the Levite has no “part nor inheritance with his bretheren” (10:9; 12:10; 14: 27, 29; 18:1–2); for “the Lord is his inheritance” (10:9; 18:2); b. a requirement to compare the status of the Levites “in the place which he chooses” (i.e., in Jerusalem) to the status of the priests (18:6– 7). This requirement is also emphasized in the typical expression “the Levitical priests,” and in the indication that the priesthood is given to the entire tribe of Levi. The difference between the sons of Aaron and the rest of the sons of the tribe of Levi is not addressed in the book of Deuteronomy. Both of these demands are based on reality: the economic situation of the Levites in the country towns was difficult, and in the Temple in Jerusalem they served as an inferior auxiliary force (gatekeepers, and more). von Rad suggested that the author of D was a Levite.21 This assumption is very reasonable. The first edition of the book of Deuteronomy (D) can be understood as a revolutionary polemic of the Levites who were employed in the Temple in Jerusalem against the priests in this Temple. The book is directed first and foremost against the Levites’ inferior status to the priests and their repression to serve as an auxiliary force and as servants to the sons of 19

For the commandment to love God “with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might” (Deut 6:5), and its relation to the prophecy of Hosea see von Rad 19662: 63–64; Weinfeld 1991: 351–352; Richter op. cit.; McDonald 2003: 97–123; Tigay op. cit.: 268. For the love motif in Deuteronomy see Lundbom 2013: 61–62. 20 A few scholars have argued that the scriptures about the Levites in the book of Deuteronomy are not uniform and reflect diverse opinions composed by different authors. Dahmen (1996) identified four layers that refer to Levites in the book of Deuteronomy, three of them in Deut 18: a. a pro-monarchic original text in 18:1, 3–5; b. an addendum composed by a Deuteronomistic editor who in exile added the phrase “the Levitical priests” in v. 1; c. a pro-Levite author who after the exile added the words “All the tribe of Levi” in v. 1, and the phrase “from all your tribes” in v. 5, as well as vv. 2 and 8. For a similar opinion see Nelson 2002: 5: “Claims of special prerogatives for the tribe of Levi as a whole (10:8– 9; 18:1–2, 5) fit poorly with what the book says elsewhere about the priesthood;” see also Nelson op. cit.: 229–230, with additional bibliography. But there is no basis for separating these layers and there are no contradictory views on the issue of the status and rights of the Levites in the book of Deuteronomy. 21 See von Rad 19662: 23–27.

34

Chapter III

Aaron the priest, as explained in Num 3:5–10 (cf. also Num 16:8–10; 18:2–4). von Rad’s assertion does not contradict the claim of Weinfeld and others regarding the affinity between the book of Deuteronomy to the wisdom literature;22 after all, the Levites (or at least a few of them) were probably literate and were educated in the Temple, and therefore were also among the “scribe” circles. This is also indicated by the King’s Law in Deut 17:18. The connection of the Levites to Jerusalem is obvious, since the book of Deuteronomy preaches the concentration of worship (in Jerusalem), and on this issue there is no dispute between the Levites and the priests. So the author of D was probably a scribe from the tribe of Levi who lived and worked in Jerusalem in the days of Hezekiah. The Levites are rarely mentioned in the books of Judges, Samuel and Kings. In Judges they are mentioned only in the second edition of the book: Micah appointed his son as a priest, but preferred to nominate a Levite boy under him (Judg 17:7–13). This boy (identified with Jonathan son of Gershom son of Moses), is later appointed “priest” of the tribe of Dan (Judg 18:3, 15, 18–21, 30). This story fits the concept of the book of Deuteronomy, which states that all the sons of Levi may serve as priests. The second Levite is mentioned in the story of the Levite’s Concubine (Judg 19–21). In Samuel, the Levites are only twice associated with carrying the ark of the covenant (1 Sam 6:15; 2 Sam 15:24); and in the book of Kings, too, the Levites are mentioned only twice: a. in a post-Deuteronomistic addition separating the Levites from the priests (1 Kgs 8:4); b. in the description of the reform of Jeroboam I, it is emphasized that “he made priests … which were not of the sons of Levi” (1 Kgs 12:31). This scripture, which describes Jeroboam’s reforms with hostility, was probably quoted from “the book of the chronicles to the kings of Judah,” in which the author protested against the appointment of priests who were not sons of Levi (and not priests who were not sons of Aaron). Therefore, he too actually accepted the concept of the book of Deuteronomy, which states that all sons of Levi are allowed to serve as priests. Of particular importance to our issue is also the script in 2 Kgs 23:9, which describes the reform of Josiah: “Nevertheless the priests of the high places came up to the altar of the Lord in Jerusalem, but they did eat of the unleavened bread among their brethren,” cf. Deut 18:6–8. There is actually no contradiction between these two scriptures, because Josiah saw the “priests of the high places” as a sinful group, unworthy of serving as priests. There is no reference in Kings to the question of whether Josiah applied the demand of the book of Deuteronomy to compare the status of the Levites to the status of the priests in the Temple in Jerusalem. III.3.4 The Attitudes Towards Monarchy in Deuteronomy The King’s Law (Deut 17:14–20) indicates the ambivalent attitude of the author of the first edition of the book of Deuteronomy towards monarchy. God did not command the appointment of a king, but acceded to the request of the Israelites (similar to the traditions of the establishment of the monarchy in the book of Samuel – see chapter VII). The people of Israel were well behaved without a king during the wandering in the wilderness, where God led his people through Moses. But if and when the Israelites came to the land west of the Jordan, after they inherited it and settled it (achievements reached without the leadership of a king), and the Israelites sought to crown a king – then God would agree to their request, under certain conditions, mentioned below.23 The lack of enthusiasm for the monarchy is obvious, and is emphasized by the words “like all the Gentiles” (cf. 1 Sam 8) – for Israel is required not to behave like all the Gentiles. The monarchy is therefore presented as an indecent necessity that lowers Israelites to the level of the Gentiles – the similar Gentiles who must be destroyed, their cult eliminated, of which the Israelites must be very careful, and certainly not associate with, or be influenced by or marry (cf. Deut 7:1–4, 22–26; 12:2–4, 30; 18:9–14; 20:18). At the same time, the monarchy is not defined as a “repugnant,” and is not presented as a sin; however, the desire to establish monarchy is dangerous and must be restricted, since it conceals a longing to resemble the Gentiles. The first condition mentioned is the election of a king “whom the Lord thy God shall choose” (17:15); a general mention appears, without alluding to David, or the house of David, which are not mentioned at all in the book of Deuteronomy, due to pseudo-epigraphic considerations. As is well known all the kings of the

22

See Weinfeld 1972: 244–281. For the King’s law in Deut 17:14–20 see Driver 19023: 209–213; von Rad 19662: 118–120; Mayes 1981: 269–274; Miller 1990: 147–149; Merrill 1994: 265–267; McConville 2002a: 293–296; Vogt 2006: 44–45, 205–207; Lundbom 2013: 537–543; Nicholson 2014: 101–116; Tigay 2016: 460–466.

23

The Formation of the Book of Deuteronomy

35

ancient Near East claimed that God chose them. So in fact there is no innovation here, not even a utopia, but an almost routine requirement. There is also no objection to the idea of lineage, which is one of the tenets of the institution of monarchy (cf. the mention of the “sons” of the king in v. 20). The second condition (“one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee”) is not revolutionary, since most kings were indeed appointed from among their people. The third condition (“he shall not multiply horses”) – does not try to limit the king’s military power, but calls on him to behave modestly. The emphasis on the prohibition to import horses from Egypt, may support the supposition that this law was written in a period of cooperation with Egypt, for example, in the days of Hezekiah. The following conditions, the fourth and fifth, also involve a desire to establish an institution that is conducted in modesty: the prohibition of polygamy and the emphasis “and his heart turn not away” are mainly reminiscent of Solomon and Ahab (1 Kgs 11:1–4; 16:31); and the ban on making a lot of money is supposed to limit the king’s wealth and economic abilities. These two restrictions are relatively moderate: opposing the multiplicity of wives carries the danger of their negative impact on him; and as for wealth, it is not said “he shall not multiply silver and gold” but “he shall not greatly multiply silver and gold,” again an attempt to build a relatively modest ideal model of a king (cf. Isa 2:6; Jer 22:13–17). Monarchy is therefore a legitimate institution, and the king is allowed to marry women, amass property and build an army and a royal guard, but all in moderation. D ignores the issue of forced labor – and does not even mention the other taxes and levies that are extensively included in 1 Sam 8:11–17, but he cannot imagine a reality in which Israel does not have a king, similar to a king that the Gentiles have: a dynastic institution that accumulates property and military power. The last conditions (sixth and seventh) are very important: the king must first prepare (through his scribes) a personal copy of the Torah, emphasizing that this must be done under the watchful eyes of the “Levitical priests.” Finally, he must read the Torah and keep its laws, and not “turn aside from the commandments;” “his heart be not lifted up above his brethren” (he should not patronize them); mainly because it is the divine order, and it is the condition for a prolonged reign by him and his lineage (“he and his sons”). So there is no great enthusiasm for the institution of monarchy. Yet, the author does not oppose the monarchy, provided the king walks in the path of the Lord, behaves modestly, and especially shares his power with the “Levitical priests.” This approach is consistent with the assumption that the first edition of Deuteronomy was composed by a Levite, who was in fact included in the establishment. Dtr’s attitude towards monarchy is not reflected in the book of Deuteronomy. However, as is well known, Dtr supported the House of David, that is, the idea of an eternal dynastic monarchy. At the same time, he criticized the kings – personal criticism against a particular king, and not against the monarchy as an institution – and he judged them according to the model set forth in the king’s law in Deuteronomy: do they keep the commandments of the Torah, and do right in the eyes of God. Since Dtr wrote a history of Israel from the Exodus to the destruction of Jerusalem, he had the opportunity to present a more complete and complex picture of the issue of monarchy in Israel. His personal position was fundamentally close to D’s position, but he also emphasized the eternity of the House of David. Deut 17:14–20 is a unitary composition and it cannot be assumed that it was composed by different authors. There are no ideological contradictions, or unnecessary duplications in this section, and there is no evidence of later additions. The paragraph is set in a clear chiastic structure: it opens in v. 14, and is sealed in v. 20. The seven conditions are divided into two main groups: conditions regarding the relationship between the king and his God; and conditions concerning the relationship between the king and his subjects. The first condition (15a) and the last two (the sixth and the seventh – vv. 18–19) deal with the relationship between the king and his God; the second and third conditions (15b–16) and the fifth one (17b), deal with the relationship between the king and his subjects; and in the center of the structure, the fourth condition (17a) refers to both the relationship between the king and his subjects (“Neither shall he multiply wives”) and the relationship between the king and his God (“his heart turn not away” – as a result of the influence of his wives). In the opening and in the conclusion, there is a reference to the two aspects mentioned: in the opening (14) the Lord and the Israelites are mentioned; and in the conclusion (20), the statement: “That his heart be not lifted above his brethren” refers to the relationship between the king and his subjects; whereas the scripture “turn aside from the commandments” refers to the relationship between the king and his God. The concluding verse (20), is therefore related to all the conditions by means of two scriptures that open with the phrase “that his heart be not lifted up above his brethren” which refers to conditions 2–5; and the second (“turn aside from the commandments”) refers to conditions 4, 6–7. Therefore, it is clear that Deut 17:14–20

36

Chapter III

is a unified literary unit, and there is no basis for the claim that vv. 18–19 are a late addition. Also, there is a certain resemblance between the King’s Law and the Ten Commandments, since all the commandments dealing with the relationship between men are written in negative language, as well as some commandments dealing with the relationship between man and God, while the other commandments dealing with Israel and its God are written in positive language. III.3.5 Concern for the Poor and Weak in the Book of Deuteronomy Concern for the poor and the weak is frequently mentioned in the first edition of the book of Deuteronomy. Most of the mentions come from the Deuteronomic code (14:29; 15:1–18; 16:11, 14, 18–20; 23:16–26; 24:6, 10–22; 26:12–13; 27:19 and more). Concern for the weak is perceived in the book of Deuteronomy as a duty imposed on all Israelites who have the means, and not necessarily as a duty that applies to the establishment in general, or to the king in particular. This is the uniqueness of Israelite society, which sets it apart from other ancient Near Eastern cultures. This has also been reflected more recently in the Qeiyafa inscription.24 The Israelites are often presented in the book of Deuteronomy as “brethren” (19:18–22; 22:1–4; 23:20–21; 25:3; see also 17:15; 18:7). Contrary to the order to exterminate the Canaanites, Deuteronomy has a special treatment of the “resident aliens” (gerim – see below).25 The concern for the weak is evident in the Ten Commandments (5:13): Shabbat is a day of rest, not only for Israelites but also for their slaves and “resident aliens” (gerim) “who are at your gates.” The slaves are mentioned twice in connection to the fact that the Israelites were slaves in Egypt. Here, in contrast to Ex 1, it is clear that the reference is to true slaves and not to forced laborers (mas). The scripture “And you should remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt” comes up four more times in different contexts (15:15; 16:12; 24:18, 22); similarly, the phrase: “You and your son and your daughter and your slave and your maidservant” comes three more times (12:18; 16:11, 13). The prohibition to extradite slaves (23:16) is also unique to Israel: in other societies in the ancient Near East it was obligatory to extradite slaves, in the sense of restoring lost property (cf. also 22:1–4).26 In the description of the feasts of Weeks and Booths (16:9–15), there is reference made to four weak groups: Levites, “resident aliens” (gerim), orphans and widows. The orphan and the widow are mentioned in the Deuteronomic code and in Deut 27 ten times, usually together with the “resident alien” (14:29; 16:11, 14; 24:17, 19–21; 26:12–13; 27:19; except for 24:17, which separates the ger and the orphan from the widow, similar to the Deuteronomistic script in Deut 10:18). The term “needy” (‘bion) is mentioned seven times (15:4; 15:7 [twice]; 9:11 [twice]; 24:14); “poor” (dl) – four times (15:11; 24:12, 14–15); and the “hired hand,” namely those employed on a daily basis, whose financial situation is the worst – twice (15:18; 23:14). The book of Deuteronomy calls for debt remission every seven years, and requires the Israelites to care for the poor and prevent the phenomenon of poverty in Israel (15:1–11); it also opposes the definition of an Israelite as a slave, considering him an employee, and demanding not only his release at the end of six years, but also providing him property upon release (15:12–18). D called to celebrate and cooperate with the weak on holidays (16:11, 14), and to share with them on the Sabbath rest. There is a general, sweeping requirement to judge justly (16:18–20), but this was mainly aimed at protecting the weak (cf. 24:17; 27:19). The separation between Israelites and foreigners also exists with the issue of providing the borrower with interest (23:20–21). In addition, the Israelite who took a pledge was required not to take matters into his own hands but to wait outside to receive the pledge, and not to take mills as a pledge. The biblical scriptures do not even conceive of the possibility of taking human pledges (including members of the borrower’s family), as was the routine practice in the ancient Near Eastern societies and in Israel (24:6, 10–13).27 D forbade the oppression of the poor and the withholding of their wages (24:15); and demanded to leave them the forgotten sheaf as well as what was left from the olives and grapes (24:19–21); and every third year the Israelites were required to give the tithe to the poor in their cities (26:12–13).

24

For the Qeiyafa inscription see Galil 2010a. For the care for the poor in Deuteronomy see Driver 19023: xxiv–xxvi; Lundbom 2013: 47–50; Tsai 2014, with additional bibliography. 26 For extradition of slaves in Israel and the ancient Near East, see Bronner 2011; 2016, with additional bibliography. 27 For pledges in the Neo-Assyrian period see Galil 2007a: 86–94; 162–163, 199–205, 261–266, with additional bibliography. 25

The Formation of the Book of Deuteronomy

37

III.3.6 “The Lord, our Lord, is One Lord:” The Uniqueness and Unity of the Lord in Deuteronomy The book of Deuteronomy emphasizes the uniqueness and unity of the Lord: “The Lord, our Lord, is One Lord” (Deut 6:4). The meaning of these few words has been extensively discussed in research, and various hypotheses have been raised.28 These words have become the deepest and most concise expression of the Jewish faith, in all generations. The emphasis “The Lord (is) our Lord” does not indicate that He is not universal. God is indeed the God of Israel, a definition that expresses the special closeness between Israel and God. However, it is clear that He is universal, for there is no god except him. We will present below the variety of meanings of the phrase “one Lord” as they appear in other scriptures found in the first edition of Deuteronomy, as well as in other biblical and extra-biblical texts. “God (is) one”, that is, one and only – “and you shall have no other gods” (Deut 5:6 = the first commandment), not because there are other gods and you must not worship them, but because there are no other gods (cf. “there is no other besides him,” “there is no more,” Deut 4:35, 39 [Dtr]); one and only – which must not be duplicated (“Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image” – Deut 5:7 = the second commandment; and cf. Deut 19:4; 26:1 and more); one and only – who has no affinity for any stands (calves or cabbages – see the opposition to the golden calf in Deut 9:7–21); one and single – without a spouse (against the goddess Asherah, cf. 16:21–22); one and only – one name and one essence “YHWH” against “YHWH Teiman” or “YHWH Shomron” (mentioned in the Kuntillet ‘Ajrud’s inscriptions – see details in chapter X).29 III.3.7 The Land in the Book of Deuteronomy The land is an important and central element in the covenant between God and Israel his people: it was promised to the patriarchs (6:10, 18, 23; 8:1; 11:9, 23 [D]; 1:8, 35; 6:23 [Dtr]), and God fulfilled His promise and gave it to Israel for inheritance (5:27; 6:1; 7:1; 9:6, 23; 15:4; 19:14; 25:19; 26:1; 27:2; 28:8 [D]; 2:29; 4:1, 21 [Dtr]). The term “land” is mentioned 165 times in the book of Deuteronomy, of which about 140 are references to the land of Israel, the good land, the land of “milk and honey” (6:3; 11:9; cf. also 6:10–11; 8:7– 9; 11:12). This is the home to which God would bring his beloved people; in which he desired, and in which he chose from all the peoples; and in which the people would “come to the rest and to the inheritance” (12:9). In this place, the people would build a fair and just society, in which they would keep the laws and judgments they received from God (6:1; 12:10; 16:18; 17:14; 18:9; 19:1). The continuation of the dwelling in the land and the covenant are conditional on obedience to the word of God (7:12–19; 11:8–9, 13–17; 22:15 [D]; 4:26; 30:16–18 [Dtr]), so there is always the danger of losing the good land (4:25–31; 10:17; 29:21 – 30:10 [Dtr]).30 III.3.8 A Comparison of the Laws in the Deuteronomic Code with the Laws in the Book of the Covenant, the Priestly Source and the Holiness Code The Deuteronomic code contains eighty laws: seventy, in addition to the Ten Commandments. Of these 80 laws in Deuteronomy, 48 (60%) also appear in the book of the Covenant (Ex 21:1 – 23:19 [E]); 33 laws (41%) are also included in the Holiness code (Lev 17–26 [H]); and 14 laws (17%) are also mentioned in the priestly source (Ex 12:1–20, 43–49; 25:1 – 31:17; 35:1 – 40:38; Lev 1:1 – 16:34; 27:1–34; Num 1:1 – 10:10; 17:1 – 19:22; 25:16; 27:1 – 30:17; 34:1 – 36:13 [P]). 40 laws in Deuteronomy (50%) have an equivalent in H or P (seven have an equivalent in both H and P). All laws in Ex 34:12–28 [J], as well as 76% of the laws in the book of the Covenant – have an equivalent in Deuteronomy. So the affinity between the Deuteronomic code and the book of the Covenant is indeed significant, but there is also a similarity between the laws in Deuteronomy and the laws in H and P, alongside profound differences between them. So, the Deuteronomic 28

“The Lord our God” means “the Lord (is) our God,” as well as “God (is) one,” that is, “the Lord is one,” cf. Papyrus Nash: “the Lord is one.” For Deut 6:4 see Driver 19023: 89–91; von Rad 19662: 63, 91; Mcbride 1973; Mayes 1981: 176; Miller 1990: 98–99; Weinfeld 1991: 331–338, 349–351; Christensen 1991: 137–143; Merrill 1994: 162–166; Sonnet 1997: 53–54; Brueggemann 2001: 83; McConville 2002a: 140–141; Nelson 2002: 89–91; McDonald 2003: 59–75; Vogt 2006: 38, 157, 176; Kraut 2011; Lundbom 2013: 309–310; Tigay 2016: 266–268, 273–276, with additional bibliography. Cf. also Zech 13:2; 14:9. Contrary to the opinions of Tigay and others, in my opinion there is no difference between Deut 6:4 and Deut 4:35, 39. 29 For the Kuntillet ‘Ajrud’s inscriptions see Ahituv, Eshel, Meshel and Ornan 2015, with additional bibliography. 30 For the land in the book of Deuteronomy see Weinfeld 1991: 57–60; 1994: 21–22; Römer 1994: 202–204; 2000: 126– 130; Lundbom 2013: 65–66; Tigay 2016: 263–264.

38

Chapter III

code is based on all the other codes in the Pentateuch and is the latest one. At the same time, there are significant differences between these codes, both in terms of content and quantitatively, as follows: about a third of the laws in the book of Deuteronomy (27 out of 80) have no equivalent in the book of the Covenant or in the Holiness code or in P; and half of the laws in the Holiness code, as well as 80% of the laws in P, have no equivalent in Deuteronomy. The affinity between the Deuteronomic code and the book of the Covenant has been discussed extensively in research. In a few cases, D quoted verbatim from the book of the Covenant, for example: “Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother’s milk” (Deut 14:21b = Ex 23:9a); “For the bribe will blind the eyes of the wise, and pervert the words of the righteous” (Deut 16:19 = Ex 23:8); and more. Usually, however, the quotations are only partial and the previous law has been expanded, reinterpreted, and substantial changes have been made to it. D’s decision to rely primarily on E’s code is further evidence of the northern influences in the book of Deuteronomy, and the tendency to find a common denominator between the south and the north, as stated above. On many issues there is a correlation between the Deuteronomic code and the book of the Covenant in particular, and Source E, in general; for example, on the issue of the land’s northern border (until the Euphrates); the demand of the complete annihilation of all Canaanites; as well as dozens of other details discussed below. On the other hand, in a number of issues there is disagreement between D and E; for example, D advocates the concentration of worship in one place (similar to H), while E makes it possible to worship the God of Israel everywhere (Ex 20:24); according to D, only the Ten Commandments were given at Horeb, and the rest of the Torah was given in Transjordan; but according to E, both the Ten Commandments and the book of the Covenant were given in Horeb. Moreover, D’s claims that the Torah given in Transjordan is the one and only, and that nothing should be added to or derogated from it, is in fact directed against the book of the Covenant, the Holiness code, and the laws in P, denying their legitimacy. Similarly, Dtr argues that the book of the Law of God written by Joshua in Shechem (Josh 24:25–26), is just a verbatim duplicate of the “Torah of Moses,” that is, the Deuteronomic code (Josh 8:30–35). Moreover, there are, as mentioned, many differences between the laws in Deuteronomy and the laws in the other codes in the Torah (see below). In contrast to the Deuteronomic code [D] – the priestly editor of the Pentateuch (RP) inserted all the codes into his composition without trying to reconcile them, emphasizing that all the codes are actually the Torah of Moses, and no code should be preferred. 48 laws in Deuteronomy have, as stated, a parallel in the book of the Covenant (this quorum also includes the Ten Commandments quoted by D verbatim from Ex 20 [E] except for a few changes). The parallels between the Deuteronomic code and the book of the Covenant relate mainly to the apodictic laws, which deal with the religious and moral issues (Ex 12:17 – 23:19). 21 of the 23 apodictic laws in the book of the Covenant have a parallel in Deuteronomy (91%). At the same time, out of the 16 causal laws in the book of the Covenant, which deal with the civil sphere (Ex 21:1 – 22:16), only six have a parallel in Deuteronomy (38%). The Sabbath is mentioned in other priestly scriptures in the Torah (Ex 31:15; 35:2–3), as well as in the book of the Covenant (Ex 23:12); and in Ex 34:21 [J], which also enumerates the first two commandments. All the commandments, except the last one, are also mentioned in the Holiness code [H] but in a different wording (see especially Lev 19–20; 24). Contrary to the agreement between all codes regarding the importance of the struggle against the idols (Deut 7:25–26; 12:2–3 [D]; Ex 23:24 [E]; 34:13 [J]; Num 33:52 [P]), in two other issues there is an essential disagreement between the codes: first, Deuteronomy and the Holiness code (Lev 17:1–9) agree about the place of worship as opposed to the book of the Covenant (Ex 20:24); second, with regard to the non-sacral slaughter, there is a dispute between Deuteronomy, which permits it (12:15–27) and the Holiness code, which forbids it (Lev 17:1–9). The law in Deut 14:3–21a deals mainly with the prohibition of eating the “repugnant,” (tôʽēbâ) detailing the unclean and pure animals. This law is quoted almost verbatim from Lev 11 (P). Deuteronomy, as stated, allows non-sacral slaughter and therefore presents the list of pure and unclean animals to the people of Israel so that they would be careful about it. The demand to give the scoundrel to the ger is probable against the background of D’s care for the poor as well as the emphasis that Israel are a holy people. This requirement is different from the concept in Leviticus, for according to Deuteronomy, all of Israel is holy by its very nature, and therefore they must eat only pure animals lest they be defiled. In contrast, according to the Priestly source, Israel is required to be holy because God is holy, and the laws in the Priestly source are intended only

The Formation of the Book of Deuteronomy

39

for priests and not for all of Israel (see below).31 The Priestly source commands the Israelites to give tithes to the Levites, and the Levites are required to set aside tithes from this tithe for the priests (Num 18:21–24; cf. also Lev 27:30). In the book of Deuteronomy, however, the Israelites are commanded a three-year cycle: in the first two years, they should go up with the tithe to a place God chooses and eat it there; whereas in the third year they should give the tithe to the weak in their cities (Deut 14:22, 29; 26:12–15). The book of the Covenant does not refer to this subject. In sum, the Deuteronomic code is based on the book of the Covenant and also draws from the Priestly source and the Holiness code. There are quite a few similarities between these codes alongside many profound differences. In addition to the differences noted above, the following essential differences between the Deuteronomic code and the Priestly source and the Holiness code should be mentioned: a. the Priestly source distinguishes between three classes: priests (only the “sons of Aaron”) versus Levites and Israel, while Deuteronomy uses the phrase “Levitical priests,” emphasizing that all Levites are allowed to serve as priests; b. the law of tithing is very different in the various codes (see above); c. in Lev 17, non-sacral slaughter is forbidden, while in Deut 12:16–17 it is permissible (cf. also 1 Sam 14:32–35); d. Deut 15:1–11 requires debt remission at the end of every seventh year, and the emphasis is social; whereas in Lev 25:2 – the nature of the sabbatical year (shmita) is essentially ritual (“a sabbath of solemn rest for the land, a sabbath unto the LORD”); e. the Sabbath, according to the priestly source in the Torah, illustrates God’s rest (Gen 2:1–3; Ex 20:11; 31:17), while in Deut 5 the Sabbath is intended for the rest of man, his family and his servants. There are also many similarities between these codes in the Pentateuch, as follows: a. Deut 14:3–21a is an almost verbatim quote of Lev 11 [P], but the discussion in Leviticus is more detailed; b. the calendar of the festivals in Deuteronomy is based on the Holiness code; c. the prohibition of sacrificing sons appears both in Lev 18:21; 19:26, 31; 20:1–6, 27, and Deut 18:1–2; d. the concern for the weak is common to Deuteronomy (24:19, and more) and the Holiness code (Lev 19:9–10; 23:22); e. the command to love the ger appears both in Deut (27:17) and in the Holiness code (Lev 19:10, 33–34; 23:22); f. the law of the Hebrew slave in Deut 15:12–18 is based on Lev 25 [H]; g. the prohibition of taking interest on loans in Deut 23:20–21 is similar in essence and style to the law in the Holiness code (Lev 25:35–38); h. the law of leprosy in Deut 24:8–9 is short and concise, clearly referring to the priestly laws detailed in Lev 13–14; i. for further verbal connections between the laws in Deuteronomy and the laws in the Holiness code and in the Priestly source, cf. for example Deut 16:22 vis-à-vis Lev 26:1 [H]; Deut 17:1 vis-à-vis Lev 22:2 [H]; Deut 22:9–11 vis-à-vis Num 35:11 ff. [P]; Deut 22:9–11 vis-à-vis Lev 19:19 [H]; Deut 23:11 vis-à-vis Num 5:3 [P]; Deut 23:22 vis-à-vis Num 30:3 [P]; and more. III.3.9 Northern Sources of the Book of Deuteronomy The first edition of the book of Deuteronomy includes scriptures that probably originate in the Kingdom of Israel. First and foremost, we should mention the “traditions of Shechem” (Deut 11:29–30; 27–28), which emphasize the importance of Shechem, Mount Ebal and Mount Gerizim and even command Israel to erect “big stones” (=pillars), whitewash them with lime, and write the words of the Torah on them. Israel is also commanded to build an altar there, offer sacrifices to God, and perform the blessing and cursing ceremony there. These traditions are inserted in the book of Deuteronomy even though they contradict the concentration of worship and the prohibition of pillars. The northern roots of Deuteronomy are also evident in the resemblance between it and the book of Hosea, as well as its connection to the book of the Covenant, and to other traditions mentioned in E, including the golden calf – a story also mentioned in the book of Hosea. The motif of God’s love for Israel is extensively emphasized in both books, Deuteronomy and Hosea (see Hos 11:1–8; 14:5; Deut 10:15, etc., and the discussion above). Also noteworthy is the idea of the covenant (Hos 8:1; Deut 6:7; 8:12). Another resemblance is evident in the expressions “lift up your heart,” namely the sin of pride: after the Israelites ate, their hearts were “lifted up” and they left God (Hos 13:6 and cf. Deut 8:12–14). The idea of the Israelites’ return to God, and the connection between it and the return to the land after exile, are also common to Hosea and Deuteronomy. The prophet Hosea prophesies that God will restore his people and heal

31

For the relation between Deut 14:3–21a and Lev 11 see Driver 19023: 157–166; von Rad 19662: 101–103; Mayes 1981: 239–243; Merrill 1994: 236–239; Brueggemann 2001: 156–160; McConville 2002a: 248–250; Nelson 2002: 179– 182; McDonald 2003: 59–75; Vogt 2006: 91, 95, 191; Lundbom op. cit.: 462–464; Tigay op. cit.: 397–401.

40

Chapter III

them (Hos 14:2–5; cf. also 5:15; 6:1). This motif also appears in Deut 6:11; 7:1 (D); cf. also 4:29–30 (Dtr). The story of the calf mentioned in E, also appears in the book of Deuteronomy, as stated above. It is based on the opposition to the golden calves, which is also evident in the prophecy of Hosea. Some of the Israelites in the northern kingdom, including King Jehu, did not see any defect in the golden calves, which were placed in Dan and Bethel (2 Kgs 10:31); but others, including the prophet Hosea, opposed calves (see Hos 10:5; 13:2). Opposition to idolatry and their presentation as an empty vessel made of wood and stone is common in the book of Deuteronomy (27:15 and more) and is also found in the book of Hosea (13:2).32 III.4 The Second Edition of the Book of Deuteronomy (Dtr) The second edition of the book of Deuteronomy was composed by Dtr, in the Babylonian exile. He built the book in a literary structure and incorporated three sources into it: D, which is divided into three main parts: a. introduction (4:45; 5:1 – 6:19; 7:1 – 10:5; 11:1–32); b. the main body (“The Deuteronomic code”: 12:1– 21:7; 21:10 – 26:4; 26:12–15a, 15c–19); and c. conclusion: blessings and curses (27:1 – 28:68) – totaling about 64% of the book; and two other sources (Moses’ song and blessing – 32:1–43; 33:2b–29), amounting to about 6% of the book. Dtr added a preface to the first edition (1:1–5a, 5c–8a, 9–38, 39b–46; 2:1 – 3:29; 4:1–37a, 38–40, 41–44; 46–49) and a concluding unit (28:69 – 30:20; 31:1–30; 32:44–47; 33:1–2a; 34:1a, c, e, 5a, c, 6a, c, 10–12). Dtr built a structure of 14 speeches in Deuteronomy: ten are attributed to Moses, one is presented by the Lord, and three are liturgical: in two of them, the “speaker” is “Israel” (6:20–25; 26:5–11); in the third, it is Dtr himself (10:12–26). Moses’ ten speeches are divided into two groups, each containing five speeches: the first group is incorporated into Deut 1–28, the second into Deut 29–34. The three liturgical speeches and the concluding passage in 11:26–32 actually divide the second speech into five parts. So, only four speeches were included in the first edition of Deuteronomy (D): the first was divided into five parts, as stated; and the three remaining speeches were included in Deut 27–28. The preface and the concluding unit open with a historical introduction (Deut 1–3; 29:1–7), followed by a sermon (4:1–40; 29:8 – 30:20). In addition to D, Dtr also used other sources from the Torah, which were sometimes quoted verbatim, and sometimes re-processed and inserted into Deuteronomy with changes (see discussion below). Moses’ song and blessing (32:1–43; 33:2b–29) were quoted from unknown source(s). Both D and Dtr use verbs in the singular and plural in the notation “you” (singular directed to the plural), as evidenced in Deut 12. Speech no. 1 2 3

D or Dtr Dtr D Dtr

References 1:1 5:1a 6:20–21

4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Dtr Dtr D D D Dtr Dtr

10:12 26:5 27:1 27:9 27:11 29:2 31:1–2

11 12 13 14

Dtr Dtr Dtr Dtr

31:9–10 31:14–16 31:24–25 32:45–46

Opening Formulas These be the words which Moses spoke unto all Israel … And Moses called unto all Israel and said unto them And when thy son asketh thee in time to come … thou shalt say unto thy son: And now Israel what doth the Lord thy God require of thee And thou shalt speak and say before the Lord thy God: And Moses with the elders of Israel commanded the people saying: And Moses and the priests the Levites spoke unto all Israel saying: And Moses charged the people the same day, saying: And Moses called unto all Israel and said unto them: And Moses went and spake these words unto all Israel and he said unto them: And Moses wrote this law … And Moses commanded them, saying: And the Lord said unto Moses: … And the Lord said unto Moses: … That Moses commanded the Levites … saying: And Moses made an end of speaking all these words unto all Israel and he said unto them

Table 2: The Opening Formulas of the Speeches in the Book of Deuteronomy

32

For the northern origins of the book of Deuteronomy see Weinfeld 1972: 366–370; 1991: 44–57; 1994: 25–27.

The Formation of the Book of Deuteronomy

41

Dtr wrote the opening passage of the book of Deuteronomy, and paid special attention to its literary structure, as well as to the second opening, which he also composed and placed at the end of the preface and before the Deuteronomic code. Dtr also paid attention to the structure of Deut 29, in which God’s speech was incorporated. The other opening formulas are shorter (see table 2). The phrase “unto all Israel” (“el kol Israel”) appears in the book of Deuteronomy six times – all in the opening formulas of the speeches in the book. In addition, the phrase “said unto them” appears five times in the book; four of them in the opening formulas of the speeches (see table 2). The literary structure of the Deuteronomistic edition of the book of Deuteronomy is presented in table 3 below. Preface (1–4) [Dtr] Opening unit (1:1–5) Speech no. 1 [Dtr]: 1:6 – 4:40 Concluding unit (4:41–43) Introduction (4:44 – 11:32) [D] Opening unit (4:44–5:1a) [Dtr] Speech no. 2 – part 1 [D]: (5:1b – 6:19) Speech no. 3 [Dtr]: (6:20–25) Speech no. 2 – part 2 [D]: (7:1 – 10:5) Gloss (10:6–7) Dtr addition (10:8–11) Speech no. 4 [Dtr]: (10:12–22) Speech no. 2 – part 3 [D]: (11:1–25) Concluding unit (11:26–32) [D] – [The introduction serves as the opening unit of the Deuteronomic code] The Deuteronomic code (12:1 – 26:14) [D] Speech no. 2 – part 4 [D]: (12:1 – 26:4) Speech no. 5 [Dtr]: (26:5–11) Speech no. 2 – part 5 [D]: (26:12–14 [15=Dtr], 15–19) Blessing and Curses: Speech no. 6 [D]: (27:1–8) Speech no. 7 [D]: (27:9–10) Speech no. 8 [D]: (27:11 – 28:68) Concluding Division (28:69 – 34:12) [Dtr] Opening unit (28:69) Main bady: Speech no. 9 [Dtr]: (29:1 – 30:20) Speech no. 10 [Dtr]: (31:1–8) Speech no. 11 [Dtr]: (31:9–13) Introduction to the speech of God (31:14–15) Speech no. 12 [Dtr]: (31:16–21) Conclusion of the speech of God (31:22–23) Speech no. 13 [Dtr]: (31:24–29) 31:30 [Dtr] + Moses’ song (32:1–43) + 44 Speech no. 14 [Dtr]: (32:45–47) 33:1–2a + Moses’ blessing (33:2b–29) Concluding unit (34:1–12) Table 3: The Literary Structure of the Deuteronomistic Edition of Deuteronomy III.4.1 The Opening Paragraph of the Book of Deuteronomy The opening paragraph of the book of Deuteronomy and the DC is an elaborate craft of thought, built in a concentric structure as follows (see table 4 below):

42

Chapter III

A1

A3

(1) These are the words which Moses spoke unto all Israel B1 beyond the Jordan; in the wilderness, in the Arabah, over against Suph, between Paran and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Di-zahab. (2) It is eleven days journey from Horeb unto Kadesh-barnea by the way of mount Seir. C1 (3a) And it came to pass in the fortieth year, in the eleventh month, on the first day of the month, A2 (3b) that Moses spoke unto the children of Israel, according unto all that the LORD (“YHWH”) had given him in commandment unto them, C2 (4) after he had smitten Sihon the king of the Amorites, who dwelt in Heshbon, and Og the king of Bashan, who dwelt in Ashtaroth [and] in Edrei. B2 (5a) beyond the Jordan, [RP: in the land of Moab] (5b) Moses began to expound this law, saying: Table 4: The Opening Paragraph of the Book of Deuteronomy and the DC

The literary structure opens with component A (A1), followed by a place mark (B1), followed by a time mark (C1; see table 4). In the center of the structure: again A (A2) where Moses, God, and Israel are mentioned in a chiastic structure, presenting the name YHWH in the center. In the second part of the structure, there is first a time mark (C2), followed by a toponym (B2) and at the end, component A (A3) again, which emphasizes that Moses explained this Torah (to the children of Israel as much as God commanded it). Component A, which is repeated three times, emphasizes the centrality of Moses as an intermediary between God and Israel. This component has four elements (see table 5 below): (I) the law (“Torah”) or the words, which are in the opening and concluding lines; (II) Moses is mentioned four times, three times by his proper name and a fourth time using “him” (1b); (III) “the children of Israel” are also mentioned in the phrases “all Israel” and “to them” (1b); (IV) the God of Israel is mentioned by his explicit name YHWH in v. 3. So Dtr made efforts to design the opening paragraph of the DC in a sophisticated and complex manner. A1 (I) These are the words (II) which Moses spoke (II) A2 that Moses spoke

(III)

unto all Israel unto the children of Israel, according unto all that (IV) the LORD (“YHWH”) had given (II) (III) him in commandment unto them (II) A3 Moses began to expound (I) this law (“Torah”), saying: (III)

Table 5: The Literary Structure of Deut 1:1–5 (component A and its four elements) The territorial term “the Land of Moab” does not reconcile with the view of Dtr, who emphasizes the prohibition to inherit the land of Moab, since God gave the Moabites their land as an inheritance (Deut 2), noting that the area north of the Arnon river is included within the confines of the inheritance of the tribes of Israel (Deut 3). Therefore, Dtr could not define the region north of the Arnon river as the “land of Moab”, not even as a “geographical indication” referring to the past (the ancient name of the land of Moab in the book of Deuteronomy is “Er” see 2:9, 29). In view of the aforementioned argument, it must therefore be assumed that the term the “Land of Moab” in Deut 1:5, as well as in 28:69, was added by a postDeuteronomistic priestly editor, who should be identified with the editor of the Pentateuch (RP). Moreover, in Deut 1:5, the phrase “in the land of Moab” is superfluous, doubling the definition “in Transjordan”, and it is likely that in 28:69, the original wording was “in Transjordan” and not in the “Land of Moab.” So all the scriptures in the book of Deuteronomy that mention the “Land of Moab” or “the plains of Moab” (1:5; 28:69; 32:49; 34:1, 5–6, 8) – were added by RP. Similarly, the book of Deuteronomy is sealed by marking the area where Moses died, and this text (composed by Dtr) was enlarged by priestly and post priestly additions (see below).

The Formation of the Book of Deuteronomy

43

So, according to Dtr’s view, Moses died at the “top of Pisgah” (Deut 34:1; cf. 3:27) and was buried in a valley “over against Beth-peor” (cf. 3: 9). However, the priestly editor emphasizes three times that the place is in the land of Moab or in the plains of Moab, and mentions Mount Nebo. The definition “that is over against Jericho” is priestly, and completes the toponym “the plains of Moab” (cf. also the following priestly texts: Num 22:1; 26:3, 63; 31:12; 33:48, 50; 35:1; 36:13; Josh 13:32; Deut 32:48). Deut 34: [Dtr] (1) And Moses went up [RP] from the plains of Moab unto mount Nebo, [Dtr] to the top of Pisgah, [RP] that is over against Jericho. [Dtr] And the LORD showed him all the land. [Post-Priestly Gloss] even Gilead as far as Dan; (2) and all Naphtali, and the land of Ephraim and Manasseh, and all the land of Judah as far as the hinder sea; (3) and the South, and the Plain, even the valley of Jericho the city of palm-trees, as far as Zoar. [RP] (4) And the LORD said unto him: ‘This is the land which I swore unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob saying: I will give it unto thy seed; I have caused thee to see it with thine eyes, but thou shalt not go over thither.’

Moses the servant of the LORD died there

[RP] in the land of Moab, [RP] in the land of Moab

LORD. (6) And he was buried in the valley man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day.

[Dtr] (5) So

[Dtr] according to the word of the [Dtr] over against Beth-peor; and no

Table 6: Deut 34:1–6 Let us now return to the definition of the place in Deut 1:1 – 2:5. The description was opened and sealed by the words “beyond the Jordan,” and in between, geographical information is presented: in the wilderness, in the Arabah, over against Suph, between Paran and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Di-zahab. It is an eleven–day journey from Horeb unto Kadesh-barnea by the way of mount Seir. The term “beyond the Jordan” is general (namely Transjordan). In Deut 34:1, 5 Dtr emphasized that Moses ascends to the “top of Pisgah” and then dies and is buried in a valley “over against Beth-peor” (cf. 3:9). The next geographic terms (“in the wilderness, in the Arabah, over against Suph, between Paran and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Di-zahab … from Horeb unto Kadesh-barnea …”) are presented in reverse geographical order: from the last station to Horeb: the fourth definition indicates the road between Horeb and Kadesh-barnea. The second term is directed to the northern shore of the Suph Sea (near Elath) defined by the two scores “in the Arabah” (the southern end of the Arabah), which is opposite the Suph Sea (cf. Deut 1:40; 2:1). In the wilderness refers to “the wilderness of Moab” (Deut 2:8; cf. also Deut 2:26; Num 21:11). The third (“between Paran and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Di-zahab”) probably refers to the route from Kadesh-barnea to Elath defined in Deut 1:40; 2:1: “the wilderness;” or the “wilderness of Paran” in Num 2:12; 13:3, 26.33 In this way, Dtr sought to allude to the way in which the forty years of wandering in the wilderness would be described in the book of Deuteronomy: from the last station to the starting one (Horeb); in retrospect, in a flashback, and in a circular, not chronological order. This attitude is also clearly related to the chronological notes in Deut 1:3–4. The chronological starting point of the DC work is the Exodus (4:45–46), and from this point he begins the numerator of the 40 years of wandering in the wilderness. The words of Moses presented in Deuteronomy were said in the 40th year (of the Exodus), on the first day, in the eleventh month, about two months before the end of the 40 years of wanderings imposed on the children of Israel. Deut 1:4 includes only a relative time mark “after,” that is, after Moses had completed his great military enterprise: a victory over Sihon and Og (cf. also Deut 4:44–49). Dtr mentions the number eleven three times in the opening paragraph of the book of Deuteronomy: eleven days from Horeb to Kadesh-barnea, the eleventh month, and

33

For the opening paragraph of the book of Deuteronomy see Driver 19023: 1–9; von Rad 19662: 36–39; Mayes 1981: 113–117; Noth 1981: 27; Miller 1990: 22–25; Weinfeld 1991: 125–301; Merrill 1994: 61–64; Kallai 1995; Brueggemann 2001: 25–27; McConville 2002a: 60–62; Nelson 2002: 16–17; Lohfink 2005: 233–251; Lundbom 2013: 155–162; Tigay 2016: 89–94.

44

Chapter III

eleven toponyms: wilderness, Arabah, Suph, Paran, Tophel, Laban, Hazeroth, Di-zahab, Horeb, Mount Seir and Kadesh-barnea. III.4.2 The Preface to the Book of Deuteronomy (Deut 1:1 – 4:43) The preface to the book of Deuteronomy is the largest Deuteronomistic speech in the DC. It is divided into two main parts: it first contains a historical survey (1:6 – 3:29) followed by a preaching sermon (4:1–40). Deut 1:6 – 3:29 is divided into four main units: a. the appointment of judges in Horeb (1:9–18); b. the spies in Kadesh-barnea (1:19–46); c. the journey from Kadesh-barnea to the Arnon river (2:1–25); d. the conquest of Transjordan (2:26 – 3:29). Deut 4:41–43 is an appendix that describes the cities of refuge in Transjordan. III.4.2.1 The Appointment of Judges (Deut 1:9–18) Dtr opens the historical review with the story of the appointment of judges (and not, for example, with the Exodus). He wanted to avoid a precise repetition of the stories in the order they were presented in his sources. This is for literary reasons – not because he sought to put forwards an alternative historical picture. As indicated above, Dtr frequently mentions the Exodus in Deuteronomy, and it is a very important event in his world view. For the same reason, Dtr does not begin his historical description with the law giving at Horeb to avoid precise repetitions of the order of the events as presented in D. He did not mention the sin of the calf because he did not want to begin with an attack on Israel, and because he preferred to emphasize the story of the spies, which corresponds well to the detailed description of the conquest of Transjordan in Deut 2–3. Dtr chooses not to present a chronological review of the events as they appear in Exodus, which deals with the description of the plagues of Egypt and the splitting of the sea. Instead, he opens with the appointment of the judges and continues with the story of the spies – without referring at this point to the law giving at Horeb. It is therefore clear that Dtr preferred the literary consideration over the historical one. Dtr mentions these events explicitly in the concluding division of Deuteronomy, and he does not erase them from the original source, which he cited (D). So Dtr certainly did not wish to deny their existence. He just preferred the literary setting – a further indication that he wished to compose a new and original composition and not just a technical summary of his sources. The story of the appointment of the judges is based on two traditions: Ex 18:13–27 [E], and Num 11:11– 25 [J]. The relation of Deut 1:9–18 to these two traditions is evident, but Dtr did not quote them verbatim, nor did he try to reconcile the contradictions between them. Rather, he built a third version that highlights similarities and differences among his sources.34 III.4.2.2 The Story of the Spies (Deut 1:19–46) Dtr wrote a new version of the story of the spies. It is based partly on Deut 9:23 (D), and mainly on the text in Num 13–14 (which presents two intertwined versions: J+P). The text in Deut 1 includes less than 40% of the text in Numbers, and it highly resembles the version of J: 18 clichés of J are cited verbatim in Deut 1, and only two are copied from D (although this is a very short text, compared to Numbers). Along with the similarities there are differences: according to Numbers, God commands Moses to send spies, and Moses sends them “according to God;” Dtr claims that the people ask Moses to send the spies, and Moses agrees, but they do not ask the Lord. In both cases, the act is not presented as a sin. There are also differences in the area the spies examine: in the book of Numbers two versions are attested: a. until Lebo-Hamath (P); b. until Hebron (J). Only the second version is mentioned in Deuteronomy. In Numbers, the negative report of the spies is reported at the beginning of the text. In Deuteronomy, this report is only mentioned later, in v. 28. Dtr apparently trusted the reader and assumed that he knew the details of the story and therefore allowed himself to shorten it. The people’s sin is also mentioned in Deuteronomy, but the motif of the return to Egypt is absent. The responses of Moses, Joshua, and Caleb were also shortened, and the people’s intention to slay its leaders is omitted in Deuteronomy. God’s response is similar, though it lacks the motif of destroying the Israelites. 34

For the story of the appointment of the judges in Deut 1:9–18 see Driver op. cit.: 14–19; von Rad op. cit.: 39–40; Mayes op. cit.: 118–127; Noth op. cit.: 28; Miller op. cit.: 27–30; Weinfeld op. cit.: 134–141; Christensen 1991: 16–22; Merrill op. cit.: 68–71; Bruggemann op. cit.: 27–28; McConville op. cit.: 64–67, 75; Nelson op. cit.: 19–20; Lohfink op. cit.: 253–272; Vogt 2006: 98–113; Lundbom op. cit.: 171–175; Tigay op. cit.: 113–120, 168–170.

The Formation of the Book of Deuteronomy

45

The reaction of the people to the punishment and the failure of the Israelite attack are mentioned both in Numbers and in Deuteronomy. So there is a great similarity between the texts, in the order of the components of the story, as well as the ideas and the literary clichés. However, the version in Deuteronomy is shorter, and is similar to the passages quoted from source J.35 III.4.2.3 From Kadesh-Barnea to Arnon River and the Conquest of Transjordan (Deut 2:1 – 3:29) Deut 2:1–25 emphasizes the universal nature of God – and forbids the Israelites to conquer the territories that God gave to the people of Transjordan (Edomites, Moabites and Ammonites). The description of the war against Sihon is based on the text in Num 21:21–31 (E). A few texts are quoted verbatim from the book of Numbers, but there are also many differences between these passages. In both places, the story opens with an appeal to Sihon to pass through his country in peace. Deuteronomy emphasizes the words “Divrei Shalom” (“words of peace,” 2:26), which are absent in Numbers, even though in the previous verses (Deut 2:24–25) there is a divine commandment to provoke Sihon. The text in Deuteronomy is more detailed than in Numbers, and includes a reference to the passage of Israel in Edom and Moab (Deut 2:29). In both places, Sihon refuses to allow the Israelites to pass, but in Deuteronomy (2:30–31) a detailed explanation of the refusal is given (cf. Ex 7:3 [P] and Josh 11:20 [author of the first edition of Joshua]). In both places (Deuteronomy and Numbers) the war takes place in Jahaz and a complete victory is achieved. But there are several differences between the descriptions: a. Deuteronomy emphasizes that the entire Amorite population was destroyed: “And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed every city, the men, and the women, and the little ones; we left none remaining” etc. (Deut 2:34–35). Thus, Dtr may have had a more detailed version of E that included this text, or sought to adapt the story of the war with Sihon to the story of the war with Og (Num 21:35); b. different borders of the kingdom of Sihon are defined: in Numbers the territory extended only unto the Jabok River in the north; in Deut 3:8 the whole area from Arnon to mount Hermon is divided into two parts separated by a line that stretched from the sea of Galilee to the border of Ammon: the Kingdom of Sihon is placed in the south, and the kingdom of Og in the north; c. in both books, the border of the kingdom of Sihon met the border of the kingdom of Ammon, but the reason for avoiding conquering Ammon is different: in Deuteronomy it was due to a divine prohibition to conquer Ammon; whereas in Numbers the author just pointed out the fact that the border of the Ammonites was “strong” (fortified); d. the text in Num 21:26–31 is not mentioned at all in Deuteronomy, for two main reasons: a. it emphasizes the fact that “the land of the plain” was actually part of the land of Moab, and according to Dtr the Israelites are forbidden to fight the Moabites and inherit their land; b. conquering Jaazer is incompatible with Dtr’s perception of the extent of Sihon’s kingdom; e. the description of the victory over Og and the conquest of his land is based on a text in Num 21:33–35; f. Deut 3:1–2 is almost a verbatim duplicate of Numbers. But this does not imply that the text in Numbers is Deuteronomistic. On the contrary, there are considerable differences between the text in Deuteronomy and the source in Numbers. Especially noteworthy is the fact that Deut 3:4–7 are not mentioned in Numbers. The general picture of the two wars in Deuteronomy and Numbers is similar: there was a battle in Edrei against Og, and in its wake the Israelites conquered all the land of Og and destroyed the entire local population. But while in the book of Numbers the borders of the kingdom of Og are vague, in Deuteronomy the scope of his kingdom is clear, and there is an additional emphasis on the destruction of the entire local population, similar to that of the inhabitants of the kingdom of Sihon.36 In sum, Dtr briefly reviewed Moses’ main achievements in his forty years of leadership. He built a chronological skeleton for this period and focused mainly on the last year (the conquest of Transjordan and the speeches of Moses). He also referred, to a lesser extent, to the first year (Exodus, appointment of judges, Horeb). He reduced the description of historical events and expanded on preaching and speeches – and in particular, he devoted a central place to the Deuteronomic code, which he copied with only slight changes from D. 35

For the story of the spies in Deut 1:19–46 see Driver op. cit.: 19–24; von Rad op. cit.: 40–41; Noth op. cit.: 28–29; Miller op. cit.: 27–30; Weinfeld op. cit.: 141–145; Lohfink 2005, 227–233; Merrill op. cit.: 74–81; Bruggemann op. cit.: 29–34; McConville op. cit.: 67–72, 75–77; Nelson op. cit.: 21–31; Tigay op. cit.: 122–127, 170–171. 36 For the Conquest of Transjordan in Deut 2:1 – 3:29 see Driver op. cit.: 33–42; von Rad op. cit.: 41–43, 47–51; Mayes 1981: 133–314; Noth op. cit.: 29–31; Weinfeld op. cit.: 153–167, 178–181; Christensen 1991: 34–44; Merrill op. cit.: 88–99, 104–105; Lohfink 2000: 47–74, 82–87; Bruggemann op. cit.: 34–38; McConville op. cit.: 82–88; Nelson op. cit.: 31–46; Haran 2003: 198, 200; Galil 2010c; Lundbom 2013: 187–207; Tigay op. cit.: 135–156.

46

Chapter III

III.4.2.4 A Preaching Sermon (Deut 4:1–40) Deut 4:1–40 is one of the most important chapters in the DC; about 50 Deuteronomistic clichés appear in this unit. Its structure is chiastic and it is divided into five main parts: it opens and is sealed with a call to Israel to keep the laws of God and His commandments (1–8; 40); the second (9–24) and fourth (32–39) parts mention the covenant in Horeb and the Exodus, noting that “YHWH is the God and there is no more except him,” and a call to keep the first and second commandments. At the center of the literary structure comes the most important paragraph, emphasizing that Moses prophesied not only destruction and exile, but also repentance and redemption (25–31). Dtr addressed this paragraph to the exiles – it was intended to encourage them, prevent assimilation, and instill hopes of redemption in them.37 The chapter ostensibly calls for the observance of the Ten Commandments (4:13), and in general to keep all the laws and judgments given by Moses, but in fact it focuses on the first two commandments – which were listed alternately especially in vv. 16–18. The unity of the chapter is also evident in intentional repetitions and in the guiding words included in it: the verb “to do” is mentioned 12 times; the verb “to hear” in its various forms; and the words “heaven” and “day” are mentioned ten times; “see” and “command” – nine; “The Promised Land,” “fire” and “gentile” – seven; “inherited,” “learn,” “preserve,” and “picture” – five, and more. The rhetorical questions also testify to the unity of this chapter: so at the end of the first division (4:7– 8: “For what great nation is there, that hath God so nigh unto them, as the LORD our God is whensoever we call upon Him? And what great nation is there, that hath statutes and ordinances so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day?”); and so also at the beginning of the fourth part (4:33–34: “Did ever a people hear the voice of God speaking out of the midst of the fire, as thou hast heard, and live? Or hath God assayed to go and take Him a nation from the midst of another nation, by trials, by signs, and by wonders, and by war, and by a mighty hand, and by an outstretched arm, and by great terrors …”). Wordplay also tightens the connection between the parts of the chapter, for example: Israel will deal corruptly (“destroy”) and make a statue and a picture (twice: 4:16, 25) but God is merciful and therefore will not “destroy” Israel (31); Israel is warned not to forget the covenant of God (23), and is promised that God will not forget the “covenant of your fathers which I swore to them” (31).38 III.4.3 A Deuteronomistic Opening to the Deuteronomic Code (Deut 4:44, 46–49) The introduction to the Deuteronomic Code opens with a paragraph composed by Dtr (4:44, 46–49).39 This opening is similar in its general structure and components to the opening passage of the book of Deuteronomy. It also includes three components, which also indicate the place and time, similar to the opening of the book of Deuteronomy (see table 7 below). Here Dtr combined two passages that he found in the original opening of D (4:45 and 5:1). He preceded 4:45 with the words: “And this is the law which Moses set before the children of Israel,” which are related to 1:5, where the term “Torah” also appears, as well as the fact that it was clarified by Moses. Deut 5:1 is incorporated by Dtr in the new structure as a sealing. Similar to the opening paragraph of the book in Deut 1:1–5, this opening also mentions the conquests of Moses in Transjordan, and his victory over 37

Deut 4:1–4 includes about 50 Deuteronomistic clichés – more than any other literary unit in the Bible. Cf. the discussion about Deut 29–30, and see also the appendix to the book. For Deut 4:1–40 see Driver op. cit.: lxxxiv–lxxviii, 62– 81; von Rad op. cit.: 48–51; Weinfeld 1972: 320–365, Noth op. cit.: 33–34; Clements 1989: 34, 38–39, 51; 2001: 12– 18; Miller 1990: 53–63; Merrill op. cit.: 113–134; Sonnet 1997: 35–37, 81–82, 143–144; 169–170; Brettler 2000: 33– 50; Campbell and O’Brien 2000: 52–55; Lohfink 2005: 23–28, 193–198, 227–233; Bruggemann op. cit.: 50–59; McConville op. cit.: 97–117; Nelson op. cit.: 57–71; Vogt 2006: 113–135; Lundbom op. cit.: 229–264; Barton 2014: 76, 147; Tigay op. cit.: 122–127, 170–171; Masntjak 2016: 64–65, 195–200, 203–204. 38 McConville and Millar (1994: 132–138) rightly noted that Deut 4 emphasizes the dialectic between the transcendental and the immanent in the essence of divinity: God is in heaven, but on the other hand, He is on earth, very close. Indeed, the closeness of God to his people is especially mentioned in the first two units (vv. 7, 10–11). Deut 4:37 emphasizes the sound of the voice from heaven as opposed to seeing the fire from the earth, and v. 39 explicitly emphasizes that “the LORD, He is God in heaven above and upon the earth beneath; there is none else.” 39 For Deut 4:44, 46 see Mayes 1981: 105; Merrill 1994: 137–138; Weinfeld 1991: 234–236; Christenesn 1991: 99–105; Bruggemann 2001: 62–64; McConville 2002a: 114; Nelson 2002: 72–73; Lundbom 2013: 260–264; Tigay 2016: 224– 225.

The Formation of the Book of Deuteronomy

47

Og and Sihon. However, while in the first opening these conquests are secondary and form part of the second time mark, in Deut 4, most of the description focuses on the victories over Sihon and Og and the description of the extent of their kingdoms. The vague time mark “when they came forth out of Egypt,” which is included in the original opening in v. 45, is also copied by Dtr to v. 46, separating the first place mark from the second mark using the words “whom Moses and the children of Israel smote, when they came forth out of Egypt.” The first geographical indication (46a) accurately defines the place where Moses delivered his last speeches: to tighten the associative affinity between the two sides of the structure, Dtr mentions the term “beyond the Jordan” in vv. 47 and 49. The areas of Transjordan that were occupied by Moses and the children of Israel from Sihon and Og (48–49) include two complementary definitions: a. (48): “From Aroer, which is on the edge of the valley of Arnon, even unto mount Sion – the same is Hermon;” b. (49): “and all the Arabah beyond the Jordan eastward, even unto the sea of the Arabah, under the slopes of Pisgah.” The first definition refers to the plain and mountain area, while the second to the eastern Jordan Valley, up to the Dead Sea = the Araba Sea. The addition “under the slopes of Pisgah” was added only for literary reasons, linking this scripture to v. 46, since the slopes of Pisgah is located close to Beth-peor, west of Mount Nebo.40 That is, the geographical description actually returns to the starting point, to the place where Moses would deliver his last speeches and then die and be buried, in a valley near Beth-peor and Mount Nebo. So this opening is also well-constructed and calculated, and Dtr made an effort to build it and emphasize its special literary structure and connection to the title of the book. A1 [Dtr] 4:44 And this is the law which Moses set before the children of Israel B1: Time [D] 4:45 these are the testimonies, and the statutes, and the ordinances, which Moses spoke unto the children of Israel, when they came forth out of Egypt C1: Place [Dtr] 4:46a beyond the Jordan, in the valley over against Beth-peor, in the land of Sihon king of the Amorites, who dwelt at Heshbon, B2: Time [Dtr] 4:46b whom Moses and the children of Israel smote, when they came forth out of Egypt C2: Place [Dtr] 4:47–49 and they took his land in possession, and the land of Og king of Bashan, the two kings of the Amorites, who were beyond the Jordan towards the sun rising; from Aroer, which is on the edge of the valley of Arnon, even unto mount Sion – the same is Hermon, and all the Arabah beyond the Jordan eastward, even unto the sea of the Arabah, under the slopes of Pisgah A2 [D] 5:1 And Moses called unto all Israel, and said unto them: Table 7: Deut 4:44, 46–49 III.4.4 The Concluding Literary Division of the Book of Deuteronomy Dtr opened the concluding division of the book of Deuteronomy (28:69 – 34:12) by the following short opening (28:69 – see table 8 below): A1

A2

These are the words of the covenant B which the LORD commanded Moses to make with the children of Israel [RP] in the land of Moab *[beyond the Jordan], beside the covenant which He made with them in Horeb Table 8: Deut 28:69

40

See Galil and Zakovitch 1994: 130, 132.

48

Chapter III

This opening is set in a chiastic structure: it opens and is sealed with a reference to the “covenant,” and in the middle of this pattern he placed an emphasis that indicates the divine commandment, and the fact that Moses connects God with the children of Israel. Here, too, comes the landmark: “in the land of Moab,” added by the priestly editor. Originally, the words “beyond the Jordan” probably appeared here. Dtr thus distinguished between the Horeb covenant and the covenant in Transjordan.41 III.4.4.1 The Covenant in Transjordan (Deut 29–30) The ninth speech (Deut 29–30) is a well-constructed unit composed by Dtr. It describes a new covenant that Moses made with the children of Israel in Transjordan (28:69; 29:11–13), in addition to the oath sworn by God to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (29:12; 30:20), and in addition to the Horeb covenant (28:69; 29:24). Deut 29–30 are a unified literary composition that focuses on preaching the observance of the Torah commandments, while emphasizing the importance of freedom of choice and presenting the “mitzvah” as simple and easy to achieve. Dtr calls on the exiles to repent and promises them redemption and return to the good land, emphasizing that Moses foretold not only destruction and exile but also repentance and redemption. The ninth speech, similar to the first speech in Deut 1–4, opens with a historical introduction (Deut 29:1–7, similar to Deut 1–3) and later follows (in both of them) a sermon to keep the covenant (Deut 4:1–40; 29:8 – 30:20). The ninth speech is a work of ingenious thought and its purpose is to meet two deep mental needs of people in general, and of the exiles in particular. First, the need for hope, lest the exiles sink into grief and despair. And second, the need for peace of mind and overcoming the anxieties of the exiles from the God of Israel and the other gods. As for the God of Israel, Dtr assures them that now that he has exhausted the law, he has no choice but to act according to the degree of mercy, provided they return to Him. The relationship with God would then be restored, and the land rebuilt. As for their fear of the wrath of the other gods, Dtr claimed that these gods did not exist at all; they were not living gods but empty vessels made of wood and stone, and couldn’t harm them. Similar to Deut 4, Dtr presents his main message and purpose of the DC as a whole; a message of comfort and redemption, return and love, life and prosperity, rebuilding the relationship with God and restoring the ruined land; a message of national revival, of an infinite path that has starting points (the oath to the patriarchs and alliances at Horeb and Transjordan) but has no end; a relationship that has its ups and downs – but with no dead end. Deut 29–30 are divided into twelve literary units, which are set in an elaborate literary structure as follows: After the title in 28:69, and the opening formula of the ninth speech in 29:1, comes a brief historical review ending in v. 7. Deut 29:8 seals the first unit and also serves as a title to describe the covenant. The second unit (29:9–14) describes the covenant and the curse. Units three and four (29:15–20; 29:21–27) deal with the “curses of the Covenant” (20), and focus on the “curse.” The third unit discusses the sin and punishment of the individual, while the fourth unit discusses the sin and punishment of Israel as a whole. 29:28 seals units two–four, and refers to 29:8. Deut 29 is therefore divided into four units: a. a historical introduction; b. covenant and curse; c. “the curses of the covenant” (a) – the curse (detail of the rule); d. “the curses of the covenant” (b) – the curse (rule).42 Deut 30, which is a clear continuation of Deut 29, forming an integral part of the ninth speech, is divided into eight literary units. In contrast to the curse of the individual and the curse of the whole in 29:15–28, Deut 30 opens with two units describing the “blessing:” units five and six (30:1–5; 30:6–10). Against the sin of idolatry that leads to doom, destruction and exile (“the curse”), Deut 30:1–10 describe repentance, redemption and love.43

41

For Deut 28:69 see Mayes 1981: 358; Merrill 1994: 372–373; Nelson 2002: 338; Lundbom 2013: 798–799; Tigay 2016: 699. 42 For Deut 29 see Driver 19023: 320–328; Mayes op. cit.: 358–367; Miller 1990: 200–212; Merrill op. cit.: 375–385; Bruggemann 2001: 259–266; McConville 2002a: 410–420; Nelson op. cit.: 339–344; Lundbom op. cit.: 800–814; Barton 2014: 55, 220; Tigay op. cit.: 711–726; Mastnjak 2016: 85–87, 207–210, 215–218. 43 For Deut 30 see Driver op. cit.: 328–332; Mayes op. cit.: 814–826; Miller op. cit.: 212–216; Millar 1999; Bruggemann 2001: 266–271; McConville op. cit.: 421–436; Nelson op. cit.: 344–350; Lohfink 2005: 25–28, 31–36, 214–215; Lundbom op. cit.: 814–826; Barton op. cit.: 76, 152, 159; Tigay op. cit.: 727–733; Mastnjak op. cit.: 59–63, 90–91, 204– 206.

The Formation of the Book of Deuteronomy

49

The last six units are presented in 30:11–20. The seventh unit returns to the covenant (unit two), emphasizing that the commandments of the covenant (the mitzvah, in general) are “not too hard for thee, neither is it far off” (30:11) – but simple, clear and very close. This is also the reason why Dtr emphasizes only the first commandment in his speeches and sometimes the second – to point out that it is easy to keep the commandments, since its essence is the prohibition of the worship of other Gods. Units eight and eleven (30:15, 19a) emphasize the importance of freedom of choice: on the one hand, the choice between life and death, blessing and cursing, sin and doom, and on the other, the love of God and keeping the covenant. Units nine and ten again set the blessing (16) vis-à-vis the curse (17–18); and the speech was sealed with the blessing (19b–20): “therefore choose life, that thou mayest live, thou and thy seed.” Deut 30 is therefore divided into eight units: Blessing (a); blessing (b); covenant (“mitzvah”) (c); choice (d); blessing (e); curse (f); choice (g); blessing (h). The whole ninth speech is therefore divided as follows: historical introduction; covenant; curse; curse; blessing; blessing; covenant (“mitzvah”); choice; blessing; curse; choice; blessing. Three units deal with cursing, and four with blessing. Two units were devoted to the “covenant” and the “mitzvah,” and the other two to “choice.” The first six units include a historical introduction – a covenant – twice a curse – and twice a blessing. While the last six units include: “mitzvah” – twice choice – twice blessing – and once a curse. The unity of Deut 29–30 is also evident in the deliberate repetitions and in many leading words included in these chapters, as follows: “to return” appears in chapter 30, eight times; “today” – seven times in chapter 29, and seven in chapter 30; “covenant,” “life/your life” (etc.), and “your heart,” are mentioned seven times in Deut 30; “hear” – seven times in Deut 30, and twice more in 29; “act” – five times in Deut 29, and seven times in Deut 30; and more.44 The review in Deut 29:1–7 serves as a kind of historical introduction to the description of the covenant in Transjordan and is parallel, as stated, to the historical introduction in Deut 1–3. In Deut 29, Dtr was content with only brief allusions to three main events that took place in the forty years in the desert: a. Exodus (vv. 1–2); b. wandering in the wilderness forty years (v. 4); c. conquest of Transjordan and its inheritance to the tribes of Reuben, Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh (vv. 6–7). Among these three events, which refer to the past, two remarks concerning the present and the future were noted (vv. 3, 5b). These remarks present Israel in opposition to God: while God cared for the wants and physical needs of the children of Israel in the wilderness (clothing, shoes and food), he did not take care to equip them with tools that would train their hearts to accept his commandments, and they remained rebellious, despite the fact that they saw all the miracles that God performed in Egypt and in the desert. Deut 29:1–2 emphasizes three times that the Israelites saw the deeds of God in Egypt, and yet it is said in v. 3: “but the Lord hath not given you ... eyes to see,” namely, they are not able to see.45 The second unit (Deut 29:9–14) describes the covenant and the curse, most of which is summarized in the legal wording presented in v. 12: “that He may establish thee this day unto Himself for a people, and that He may be unto thee a God.” The unit emphasizes that the covenant is made not only with all those who stood in those days “before the Lord,” but with all of Israel for generations, and therefore also with the exiles. In this way, Dtr connected the distant past with the present. Unlike the Horeb covenant, the description here does not involve fire and smoke and carries a more modest character. This unit opens with the following words: “Ye are standing this day all of you before the LORD your God” and is sealed with a similar scripture (14): “… that standeth here with us this day before the LORD our God.” Deut 29:10 is one of the only Deuteronomistic writings that also refers to the weak in society, including the “resident alien” (ger), “the hewer of thy wood” and “the drawer of thy water.”46

44

Here are some more examples of guiding words in these chapters: The phrase “Yahweh your God” – is mentioned 12 times: ten in Deut 30, and twice in 29; Sky – four times (three in Deut 30, and once in 29); “Mitzvah” – eight times (four in Deut 30:1–10; and four in 30:11–20), and more. 45 For Deut 29:1–8 see Mayes 1981: 360–361; Merrill 1994: 376–377; Lohfink 2000: 249–257, 299–301; Bruggemann 2001: 260–261; McConville 2002a: 414–415; Nelson 2002: 339–340; Lundbom 2013: 799–802; Tigay 2016: 712–714. 46 For Deut 29:9–14 see Mayes op. cit.: 362–364; Merrill op. cit.: 377–380; Lohfink op. cit.: 253, 255, 259, 296–298; Bruggemann op. cit.: 261; McConville op. cit.: 415–416; Nelson op. cit.: 340–341; Lundbom op. cit.: 803–807; Tigay op. cit.: 715–718.

50

Chapter III

The third unit (29:15–20), which reopens in Egypt, describes the “alot” of the covenant (alot in a double sense of both an oath and a curse). Dtr, as usual, focused on the first commandment and opened this unit by mentioning the idols of the Egyptians and other Israelite neighbors, who saw the Israelites on their way to the Promised Land, idols who were nothing but empty statues made of wood and stone, silver and gold. In v. 17 onwards, the author brings his listeners closer to their contemporary reality through a hypothetical description of the fate of a man or group in Israel who may be tempted to worship other Gods. These wicked people, who chose to do what was right in their eyes and walk “in the will of their heart,” hoped they would not be punished for their deeds, hiding within the larger obedient community. But vv. 19–22 emphasize that God would severely punish the sinner while separating him from the rest of Israel – because God is jealous, and is not willing to tolerate the worship of other gods. This unit thus illustrates the dangers posed to people who chose the curse, and broke the covenant: God would not forgive them, and would blot out their name from under heaven.47 The fourth and final unit in Deut 29 (vv. 21–28) also describes sin and its punishment, but this time it is not a theoretical danger (as presented in the previous unit), but a harsh and cruel reality familiar to the exiles. This reality is described through rhetorical questions posed by both Israelites and foreigners in the face of the horrific destruction of the country: “even all the nations shall say ‘Wherefore hath the LORD done thus unto this land? What meaneth the heat of this great anger?’” (v. 23). Seven expressions illustrate the destruction: “brimstone,” “salt,” “burning,” “shall not be sown,” “nor beareth,” “nor any grass groweth therein,” “like the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah.” The expressions are divided into two groups of three, and the mention of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah includes the names of four cities. Dtr refers to the destruction as a known fact that requires explanation, and as a reality that served as a background for his speech and its preaching to the exiles. The sin mentioned in v. 22 is again the sin of the idols, and again the first commandment is presented as the central problem in Israel’s relationship with its God. These scriptures emphasize the breaking of the covenant at Horeb while explicitly mentioning the Exodus, marking the “curse” written “in this book,” and pointing out God’s great wrath. Dtr deliberately repeated the phrases “anger,” “the heat of this great anger,” similar to the phrases mentioned in the previous unit. The punishment for the idolatry is heavy again: God dispossessed them of their land and threw them into another land (Babylon as an analogy to Egypt).48 Dtr sealed Deut 29 with an enigmatic statement: “The secret things belong unto the LORD our God; but the things that are revealed belong unto us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law,” namely, God’s commandments are visible and simple, and the Israelites (“us and our children”), should keep these commandments (“do all the words of this Torah,” namely the Deuteronomic code), since they are visible and clear, hinting at the importance of repentance to be emphasized in the next unit (Deut 30:1–10); and they should not deal with the hidden desires of God, because they are His business, and he expects us to do only “the things that are revealed” and not to engage in the hidden (“the secret”), since the divine wisdom is hidden (Prov 1:3–4; cf. also Job 38–39).49 Units five and six (Deut 30:1–10) are in fact a consolation prophecy, which Dtr aimed at the exiles. After the long introduction in Deut 29, he now comes to the main points: a call for the exiles to repent and restore their relationship with God. Not to assimilate and not to despair but to cling to God “with all thy heart and with all thy soul.” God is waiting for their repentance and if they returned to Him He would receive them, renew His relationship with them, gather them from all the exiles and return them to the good land.

47

For Deut 29:15–20 see Mayes op. cit.: 364–365; Lohfink op. cit.: 302–303; Bruggemann op. cit.: 261–262; McConville op. cit.: 416–417; Nelson op. cit.: 341–342; Lundbom op. cit.: 808–811; Tigay op. cit.: 718–721. 48 For Deut 29:21–28 see Mayes op. cit.: 365–367; Merrill 1994: 380–385; McConville op. cit.: 417–419; Nelson op. cit.: 342–344; Lundbom op. cit.: 811–814; Tigay op. cit.: 722–724. 49 See Nelson op. cit.: 343–344; cf. Merrill op. cit.: 385; Lundbom op. cit.: 813. Tigai (op. cit.: 725–726) preferred the interpretation of Jonathan’s translation: The “secret things,” that is, the sins that people secretly commit and are not visible to all, but they are visible to God, and he will punish the sinners, while we must deal with the sins that “are revealed.” That is, Moses tries to reassure the people and comfort them on the grounds that they will not be punished for the sin of individuals who have sinned in secret, and is not visible to everyone. In contrast, Driver (19023: 328) believes that “secret things” refers to the future, visible only to God, and therefore a person should not speculate about the future, but only deal with the present, that is, the observance of Torah laws that are visible and known to all (“the things that are revealed”).

The Formation of the Book of Deuteronomy

51

God would now train the heart of the exiles to love Him and even God would love Israel as in the beginning, and would “again rejoice over thee for good, as He rejoiced over thy fathers.” So, Dtr put words of comfort and redemption in the mouth of Moses and emphasized that despite the destruction and exile, and despite the great anger and prolonged interruption and “concealment of the face,” God was waiting for their return to Him, and if they returned, He would return them to the land of their fathers. The starting point of Deut 30 is the conclusion of Deut 29, which is further evidence of the unity of these two chapters. Accordingly, Dtr emphasized in Deut 30:1: “And it shall come to pass, when all these things are come upon thee, the blessing [that is the covenant] and the curse [the destruction and exile].” The Israelites were already sitting in exile “among all the nations, whither the LORD thy God hath driven thee.” The verb “to return” is mentioned in these two units eight times and emphasizes both the return of Israel to his God, and God’s acceptance of their repentance, as well as their return to the promised land. The two units have a similar symmetrical structure: they open with repentance and hearing (vv. 1–2; 6–8) and are sealed with redemption (vv. 3–5; 9–10). Other phrases are common to the two units: for example, “with all thy heart and with all thy soul” (vv. 2; 10), and “the Lord your God,” mentioned six times in each of these units. Dtr made a special effort to design the last ten verses in Deut 30: units seven to twelve (vv. 11–20). The main purpose of unit seven is to emphasize that returning to God and keeping His commandments was not a complex and complicated task, but a very simple matter, “the word is very nigh unto thee;” therefore, the exiles should not be afraid of the process of repentance: “it is not too hard for thee, neither is it far off.” Twice it is emphasized in units eight and eleven that the repentance would not be God’s initiative but must stem from their decision, because they had the freedom to choose between life and death, between the blessing and the curse. Unit ten emphasizes that they could indeed assimilate and worship other gods. But the consequences would be extremely severe: doom and destruction. Unit twelve is sealed with a positive attitude: Dtr called on the exiles to love the Lord and to cling to him and “therefore choose life, that thou mayest live, thou and thy seed.” Ostensibly, the exiles were faced with two options, but in fact only one could be realized, because if they chose the other gods they would be lost from the land, so the emphasis comes: “I have set before thee life and death;” in other words, if you do not repent – you will die. There is no third way. III.4.4.2 Joshua in Deuteronomy Joshua is mentioned in Deuteronomy ten times: nine in Deuteronomistic scriptures (Deut 1:37–38; 3:21, 28; 31:3, 7, 14 [twice], 23; 32:44), and once in a priestly addition (Deut 34:9). In contrast, Joshua is not mentioned at all in Deut 5–28 (D). Dtr presented Joshua as Moses’ servant (1:38), and as his successor: he was the man who would cross the Jordan with Israel and inherit the land for them, unlike Moses, who was punished and did not get to cross the Jordan. God’s support was guaranteed for Joshua (Deut 31:8: “He will be with thee, He will not fail thee, neither forsake thee; fear not, neither be dismayed”). Dtr repeated the phrases: “Strong and embrace” (Deut 31:7, 23), “encourage thou him, and strengthen thou him” (Deut 3:28), and “encourage thou him” (Deut 1:38), which are intended to encourage Joshua and strengthen him for the important task assigned to him. A similar approach to Joshua is also evident in the Deuteronomistic layer of Joshua, and especially in Josh 1, whose many similarities are drawn to Deut 31, both of which were composed by Dtr. In a priestly addition to the book of Deuteronomy (34:9), the attitude towards Joshua is similar: it emphasizes the wisdom of Joshua, the smooth transition of leadership from Moses to Joshua, and the fact that Joshua drew his authority from both God and Moses.50 III.4.4.3 Repentance, Redemption and the Eternity of God’s Covenant with Israel Dtr emphasized in Deut 4 and 30, the importance of repentance, and also presented prophecies of consolation and redemption. In Deut 4:25–31 and 30:1–10, Moses foretold not only destruction and exile but also redemption. It is likely that these scriptures were composed in exile to inspire hope in the hearts of the exiles and instill in them hopes for redemption, emphasizing that Moses’ prophecy of destruction was fulfilled, and 50

For Deut 34:9 see Driver op. cit.: 424; Mayes 1981: 375–379; Merrill op. cit.: 400–403; Sonnet 1997: 21, 117, 122– 123; Bruggemann 2001: 273–275; McConville 2002a: 439–441; Nelson op. cit.: 359–361; Lundbom op. cit.: 837–843; Tigay op. cit.: 856–857.

52

Chapter III

so his promises of redemption would also be fulfilled, provided the people of Israel returned to their God. Destruction and exile were but one station on the long road, and not the dead-end of the road, for God’s relationship with Israel was eternal, his love to Israel was everlasting, and God would not forget his covenant with Israel (Deut 4:27–31; cf. 30:1–10). The term “eternal covenant” (“berit olam”) is indeed a priestly cliché – but in the Deuteronomistic chapters of the book of Deuteronomy, Dtr presupposed the fact that the covenant between God and Israel was eternal, especially in describing the expected destruction and exile, and above all in discussing the issue of repentance in exile and the return to the land of Israel after exile. The phrases: “all the days” typical of the Deuteronomic and the Deuteronomistic style, are mentioned twelve times in Deuteronomy, as well as the phrases “forever” and “for a thousand generations,” which are also found in other layers of the Bible (see appendix to the book). Usually the phrase “all the days” refers to the days of the life of the individual believer. At the same time, in Deut 5:26, the author was apparently referring to the eternity of the relation between God and his people: “O that there were such a heart in them, that they would fear Me, and keep all My commandments, all the days, that it might be well with them, and with their children forever.” III.4.4.4 The Book of Torah The terms “the book” and “Torah” are mentioned 30 times in Deuteronomy (11 times in D, and 19 in scripture composed by Dtr). The phrase “the (book of the) Torah” (“sefer haTorah”) appears four times: twice in Deut 17–28, and twice in Deut 29–30. Also, the term “book” comes in connection with “Torah” once in Deut 28:58 (see full details in the appendix to the book). D and Dtr therefore perceived the book of Deuteronomy as an obligatory and sacred canon (see also the emphasis that “thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it” (Deut 13:1, cf. also Deut 4:2). Moreover, the book of Deuteronomy emphasizes several times that Moses not only gave an oral speech to Israel, but also wrote the words “on a book,” see Deut 31:9: “And Moses wrote this law (Torah),” and cf. Deut 31:22 and 24: “when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book.” The term book refers to the whole book of Deuteronomy except the Ten Commandments, written by God Himself (see Deut 5:18; 9:10; 10:2, 4 [D]; and also Deut 4:13 [Dtr]). This view contradicts Ex 34:27–28 [J], which emphasizes that Moses wrote the Ten Commandments and not God (although God told him the Commandments). According to the priestly source, Moses wrote the description of the wandering stations of the children of Israel (Num 33), and according to source E, “And Moses wrote all the words of the Lord” (Ex 24:4), and then read the laws to the Israelites from “the book of the covenant:” “And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the hearing of the people” (Ex 24:7). III.4.4.5 Deut 31 This chapter includes four speeches: one put in the mouth of the Lord (Deut 31:14–23), and three in the mouth of Moses (Deut 31:1–8; 9–13; 24–29). God’s speech (no. 12) is embedded in the heart of the chapter, and is the only one in Deuteronomy in which God is the speaker. In the openings to speeches 11 and 13, an emphasis was added that Moses wrote “this Torah” (cf. also the sealing to the speech of God, where it is emphasized that Moses wrote “this song” – Deut 31:22, 30). These three repetitions of the verb “to write” tightens the connection between the speeches in Deut 31. The tenth speech is the only one that receives a concluding unit, similar to God’s speech. In the concluding unit of God’s speech, Dtr reiterates the appointment of Joshua and God’s support for him, which are also mentioned in the opening of God’s speech. The similarities between the concluding units of speechs 10 and 12 are evident: (31:7) Be strong and of good courage: for thou shalt go with this people (31:23) Be strong and of good courage: for thou shalt bring the children of Israel (31:7) into the land which the LORD has sworn unto their fathers to give them; … (31:23) into the land which I swore unto them (31:8) And the LORD, He it is that goes before thee; He will be with thee, … (31:23) and I will be with thee Table 9: A Comparison Between Deut 31:7 and 31:23

The Formation of the Book of Deuteronomy

53

Deut 31 deals with a few issues, including the appointment of Joshua by God and Moses, the encouragement of the Israelites before entering the land, the writing of the Torah and its deposit by the Levitical priests. However, there is a pessimistic tone in both the words of God and the words of Moses about the future of the relationship between God and his people, and the assessment after Moses’ death, that the Israelites would sin against God and worship other gods; sins that would lead to great anger of God, heavy punishments and even concealment. This pessimistic attitude is also evident in Moses’ song, which contains harsh words of rebuke to Israel. In order not to end Moses’ speeches with words of rebuke, Dtr added a short speech with a positive tone at the end of Deut 32 (no. 14: Deut 32:45–47). After citing the need “to observe to do, all the words of this law” (v. 46), Dtr highlighted the positive of “life” that is, the blessing, and the survival of Israel in their land: “For it is no vain thing for you; because it is your life, and through this thing ye shall prolong your days upon the land, whither ye go over the Jordan to possess it” (v. 47). This is followed by chapter 33, with Moses’ blessing for Israel, the last words of Moses, which are therefore positive and encouraging: “And Israel dwelleth in safety, the fountain of Jacob alone, in a land of corn and wine; yea, his heavens drop down dew. Happy art thou, O Israel, who is like unto thee? a people saved by the LORD, the shield of thy help, and that is the sword of thy excellency! And thine enemies shall dwindle away before thee; and thou shalt tread upon their high places” (Deut 33:28–29). Thus Dtr manages to emphasize the dangers lurking for Israel in the future in Deut 31, while also ending with a positive and optimistic tone through the last speech and Moses’ blessing. The last speech is therefore inserted between the two songs, so its opening begins with a link to Moses’ song, while mentioning Joshua and constituting a kind of sealing to Moses’ song. III.4.4.5.1 Speech No. 10 (Deut 31:1–8) Speech no. 10 is short and divided into three main units: an opening unit (1–2a); main body (2b–6), and concluding unit (7–8). Its purpose is to strengthen the hearts of the Israelites before entering the land, to emphasize the transfer of leadership from Moses to Joshua, and to assure them that God would lead the war against the Canaanites in the land west of the Jordan – as he did in Transjordan. The transfer of leadership to Joshua is deliberately emphasized twice: once in the body of the speech, and a second time in its concluding unit. The speech is unifying and shows many rhetorical repetitions: “before you” is mentioned five times; in addition, all of the following scriptures are deliberately mentioned twice: “He will not fail thee, nor forsake thee” (vv. 6, 8); “Be strong and of good courage” (vv. 6, 7); “the LORD thy God;” “All Israel;” “fear not, neither be dismayed” (vv. 6–8); and in addition the motif of extermination is also mentioned twice, as well as the names of Moses and Joshua. III.4.4.5.2 Speech No. 11 (Deut 31:9–13) Speech no. 11 includes an opening unit (vv. 9–10) indicating that Moses wrote the Torah and gave it to the “priests of the sons of Levi.” The speech includes the commandment of the “congregation” that would apply in the year of the shemita on the holiday of Sukkot – at this time the Torah must be read to all Israel. The speech therefore emphasizes the canonical nature of the Torah of Moses, as well as the need to share the “resident aliens” (gerim) in worship. III.4.4.5.3 Speech No. 12 (Deut 31:14–23) Speech no. 12, the speech of the Lord, is divided into three main units: an opening unit (vv. 14–16a); main body (vv. 16b–21), and concluding unit (vv. 22–23). The opening and conclusion emphasize the choice of Joshua, also mentioned above in the tenth speech. This is a rhetorical repetition, which does not indicate stages in the formation of the text: in the tenth speech, Moses presented Joshua before all of Israel, strengthened him and appointed him to lead the people after his death and conquer the land. In the opening of God’s speech, Moses and Joshua were called to appear before God in the Tabernacle, where they heard God’s speech. In the concluding unit, God turned to Joshua in the Tabernacle and told him things that were verbatim similar to the things that were said to him by Moses before all of Israel (see details above). The main body of the speech of God presents a pessimistic picture of the future: which connects to what is said in speech no. 13, as well as to the speeches in Deut 4 and 29–30: after the death of Moses, the Israelites would betray God, leave him, and break his covenant. The only sin, mentioned three times, is, again, idolatry – that is, the

54

Chapter III

violation of the first commandment (Deut 31:16, 18, 20). It also emphasizes the great wrath of God and the heavy punishment that would be imposed on Israel, although the nature of the punishment was not specified. On the other hand, the important phrase “hide My face” is mentioned here twice in vv. 17–18 (“I will hide My face from them,” cf. Ps 44:25; 104:29). A similar approach is evident in Judg 10:13–14 without mentioning the phrase “hide My face.” In fact, we can speak of two periods of “concealment” in God’s relationship with Israel: the period of the wandering in the wilderness and the period of exile. After God decreed the years of these two periods, He “hides His face” from them, and even if they repented and prayed to Him – He would not change His decision.51 III.4.4.5.4 Speech No. 13 (Deut 31:24–29) Speech no. 13 is related to Speech no. 11 and their openings are similar. This duplication has a rhetorical purpose and does not indicate late additions. Speech 11 focused on the commandments of the congregation while Speech 13 was essentially a commandment to the Levitical priests. Dtr deliberately emphasized the phrase “the priests, sons of Levi” in Speech 11, and the term “Levites” in Speech 13, to teach you that there is no difference between “the priests, sons of Levi” and the Levites, since both refer to the “Levitical priests,” that is, to the entire tribe of Levi. To strengthen the connection between the two speeches, the words “the bearers of the ark of the covenant of the LORD” were mentioned. Speech 13 also describes an assembly of Israelites, this time only of the elders of the tribes and the shotrim, in order to warn them from the future: Moses again prophesied that after his death the Israelites would do evil in the sight of God. This speech is somewhat similar to the content quoted above in the speeches in Deut 4, and 29–30 (see for example 4:16, 25 and 31:29, and cf. 4:26; 30:19; 31:28). III.5 The Liturgical Speeches in Deuteronomy In the book of Deuteronomy, a number of liturgical speeches were presented. Some of them were probably an integral part of Moses’ great speech in the first edition of the book of Deuteronomy (D), and some were added by Dtr as new and separate speeches, interrupting the textual sequence in which they are given. Three speeches were inserted in Deut 6:20–25; 10:12–22; 26:5–11 (Weinfeld has already shown that these passages are distinctly Deuteronomistic additions and has elaborated on the nature and essence of these speeches).52 In Deut 21:8, Dtr inserted a note into a liturgical speech composed by D (21:7, 9), referring not only to the inhabitants of the city “nearest unto the slain man,” but to the whole people of Israel. This is therefore not a new and separate speech, but only Dtr’s addition to an existing liturgical speech that formed an integral part of Moses’ speech (D). Similarly, Dtr added v. 15 to Deut 26, after vv. 13–14.53

51

For the speech of the Lord in Deut 31:14–23 see Driver op. cit.: 336–342; Tigay op. cit.: 747–84. For Deut 26:5–9 see Driver op. cit.: 288–290; Mayes 1981: 334–335; Miller 1990: 177–178; Wienfeld 1992: 217– 219; Lohfink 2005: 265–289; Merrill 1994: 334; Sonnet 1997: 21, 117, 122–123; Bruggemann 2001: 273–275; McConville 2002a: 379–380; Lundbom 2013: 725–728. 53 See Weinfeld ibid. 52

The Formation of the Book of Deuteronomy

55

The First Edition (D) 4:45; 5:1 – 6:19; 7:1 – 10:5; 11:1 – 21:7; 21:10 – 26:4; 26:12–15a, 15c–19; 27:1 – 28:68 The Second Edition (Dtr) 1:1–5a, 5c–8a, 9–38, 39b–46; 2:1 – 3:29; 4:1–37a, 38–40, 41–44; 46–49; 6:20–25; 10:8–15a, 15b–22; 21:8–9; 26:5–11; 15b; 2869 – 30:20; 31:1–30; 32:44–47; 33:1–2a; 34:1a, c, e, 5a, c, 6a, c, 10–12. Pre-Deuteronomistic Sources inserted into the Deuteronomistic edition of Deuteronomy Moses’ song = 32:1–43 Moses’ blessing = 33:2b–29 Post-Deuteronomistic additions RP 1:5b, 8b, 39a; 4:37b; 10:15b; 32:48–52; 34:1b, d, 4, 5b, 6b, 7–9 Gloss 10:6–7 Post-priestly additions 34:1f–3

Appendix: The Book of Deuteronomy: Sources and Editions

Chapter IV The Formation of the Book of Joshua

The formation of the book of Joshua has been discussed extensively in research.1 Various proposals have been raised, some taking a synchronic approach, others a diachronic. We will suggest a new diachronicsynchronic path, after first presenting conflicting conceptions and ideas expressed in the book. IV.1 Doublets and Contradictions in the Book of Joshua IV.1.1 The Conquest Conflicting views on the nature of the conquest are presented in the book of Joshua. Chapters 3–8 and 10– 11 indicate that the whole land was conquered in an all-Israelite operation led by Joshua. During the occupation, all the inhabitants of the land were killed and all the cities were captured. The emphasis in this concept is on the complete extermination of the entire population (Josh 11:11; 6:21; and more). This is not an exaggeration, an inaccurate, careless statement recorded coincidentally, or a phrase borrowed from similar descriptions in the Assyrian royal inscriptions, but a cohesive, clear and deliberate conception, which has farreaching implications for the period in question as a whole. The extermination of all inhabitants of the land, without exception, is repeated in Josh 3–8 and 10–11 twelve times, and is presented in the detailed description (nine times), in the summaries (twice), and once again in the delineation of the divine plan (11:20; cf. also 9:24). Contrary to the description in Josh 3–8 and 10–11, the book of Joshua depicts a completely different image of the nature and completeness of the conquest. Josh 9; 13–19, and 23 emphasize that Joshua did not conquer all the land; there are numerous remnants of the conquest in the area south of Mount Hermon; and there is “the land which remains” from the Hermon to Lebo-Hamath. Many Canaanites were left on the land, including Rahab and her father’s house, and the Gibeonites, with whom Joshua in his haste made a pact, “and they did not ask direction from the Lord” (9:14). Against the old, careworn Joshua stood Caleb: true, he was aged 85, apparently the same age as Joshua, but Joshua was “old and advanced in years” while Caleb was youthful in spirit and strong in body: “I am still as strong to this day as I was the day Moses sent me; my strength now is as my strength was then, for war, and for going and coming” (14:11). Caleb and Othniel, “his brother,” conquered Hebron and Debir – they, not Joshua.2 IV.1.2 The Borders of the Land The book of Joshua has conflicting views on the issue of the scope of the Land of Israel: a. in Josh 1:2–4 the Lord promised Joshua to give the children of Israel the land: “From the wilderness and this Lebanon even unto the great river, the river of Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites and unto the great sea.” Josh 21:41 emphasizes that God indeed gave Israel all the land he swore to their fathers; and they did conquer it and settle in it (cf. Josh 23:14; see also Gen 15:18 [J]; Ex 23:31 [J]; Deut 1:7 [Dtr]; Deut 11:24 [D]; 1 Kgs 5:1 [“the book of the acts of Solomon”]); b. the northern border of the land in Josh 13:5 is not the Euphrates, but “Lebo-Hamath,” which is located about 270 km north-west of the Euphrates (cf. also Num 34:1–12 [P]; Num 13:21 [P]; Judg 3:3 [RP of Judges]; Ezek 47:20). According to this concept, Transjordan was not included in the confines of the promised land (see Josh 22:9–34; Num 34:11–12; Ezek 47:18); c. in Josh 3–8 and 10–11 the land of Israel extended from Kadesh-barnea and Gaza in the south to Zidon and Mount Hermon in the north (10:41; 11:8, 17); d. the inheritance of the tribes of Israel in Josh 13–19, partly overlaps with the confines of the land described in Josh 3–8 and 10–11. The match is noticeable in the west, south and north, 1

Keil 1857; Wellhausen 19634: 116–134; Cooke 1918; Noth 19532; 1981; Kauffmann 1959; Hertzberg 19694; Eissfeldt 1965: 248–257; Polzin 1980; Woudstra 1981; Boling 1982; Gray 1967; Hess 1996; Nelson 1997; Noort 1998; 2012: 21– 50; Hawk 2000; Briend 2000; Pressler 2002; Assis 2005b; Knauf 2008; Rösel 2011; Blum 2012: 137–158; Krause 2014; Galil 2017; 2018a. 2 For the conflicting conceptions and ideas expressed in the book of Joshua see Galil 1994a; 2012b; 2017; 2021b.

58

Chapter IV

but not in the east. In Josh 13, Transjordan was included in the land of Israel; However, according Josh 3–8 and 10–11 the Jordan was the eastern border of the land; and only with the crossing of the Jordan did the conquest of the land begin. IV.1.3 The Tribe of Judah The book of Joshua contains conflicting views on the issue of the tribe of Judah: its status, importance and contribution to the conquest of the land. Judah’s importance and superiority are indicated in a few passages in the book of Joshua, especially in Josh 13–19: Judah was placed at the head of the tribes and inherited first. A special chapter in the book (14) is dedicated to the rights of the sons of Caleb and the sons of Othniel, who were annexed to the tribe of Judah; and it is no coincidence that this chapter is the one that opens the description of the inheritance of the land west of the Jordan. Even presenting Caleb in contrast to Joshua (in this chapter) indicates a pro-Judean trend. However, in most chapters of the book of Joshua (especially 3–8, 10–11) the tribe of Judah is not mentioned. The main human hero of the story is Joshua, and the Judean mentioned in these chapters is Achan, the anti-hero of the conquest story, who overcame the boycott and wreaked havoc on himself, his family, and his people. IV.1.4 Joshua and Moses in the Book of Joshua In Josh 3–8, 10–11, Joshua is portrayed as an independent leader, often shown in contrast to Moses, with a clear emphasis on his primacy (see details below). However, many scriptures in the book of Joshua present Joshua as a disciple of Moses, as a follower of his path, and as one who did not deviate right and left from the orders of Moses and his “Torah.” Joshua is presented in the opening verse of the book as a servant of Moses and as his follower. The author put words in the Lord’s mouth that stated not only the fact that Joshua was Moses’ successor, but that Joshua’s duty was first and foremost to save the “Law of Moses” and not to deviate from it right or left (Josh 1:8–9). Josh 8:35 points out that Joshua actually satisfied this demand: “There was not a word of all that Moses commanded, which Joshua read not before all the assembly of Israel, and the women, and the little ones, and the strangers that walked among them;” cf. also 11:15: “As the LORD commanded Moses His servant, so did Moses command Joshua; and so did Joshua; he left nothing undone of all that the LORD commanded Moses.”3 IV.1.5 The Inheritance of the Tribe of Levi Josh 21 emphasizes that the priests and Levites received forty-eight cities from the tribes of Israel – and that these cities and lands were actually the inheritance of the Levites and priests. This concept clearly contradicts the view presented in other chapters of Joshua, which state that the tribe of Levi did not receive an inheritance: “Only unto the tribe of Levi he gave no inheritance; the offerings of the Lord, the God of Israel, made by fire are his inheritance, as He spoke unto him” (Josh 13:14; see also 13:33; 14:3–4; 18:7; Deut 10:9; 12:12; 14:27, 29; 18:1–2). IV.1.6 Different Styles and More Doublets Some passages in Joshua were written in a “priestly” style, others in a Deuteronomistic one. More doublets are evident in the book, in addition to the doublets stated above, particularly the duplication between the last two chapters of the book: both describe an assembly of people convened by Joshua; in both, all the children of Israel and their leaders are gathered, and Joshua reviews before them the history of Israel; and in both Joshua imposes duties on the people and warns them against worshiping other gods. IV.1.7 Priests and Levites in Joshua The phrase “the Levitical priests” is mentioned twice in the book of Joshua (3:3; 8:33). This phrase corresponds to the view of the book of Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomistic editing of Former Prophets, which stipulated that every person who belonged to the tribe of Levi could serve in the priesthood and there was no 3

For Moses and Joshua in the book of Joshua see Galil 2017; and see also details below.

The Formation of the Book of Joshua

59

difference between the sons of Aaron and the rest of the Levites (cf. e.g. Deut 18:1–8, and more). In contrast, Josh 21 distinguishes between the sons of Aaron (= the “priests”) and the other families of Levi (including the remaining sons of Kehat = the “Levites”), and between the former and the other tribes of Israel (“Israel”); a separation typical of the priestly strata in the Pentateuch. IV.2 Four Editions of the Book of Joshua In my opinion, four main editions of the book of Joshua were created over a lengthy and protracted process of formation, each an update of the previous. The first edition (A) was composed in the kingdom of Israel ca. 800 BCE; the second (B) was written in Jerusalem in the late 8th century BCE, during the reign of Hezekiah; the Deuteronomistic edition of the book (C) was completed in Babylonia ca. 560 BCE; and the Priestly edition (D) was set in the Persian period (ca. 450 BCE). Oral and written traditions, composed during the 10th– 9th centuries BCE were incorporated into the first two editions.4 IV.2.1 The First Edition of the Book of Joshua: The Conquest of the Land (The Northern Edition) The first edition of the book of Joshua describes the miracle of the conquest of the land as a very successful Blitzkrieg, a total war with clear consequences: the entire land, up to Mount Hermon, was conquered by the tribes of Israel under the leadership of Joshua, and no Canaanites were left. The God of Israel very actively joins the war: he gives the order for the offensive, plans the destruction of the Canaanites down to the last detail, and even fights for Israel on the battlefield;5 no wonder then that the victory was complete. The whole land was conquered, and all the Canaanites were wiped out and vanished “from man to woman, from youth to elder.” Just as the God of Israel hardened Pharaoh’s heart in order to strike him and bring his people forth from Egypt, so he hardened the heart of the Canaanites to annihilate them entirely, mercilessly: “For it was the Lord’s doing to harden their hearts that they should come against Israel in battle, in order that they should be utterly destroyed, and should receive no mercy but be exterminated” (Josh 11:20). God goes out of his way to conquer the land for his chosen and beloved people: “The Lord threw down great stones from heaven upon them as far as Azekah … there were more who died because of the hailstones than the men of Israel killed with the sword.” Furthermore, God changes the laws of nature for them: he parts the Jordan in full flood, and even the sun stands still at Gibeon. After all these miracles and favors, can incomplete results be imaginable – a puny and partial victory, which leaves remnants behind? The total destruction of the Canaanites is noted 13 times in this edition of the book: it is inconceivable that its writer would speak of survivals of the conquest, or of “a land which remains.”6 Yet even in this celebratory and unprecedented account of God’s love for his people Israel, and his preference for them over his other creatures, the northern writer of this edition of the book of Joshua does not shrink from a polemic against the southerners: one event clouds the perfect “honeymoon” between God and the generation of the conquerors of the land: the episode of Achan. This inserted tale is a hidden polemic against the tribe of Judah, for Achan’s Judean extraction is pointed out deliberately three times (Josh 7:7, 17– 18). Thus, this edition has two main heroes: the God of Israel and Joshua the Ephraimite; and on the other hand one anti-hero is presented: Achan of the tribe of Judah, who by his sin caused a momentary setback in the divine plan, a heavy defeat, and the death of many Israelites.7 Since the editor of the first edition hints at the reconstruction of Jericho in the reign of Ahab – an implicit criticism leveled at Ahab in particular and at the house of Omri in general, it is reasonable to suggest that this edition was composed during the reign of one of the kings of Jehu’s dynasty. In the first edition of the book, Joshua is portrayed as an independent leader shown often in contrast to Moses, with a clear emphasis on his primacy. We now turn to a few examples which prove this attitude of the author of the book’s first edition.

4

Galil and Zakovitch 1994: 8–14; Galil 2012b: 297–298; 2018a: 549–561. Cf. Younger 1990: 210; Römer 2005: 85; Achenbach 2012: 1–26. 6 Contra Kaufmann 1959: 1–87; cf. Merling 1997: 7–27. 7 For Achan’s crime see Begg 1986a: 320–334; Hess 1996: 143–157; Nelson 1997: 95–107; Hawk 2000: 107–124; Dietrich 2007: 58–67; Rösel 2011: 108–119; Berman 2014: 115–131. 5

60

Chapter IV

a. Joshua circumcised the Israelites near Jericho at the commandment of Lord in an act of faith and obedience which signifies a new beginning, the start of a new path (Josh 5:2–9).8 The story states explicitly that the Israelites were not circumcised in the wilderness after their departure from Egypt – which is implicit criticism of Moses, and a manifestation of Joshua’s superseding Moses, since Joshua circumcised Israel but Moses did not. In vv. 5–6 Dtr points out the sins of the Israelites in the wilderness, and seems to blame them for not circumcising their sons. In Josh 5:2–3 the personal role of Joshua in the circumcision is emphasized: at the command of the Lord, he, personally does the operation, in contrast to Moses, who did not circumcise the people of Israel in the wilderness, not even his own son (Ex 4:22–26). In the LXX the circumcision story is attested in two additional chapters in the book of Joshua: 21 and 24. At the end of Josh 21 (v. 42 in LXX) the Greek translator added the fact that the Israelites gave Joshua the city which he asked for, Timnath-serah in the hill-country of Ephraim, and he built the city, and dwelt therein (see Josh 19:49 in the MT) and added the following words: “And Joshua took the knives of flint, by which he had circumcised the children of Israel who were born by the way in the wilderness and placed them in Timnath-serah.”9 After Josh 24:30, which relates Joshua’s death and burial (“And they buried him in the border of his inheritance in Timnath-serah, which is in the hill-country of Ephraim, on the north of the mountain of Gaash”), the LXX adds the following sentence: “That’s where they put with him, in the grave in which he was buried, the knives of flint, by which he had circumcised the children of Israel in Gilgal, when he took them out of Egypt, as the Lord commanded, and they are still there until this day.”10 In these two additions, the circumcision story is related to Timnath-serah, Joshua’s city and burial place. The scripture in LXX: “when he took them out of Egypt” is problematic since it presents Joshua (not Moses) as the leader who took out the Israelites from Egypt.11 But it is more reasonable to suggest that Joshua was the leader of the people who were taken out of Egypt by the Lord. So the words “when He took them out of Egypt” (in LXX) may refer to the Lord, hence the words “as the Lord commanded” (before “and they are still there until this day”) refer to the circumcision. b. Josh 10:14 points out Joshua’s superiority to all his predecessors, including Moses: “And there was no day like that before it or after it that the LORD hearkened unto the voice of a man.” Cf. 1 Kgs 3:12 (Solomon): “I have given thee a wise and an understanding heart; so that there hath been none like thee before thee, neither after thee shall any arise like unto thee”),12 and 2 Kgs 23:25 (Josiah): “And like unto him was there no king before him, that turned to the LORD with all his heart, and with all his soul, and with all his might, according to all the law of Moses; neither after him arose there any like him.”13 Joshua’s act depicted in Josh 10:12–13 is very rare since God changed the world’s order at the request of a person: “Then spoke Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel; and he said in the sight of Israel: ‘Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon.’ And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the nation had avenged themselves of their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jashar? And the sun stayed in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day” (cf. 1 Kgs 17:22). c. During the war against Ai, Joshua raised his javelin twice: a. first as a sign to his soldiers (8:18: “And the LORD said unto Joshua: ‘Stretch out the javelin that is in thy hand towards Ai; for I will give it into thy hand.’ And Joshua stretched out the javelin that was in his hand towards the city”); b. secondly, in v. 26 (which was erroneously omitted by the LXX), Joshua kept his javelin raised until victory was complete: ‘For Joshua drew not back his hand, wherewith he stretched out the javelin, until he had utterly destroyed all the inhabitants of Ai.” Clearly, on the second occasion Joshua held his raised arm up for a long spell (“until he had utterly destroyed all the inhabitants of Ai,” namely, “twelve thousand”), in contrast to his brandishing the javelin in a single action (giving the signal, as stated in v. 18). 8

For the story in Josh 5:2–9 see Cooke 1918: 34–37; Kaufmann 1959: 107–108; Galil and Zakovitch 1994: 57–61; Ahituv 1995: 104–108; Hess op. cit.: 118–122; Nelson op. cit.: 77–80; Howards 1998: 146–152; Hawk op. cit.: 78–81; Kraus 2000; Pressler 2002: 55–57; Blum 2003: 292–322, esp. 307–308; Rofe 2004: 333–364, esp. 350–353; Knauf 2008: 64–65; Rösel op. cit.: 82–84; Krause 2012a: 23–58. 9 Holmes 1914: 28–31; Gooding 1977: 149–164; Rofe 1977: 217–227, esp. 226; Tov 2012: 65–85, esp. 67, 77, 80–82. 10 Rofe 2004: 351. 11 Idem, ibid. 12 For a comparison of Joshua to Solomon see Schäfer-Lichtenberger 1995: 190–224, 356–364. 13 For a comparison of Joshua to Josiah see Nelson 1981a: 531–540.

The Formation of the Book of Joshua

61

This description in the first edition of Joshua is an analogy to the story of the battle with Amalek (Ex 17:8– 16), with the intention of highlighting Joshua’s superiority to Moses. Joshua is described as a superman, holding his javelin on high for many hours, until the total annihilation of all 12,000 inhabitants of Ai, at the end of the war. By contrast, Moses is depicted as a tired and weak man, who cannot keep his arm raised continuously but must raise and lower it on and off, so that the Israelites got the better, or worse, depending on the movements of his hands: “And it came to pass, when Moses held up his hand, that Israel prevailed; and when he let down his hand, Amalek prevailed” (Ex 17: 11). Moreover, Moses’ hands were heavy, and he could not even stand on his feet, so he sat on a stone, while Aaron and Hur supported his hands on either side: “But Moses’ hands were heavy; and they took a stone, and put it under him, and he sat thereon; and Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands, the one on the one side, and the other on the other side …” (Ex 17:12).14 d. The description of the history of Israel from its beginning to the time of Joshua in Josh 24 deliberately ignores the Sinai covenant and the Lord’s giving the Torah in the Tabernacle and in the plains of Moab to Israel through Moses. Instead the author emphasizes that Joshua is the one who gave the Law to Israel, and these laws were given in Shechem, not in the wilderness or in Transjordan. Moreover, it is pointed out that the laws were recorded by Joshua in a book called “The Book of God’s Law” and not “the Torah of Moses.” This chapter does not simply highlight Joshua’s primacy over Moses: it substitutes him for Moses. Here too, a clear analogy to Moses is attested: Joshua gives the Law on the eve of his death and makes a covenant with the people of Israel – not in addition to the Sinai covenant or to Moses’ Law but in its stead, since the giving of the Torah by Moses is not recorded at all in this chapter: “So Joshua made a covenant with the people that day, and set them a statute and an ordinance in Shechem. And Joshua wrote these words in the book of the law of God. And he took a great stone and set it up there under the oak that was by the sanctuary of the Lord” (Josh 24:25–26).15 e. The author of the first edition of the book praises Joshua and depicts him as a perfect leader, acting impeccably; a great warlord who conquered all the land, destroying all the Canaanites in a Blitzkrieg. Joshua occupied a territory larger than that taken by Moses. In contrast to Moses, Joshua has no doubts; he does not debate or argue with the Lord – unlike Moses. In the first edition of the book, Joshua is shown as a perfect believer in God, who never sinned and was never punished – unlike Moses. Moreover, Joshua (not Moses) is the person who was elected by the Lord to enter the holy land and lead its conquest. f. In the first edition of the book, Joshua derives his authority and power directly from God (e.g., 4:1, 15; 6:2; 8:1, and more) and not from Moses, in contrast to the Deuteronomistic perception presented in the third edition of the book of Joshua (see below), as well as in Deut 31:7; 34:9; and also contrary to the priestly concept reflected in Num 27:18–23. Moreover, in the first edition, Joshua is not told to act according to the command of Moses or to laws written in the Torah of Moses. g. Moses is not mentioned at all in the first edition of the book. The words “And I sent Moses and Aaron” (24:5), which are not attested in the LXX, are a Deuteronomistic addition, since in this chapter God does miracles for Israel by Himself, not through couriers.16 h. The analogy of the legend of the revelation of the angel to Josh (5:13–15) to the story of the burning bush in the wilderness (Ex 3:1–5) is well known. A few words are reiterated verbatim in both stories, e.g. “Put off thy shoe from off thy foot; for the place whereon thou standest is holy.” However, the description in Joshua is more concrete since the angel (“the commander of the army of the Lord”) is not just a voice heard from a burning bush but a human figure (“behold, there stood a man over against him”), so according to this legend Joshua saw the angel face to face, in contrast to Moses, who saw a burning bush and not a figure. The

14

This symbolic description depicts Moses as a king supported by the priesthood (Aaron), on the one hand, and by the Tribe of Judah (Hur), on the other hand; while Joshua is described as the king’s commander of the army who fought on the ground. See Galil 1985: 488–495. 15 For Josh 24 see Cooke 1918: 213–224; Kaufmann 1959: 248–256; Giblin 1964: 50–69; Soggin 1972: 226–231; Rofe 1977: 220–221; 2004: 345–349; Boling 1975: 541; Van Seters 1984: 139–158; Sperling 1987: 119–136; Koopmans 1990; Brekelmans 1989: 1–9; Anbar 1992; Galil and Zakovitch 1994: 212–223; Fritz 1994: 235–239; Ahituv 1995: 364– 375; Hess 1996: 299–311; Nelson 1997: 262–283; Howards 1998: 425–446; Noort 1998: 205–222; Hawk 2000: 261– 281; Pressler 2002: 116–123; Creach 2003: 118–130; Knauf 2008: 191–200; Rösel 2011: 360–378; Gosse 2012: 295– 300. 16 Galil and Zakovitch op. cit.: 214; see also Rofe 2004: 349.

62

Chapter IV

author’s aim, in this case too, was to point out Joshua’s superiority to Moses. Other scriptures in the Pentateuch emphasize the reverse situation (Deut 34:10; Ex 33:11; Num 12:7–8).17 i. The connections between the stories of the Jordan-crossing (Josh 3–4) and the sea-crossing (Ex 14) are obvious. However, these two miracles show many differences, including the diverse symbolic acts which led to the separation of the water obstacle: while Moses raised his staff over the sea, according to the book of Joshua the Jordan was divided the moment the priests’ feet made contact with its water.18 j. Like Moses, Joshua is described in the first edition of the book as an important prophet: God speaks to him directly (4:1–2, 15; 6:2; 8:1, 18), and he experiences the revelation of an angel (“the commander of the army of the LORD”), who speaks to Joshua face to face (5: 13–15). Joshua prays for the people (7:7–9); he is called “God’s servant” (24:29) and his words are often composed as prophetic formulas, for example, “For thus saith the LORD, the God of Israel ...” (7:13). Cf. also I Kgs 16:34, which refers to Joshua as a prophet and to Joshua’s curse (in Josh 6:26) as a prophecy: “according to the word of the LORD, which He spoke by the hand of Joshua the son of Nun.”19 In sum, the names Joshua and Moses are attested in the book of Joshua 226 times (Joshua 168; Moses 58; see table 1 below).20 The number of mentions of Joshua falls steeply from the first edition to the last: in the first edition he appears 110 times (66% of 168), as compared with only 31 times (18%) in the second, even though these two editions are nearly identical in length. In the third edition the number decreases to 22 (13%), and in the fourth to a mere five (3%). On the other hand, Moses is not mentioned at all in the first edition; he appears 15 times (26%) in the second, 35 (60%) in the third and eight (14%) in the fourth (see table 1, which also specifies the 224 mentions of the name of the Lord, YHWH, as against the 226 mentions of Joshua and Moses). These statistics accord well with the erosion of Joshua’s importance and status in the book of Joshua from edition to edition, as well as with the tendency to emphasize the greatness of Moses and to portray Joshua as his successor, who adhered to Moses’ path and law. IV.2.2 The Second Edition of the Book of Joshua: The Conquest and Settlement (The Judean Edition) The second edition of the book of Joshua was composed in Jerusalem in the late 8th century BCE, during the reign of Hezekiah. It contains a harsh polemic against Joshua and the portrayal of this period in the first edition. Chapters of the first edition are interspersed among those of the second; most probably the earlier chapters were left in for the express purpose of taking issue with them: the author of the second edition intersperses his newly written chapters with chapters of the first edition. Six chapters of the first edition (3– 8) are inserted between Josh 2 and 9, and three first-edition chapters (10–12) are inserted between Josh 9 and Josh 13–19. The litany of Joshua’s failings and sins in Josh 2; 9; 13–19 is long and weighty: Joshua did not conquer all the land; numerous survivals of the conquest remain, in the area south of Mount Hermon, and there is “the land which remains” from the Hermon to Lebo-Hamath. Rahab and her family, and also the Gibeonites, with whom Joshua in his haste made a pact, (9:14) – were left in the land. Caleb and Othniel “his brother” conquered Hebron and Debir – they, not Joshua. So despite his different view of that period, this author did not erase the first edition but let it stand, or at least part of it, primarily to take issue with it, and to present the reader with his alternative version contradicting the first author’s view. Joshua still has an important role in the occupation of the land west of the Jordan, but there are other leaders who participated in the conquest, including Caleb and Othniel. Moreover, the second edition highlights Moses’ achievements, which are presented in contrast to Joshua’s failures. Here are a few examples. 17

For Josh 5:13–15 see Noth 19532: 39–40; Abel 1951: 109–113; Miller 1973: 128–131; Hess 1996: 126–127; Nelson 1997: 80–83; Howards 1998: 155–163; Hawk 2000: 82–85; Pressler 2002: 41–43; Knauf 2008: 67; Rösel 2011: 87–90. 18 For Josh 3–4 see Saydon 1950: 194–207; Vogt 1965: 125–148; Eissfeldt 1965: 252–253; Soggin 1972: 52–53; Langlamet 1972: 7–38; Butler 1983: 41–44; Peckham 1984: 413–431; Zakovitch 1991; Fritz 1994: 41–56; Hess op. cit.: 97– 117; Rösel op. cit.: 54–77; Krause 2012b: 383–400; Assis 2012: 401–413; Ballhorn 2012: 415–430. 19 For Joshua’s curse see Mazor 1988: 1–26; For a comparison between Joshua and Elisha see Schäfer-Lichtenberger 1989: 198–222; Cf. Kissling 1996. 20 The statistics refer to the MT. Differences between the MT, the Dead sea scrolls and the LXX are presented below. See Tov 2012: 65–85. A comprehensive discussion on the text of the book of Joshua is beyond the scope of this book. In my opinion the MT is preferable to the LXX (with a few exceptions).

The Formation of the Book of Joshua

63

a. Josh 2 criticizes Joshua. The name of Moses is not mentioned – but the story about Rahab and the spies is a parody on the story of the spies sent by Moses. This analogy belittles Joshua as against Moses: Joshua learned no lesson from the first espionage project, in which he personally took part.21 Ch.

Joshua B C 4

A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

D

A

B

Moses C22 11

D

A

3 3 10 10 8 11 17 27 12

3 2

1 3

3 1 2 9 1 2

3+2* 1

1 2 1

9 5

1

3 5

1

31 18%

4 2 2 22 13%

5 3%

1 4+1 0+2

1 3+2

1 1 1 1

2

3+1 9+1 1

3

1

1

2+3

12 4

6 2

2

2 1

1

0 0% 55

15 28% +3=

4 0+1* 1 32+3* 60% [58]

1 2 1

8 14%

15+1 64+19 36% 17723

Total D

0+1 3+1

1 2

11 110 66% 168

1+2 6+3 2+2 7+9 11+2 5

YHWH B C 7+3 5 1 2+1 4+1 4

1 26+6 15% +47=

4 3+3 17 4 54+14 31% [224]

1 1 3 22+8

22+3 9 10+3 25+4 16+2 18+9 23+3 29+5 15+1 42 28+1 4+2 13 22+1 2 0 8 10+2 4 3 10 34+11 19+1 34+1

33+8 18% 400 + 50 [450]

Table 1: Joshua and Moses in the Book of Joshua (By Chapters and Editions) b. Josh 9 levels explicit and harsh criticism against Joshua, presents him as an impulsive man who believed the strange story of the Gibeonites, made a covenant with them to let them live (v. 15), “and asked not counsel at the mouth of the LORD” (v. 14). Opposing the violation of the ban on Jericho by Achan attributed to a Judean by the book’s first author, the second author inserts the violation of the ban by the spies of Joshua, who swore to let Rahab and her whole family live. Against the first author’s claim that Joshua seized all the

21

For the story of Rahab and the spies see Tucker 1972: 66–86; Marx 1980: 72–76; Butler 1983: 33–35; Culley 1984: 30–35; Newman 1985: 167–181; Bird 1989: 119–139; Ottosson 1989: 419–427; Zakovitch 1990: 75–98; Hess 1996: 80–97; Galil and Zakovitch 1994: 38–50; Nelson 1997: 36–52; Noort 1998: 131–146; Hawk 2000: 35–51; Rösel 2011: 40–53. 22 “The Law of Moses” (Torah of Moses) is mentioned twice in Josh 8 and once in Josh 23. 23 YHWH is mentioned 177 times in the book of Joshua. In 47 additional scriptures, He is attested in various combinations such as “YHWH your God,” and more, a grand total of 224 times.

64

Chapter IV

inhabitants of the land, the second author asserts that Joshua was negligent in this task and actually made peace with them.24 c. Josh 13 elevates Moses above Joshua, emphasizing the grandeur of the former: Joshua is mentioned only in the opening verse of this chapter, which draws attention to his old age and failure to possess the land: “Now Joshua was old and well stricken in years; and the LORD said unto him: ‘Thou art old and well stricken in years, and there remaineth yet very much land to be possessed.’” As for Moses, however, this chapter sets out his achievements in detail (he is mentioned 9 times in this chapter): Moses is defined as “servant of the LORD” (v. 8), he conquered the entire area from the river Arnon to Mount Hermon, and he divided it among the Transjordanian tribes.25 d. Josh 14–15 pursue the line of Josh 13: Caleb is 85 years old, yet still remains strong, and is asked to complete the occupation of the land; a task that Joshua had not achieved: “And now, behold, the LORD hath kept me alive, as He spoke, these forty and five years, from the time that the LORD spoke this word unto Moses, while Israel walked in the wilderness; and now, I am this day eighty and five years old. As yet I am as strong this day as I was in the day that Moses sent me; as my strength was then, even so is my strength now, for war …” (14:10–11).26 IV.2.3 The Third Edition of the Book of Joshua (The Deuteronomistic Edition) In the book of Joshua, Dtr argues with the author of the second edition of the book on several matters (mainly in Josh 1, 12, 23 and 24): first, does God keep his promise to give his people the land? His answer is that all has been fulfilled completely; none of all the good things promised by God has failed. But how can that be? Is there not “a land which remains” and are there not Canaanite cities which were not conquered? These questions become more problematic, considering that Dtr extends the borders of the land promised to Israel as far as the River Euphrates (Josh 1:4), while nothing is said of the conquest of these terrains in the book of Joshua. Here Dtr appears as a historian with a deep understanding of the processes of formation and settlement of the tribes of Israel in the land of Israel. He clearly alludes to David’s conquests, thereby enlarging the role of the Judean heroes in the conquest of the land.27 Moreover, Dtr emphasizes that there is no difference between “the Torah of Moses” and Joshua’s “Book of the Law of God.” He presents Joshua in the opening verse of the book as the Servant of Moses and his follower. He puts in the Lord’s mouth words that state not only the fact that Joshua was Moses’ successor, but first and foremost that Joshua’s duty was to save the “Law of Moses” and not to deviate from it right or left: “Only be strong and very courageous, to observe to do according to all the law, which Moses My servant commanded thee; turn not from it to the right hand or to the left, that thou mayest have good success whithersoever thou goest. This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth, but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein; for then thou shalt make thy ways prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success” (Josh 1:8–9). Josh 8:35 points out that Joshua actually satisfied this demand: “There was not a word of all that Moses commanded, which Joshua read not before all the assembly of Israel, and the women, and the little ones, and the strangers that walked among them;” cf. also 11:15.

24

For the story of the Gibeonites in Josh 9 see Liver 1963: 227–243; Hertzberg 19694: 66–69; Kearney 1973: 1–19; Halbe 1975: 613–641; Schäfer-Lichtenberger 1986: 58–81; Sutherland 1992: 65–74; Hess 1996: 175–186; Galil and Zakovitch 1994: 86–95; Nelson 1997: 120–133; Hawk op. cit.: 135–149; Day 2007: 113–137; Rösel op. cit.: 140–156. 25 For Josh 13 see Cooke 1918: 115–130; Kaufmann 1959: 160–172; Ottosson 1969: 118–186; Kallai 1967; 1986: 241– 275; Galil and Zakovitch op. cit.: 122–137; Ahituv 1995: 209–233; Hess op. cit.: 229–237; Nelson op. cit.: 163–174; Hawk op. cit.: 182–190; Creach 2003: 99–100; Rösel op. cit.: 204–223. 26 For Josh 14–15 see Auld 1980: 55–64; Kallai 1986: 115–124, 303–307, 372–397; Galil and Zakovitch op. cit.: 137– 162; Ofer 1990; 1993; Ahituv op. cit.: 234–272; Hess op. cit.: 237–256; Nelson op. cit.: 174–193; Hawk op. cit.: 190– 203; Rösel op. cit.: 224–264. 27 For the Deuteronomistic edition of the book of Joshua see Noth 1981: 35–41, 115–117; Eissfeldt 1965: 255–256; Peckham 1994: 213–234; Curtis 1994: 32–35; Hess op. cit.: 67–80, 289–299; Galil and Zakovitch op. cit.: 13–14, 34– 37, 208–212; Nelson op. cit.: 27–36, 253–262; Römer and De Pury 2000: 112–116; Rösel op. cit.: 25–39, 353–359; Koorevaar 2012: 219–232.

The Formation of the Book of Joshua

65

IV.2.4 The Fourth Edition of the Book of Joshua (The Priestly Edition) The fourth edition of Joshua was composed in the Persian period (ca. 450 BCE). This Priestly edition was written first and foremost to emphasize that the priests and Levites receive land in Israel: the author of the fourth edition pointed out that the Levites and priests received forty-eight cities from the tribes of Israel (Josh 21) – and that these cities and lands are actually the inheritance of the Levites and priests. This concept clearly contradicts the view of the book of Deuteronomy and the second edition in the book of Joshua, which states that the tribe of Levi did not receive an inheritance: “Only unto the tribe of Levi he gave no inheritance; the offerings of the LORD, the God of Israel, made by fire are his inheritance, as He spoke unto him” (Josh 13:14; see also Josh 13:33; 14:3–4; 18:7; Deut 10:9; 12:12; 14:27, 29; 18:1–2). In the fourth edition Joshua does not work alone but is part of a collective leadership with Eleazar the priest (who is always mentioned before Joshua in the passages added by the Priestly editor), and with the “presidents” who are also called “the chief fathers of the tribes of the children of Israel.” Other priestly sections ignore Joshua altogether, particularly Josh 22:9–34, where Pinchas is presented as the sole foremost leader of the people who acts next to the “presidents.” However, Moses is attested in the priestly additions many times, even in 22:9–34.28 Two main examples will suffice: “And they came near before Eleazar the priest, and before Joshua the son of Nun, and before the princes, saying: ‘The LORD commanded Moses to give us an inheritance among our brethren” (17:4); and see also 19:51: “These are the inheritances, which Eleazar the priest, and Joshua the son of Nun, and the heads of the fathers’ houses of the tribes of the children of Israel, distributed for inheritance by lot in Shiloh before the LORD.” Cf. Num 34:17–18 [P]: “These are the names of the men that shall take possession of the land for you: Eleazar the priest, and Joshua the son of Nun. And ye shall take one prince of every tribe, to take possession of the land.” Overall, in the priestly additions to the book Moses is named eight times, the same as the number of times Elazar appears (five times, and three more as the father of Phinehas). Joshua is mentioned only five times, the same number of mentions as the name Pinchas (four times as a first name and once in the toponym “Hill of Pinchas”). Remarkably, the fourth edition recalls “the presidents” (or “the heads of fathers” / “head fathers of the tribes”) 18 times. In sum, four main editions of the book of Joshua were created over a lengthy and protracted process of formation, each an update of the previous. The first edition was composed in the kingdom of Israel ca. 800 BCE; the second was written in Jerusalem in the late 8th century BCE, during the reign of Hezekiah; the Deuteronomistic edition of the book was completed in Babylonia ca. 560 BCE; and the Priestly edition was set in the Persian period (ca. 450 BCE). Oral and written traditions, composed during the 10th–9th centuries BCE were incorporated into the first two editions. Moreover, there is a clear erosion of Joshua’s importance and status in the book of Joshua from edition to edition, as well as with the tendency to emphasize the greatness of Moses and to portray Joshua as his successor, who adhered to Moses’ path and law. The author of the first edition praises Joshua’s personality and characteristics, and highlights his perfect accomplishments. He does not display Joshua as Moses’ servant and disciple, nor even as his successor, but appropriates stories about Moses and relates them to Joshua, emphasizing Joshua’s advantages over Moses. This author presents Joshua as an independent, multi-faceted leader, important in many ways, exceeding Moses, while omitting Moses’ deeds and any reference to the relationship between the two men. He presents “The Book of God’s Law,” written by Joshua as the exclusive law, ignoring the book of the Law of Moses, as well as the giving of the Torah to Moses on Mount Sinai, in the tabernacle and in Transjordan. The second edition criticizes Joshua, and contrasts him to Moses, stressing the latter’s greatness and his achievements in Transjordan. Dtr blurs Joshua’s primacy over Moses, and insists that the “Book of the Law of God” written by Joshua in Shechem and “The Book of the Law of Moses” are the same. In the fourth edition Joshua does not work alone but is part of a collective leadership.

28

Kloppenborg 1981: 347–371; Hess op. cit.: 287–293; Howards 1998: 401–416; Pressler 2002: 106–111; Den Hertog 2003: 61–83; Assis 2004a: 208–231; 2004b: 528–541; Knauf 2008: 191, 179–187; Noort 2009: 105–125; Rösel op. cit.: 342–352; Auld 2012: 281–293, esp. 293.

66

Chapter IV

The First edition (34%): Josh 3:1, 9–17; 4:1–10a, 11, 13, 15–18, 20–23a; 5:2–4, 7–9, 13–15; 6:1–17a, 18– 21, 24, 26–27; 7:1–2a, 5–7a, 8–26; 8:1a, 2–29; 10:1a, 3–4a, 5a, 7–8a, 9–24, 26–43; 11:1–8a, 9–12a, 13– 14, 16–19a, 20a, 21, 23a; 19:49b–50; 24:1a, 2–4a, 6a, 7–11, 13–14a, 15–17, 18b–22, 24–30, 32. The Second edition (32%): Josh 2:1–10a, 12–24; 6:17b, 22–23, 25; 7:2b–4, 7b; 9:1–9, 11–15a, 16–17, 22– 27a, 27c; 10:1b–2, 4b, 5b–6; 11:8b, 19b, 22; 13:1–4a, 6b–14, 16–21a, 23a, 24a, 25–28a, 29a, 30–32a, 33; 14:6–7, 8b–15; 15:1b–12a, 13–19, 21a, 22–63; 16:1–5a, 6–8a, 9–10; 17:7–18; 18:3a, 4–7, 12–20a, 21b, 22–28a; 19: 1a, 2–8a, 9–10a, 11–15, 17a, 21–22, 24a, 25–30, 32a, 33–38, 40b–47, 49–51a; 24: 6b, 12, 18a. The Third edition (17%): Josh 1:1–18; 2:10b–11; 3: 2–8; 4:10b,12, 14, 23b–24; 5: 1, 5–6; 8:1b, 30–35; 9:10, 27b; 10:8b, 25; 11:12b, 15, 20b, 23b; 12:1–24; 14:8a; 18:3b; 21:41–43; 22:1–8; 23; 24:1b, 4b, 5, 14b, 23, 31. The Fourth edition (17%): Josh 4:19; 5:10–12; 7:1a; 13:4b–6a, 15, 21b–22, 23b, 24b, 28b, 29b, 32b; 14:1– 5; 15:1a, 12b, 20, 21b; 16:5b, 8b; 17:1–6; 18:1–2, 8–10, 11, 20b–21a, 21c, 28b; 19:1b, 8b, 10b, 16, 17b, 23, 24b, 31, 32b, 39–40a, 48, 51b; 20:1–9; 21:1–43; 22:9–34; 24:33. Appendix: The Book of Joshua: Sources and Editions

Chapter V The Formation of the Book of Judges V.1 Doublets and Contradictions in the Book of Judges The formation of the book of Judges has been discussed extensively in research.1 Various proposals have been raised, some taking a synchronic approach, others a diachronic. We will suggest a new diachronicsynchronic path, after first presenting conflicting conceptions expressed in the book. V.1.1 Theocracy or Monarchy The book of Judges contains a harsh polemic against monarchy, presenting it as in conflict with theocracy; see especially Judg 8:22–23: “Then the men of Israel said unto Gideon: ‘Rule thou over us, both thou, and thy son, and thy son’s son also; for thou hast saved us out of the hand of Midian.’ And Gideon said unto them: ‘I will not rule over you, neither shall my son rule over you; the LORD shall rule over you.’”2 Moreover, Abimelech, the first king of Israel, does not save his people, nor even deal kindly with them. At the start of his rule he murders his seventy brothers, and at its end he destroys his subjects. In Jotham’s fable (Judg 9:7–21) the king does not fulfill his chief role, affording his subjects protection and safety. On the contrary: he is likened to a thorny and parasitic bush, where anyone who comes for shelter and refuge under its sparse branches gets instead but peril and distress. In the end fire breaks out in the bramble and consumes him and his household. On the other hand, Judg 17–21 reflect a positive attitude to the institution of kingship: the pre-monarchic period is presented as a time of anarchy, while the monarchy is the favored destination and a desirable egress from the social, political and religious chaos. V.1.2 The Tribe of Judah Judah’s importance and superiority are pointed out in a few chapters in the book of Judges (especially in Judg 1 and 17–21). The book opens with the Lord’s election of Judah, and highlights his hegemony (Judg 1:1a–2): “The children of Israel made request to the Lord, saying: ‘Who is to go up first to make war for us against the Canaanites?’ And the Lord said: ‘Judah is to go up: see, I have given the land into his hands.’” Judah’s election and superiority are also attested in Judg 20:18: “And the children of Israel said: ‘Who is to be the first to go up to the fight against the children of Benjamin?’ And the Lord said: ‘Judah is to go up first.’” The similarity of these scriptures is obvious. The pro-Judean tendency is clear from the beginning of Judg 1: in it Judah is mentioned ten times, conducting decisive military victories and capturing important cities, including Jerusalem and Hebron. While he conquers Jerusalem, the tribe of Benjamin is accused of not taking control of the lands of the Jebusites. The author of Judg 1 points out that most of the remaining tribes failed in gaining control of their inheritance. Moreover, he claims: “Whenever Israel became strong, they put the Canaanites to forced labor, without driving them out completely” (Judg 1:28, 30, 33). This statement also alludes to the importance and superiority of Judah, since it probably relates to the reign of King David: the children of Judah and their kings succeeded where the northern tribes failed. Placing Othniel at the top of the list of judges also reflects a proJudean tendency (3:7–11; cf. 1:10–15).

1

Amit 1999a; 1999b; 2009; Assis 2005a; Baker 2016; Becker 1990; Biddle 2012; Brettler 2002; Burney 1970; Butler 2009; Chisholm 2013; Eissfeldt 1965: 266–267; Frolov 2013; Gaß 2005; Gillmayr-Bucher 2012; Gray 1967; Gunn 2005; Hertzberg 19694; Hutton 2018; Irwin 2012; Kaufmann 1962; Lilley 1967; Lindars 1995; McCann 2002; Martin 2009; Matthews 2004; Michelson 2011; Milstein 2016: 150–206; Moore 1895; Niditch 2008; Noth 1962; 1981; O’Brien 1989: 83–98; 1994: Polzin 1980; Pressler 2002; Richter 1963; 1964; 1966; 1970; Römer 2005; Sasson 2014; Schneider 2000; Simpson 1957; Soggin 19872; Spronk 2010; Webb 2012; Williams 1991; Wong 2005; 2006; 2007; Yee 20072. 2 Cf. Davies 1963; Lindars 1965; Wong 2007; Baker op. cit.: 60.

68

Chapter V

On the other hand, in most chapters of the book the tribe of Judah is not mentioned. The song of Deborah lists most tribes, but Judah nowhere appears in it. The only passage that refers to the members of this tribe is in the Samson cycle: the people of Judah are depicted as collaborators with the Philistines, plotting to deliver Samson to the enemy (Judg 15:9–13).3 V.1.3 The Tribe of Benjamin In Judg 1 the author deliberately presents Benjamin in contrast to Judah, as mentioned above: Judah conquers Jerusalem (v. 8), while the tribe of Benjamin is accused of not taking over the lands of the Jebusites (v. 21). Moreover, the story of the Levite’s Concubine (Judg 19–21) is a sharp and severe polemic against Benjamin and the house of Saul. In contrast, in the song of Deborah, Benjamin features as one of the positive tribes (5:14), and Judah is not mentioned in this chapter at all. If the story of Othniel is a later addition, then Ehud the Benjaminite is placed as the first judge.4 V.1.4 The Sins of Israel The book of Judges frequently mentions the sins of Israel, presenting them as the cause of the misfortunes of the people of Israel in this period. The Israelites are accused of concluding alliances with the inhabitants of the land, intermarrying with them, and following other gods (Judg 2:2, 11–23; 3:6–8, 12; 4:1–2 and more). However, a different conception is reflected in other chapters of the book: while the people of Israel are subdued from time to time by their enemies, the reason is not mentioned. In one case God is presented as guilty of abandoning his people, and not as the one accusing them of the sins that led to subjugation by the enemy: “Then Gideon said to Him: ‘O my Lord, if the Lord is with us, why has all this come on us? And where are all His works of power, of which our fathers have given us word, saying: ‘Did not the Lord take us out of Egypt?’ But now he has given us up, handing us over to the power of Midian’” (Judg 6:13). Gideon’s words contain no mention of Israel’s sin, no guilt and no remorse.5 V.1.5 “Major Judges” and “Minor Judges” Twelve judges are enumerated in the book of Judges: six, usually defined by scholars as “major judges” (Othniel, Ehud, Deborah, Gideon, Jephthah and Samson), are presented in detailed salvation stories set in a pragmatic frame (sin, punishment, outcry, salvation, peace). The other six, defined by scholars as “minor judges” (Shamgar, Tola, Jair, Ibzan, Elon and Abdon), are described briefly and differently. The accounts of the minor judges lack any theological aspect: we find no sin, no repentance and no forgiveness. Salvation is mentioned, but no salvation stories are told, and rounded figures typical of the major judges are absent.6 V.2 Four Editions of the Book of Judges The best way to understand the different views expressed in the book of Judges is to posit that four main editions of the book were created over a lengthy and protracted process of formation, each an update of the foregoing. The first edition (A), “The book of the Saviors,” was composed in the north at the beginning of the Age of Monarchy; the second (B), the Judean edition of the book, was written in Jerusalem in the 10th century BCE, during the reign of Solomon; the Deuteronomistic edition (C) was completed in Babylonia ca. 560 BCE; and the Priestly edition (D) was set in the Persian period (ca. 450 BCE). Oral and written traditions, composed during the 12th–11th centuries BCE, were probably incorporated into the first edition.7 The book of Judges is divided into four main parts: Preface (1:1 – 2:5), Introduction (2:6 – 3:6), Stories of the Judges (3:7 – 16:31), Appendices (17–21). This is a striking example of the polemical nature of biblical 3

See Moore 1895; Zakovitch 1982: 135–141; Amit 1999a: 240–241; 2009: 313; Niditch 2008: 159; Biddle 2012: 156– 158; Baker op. cit.: 26, 163, 199. 4 For Ehud’s story see Alonso-Schökel 1961: 148–158; Amit 1989; 1999a: 171–197; Gunn 2005: 38–49; Sasson 2009; 2014: 221–242; Baker op. cit.: 69–77. 5 Cf. Martin 2010; Sasson 2014: 331. 6 Cf. Moore 1895: xxviii–xxix; Kaufmann 1962: 46–48, 213; Hertzberg 1954; Hauser 1975; Galil 2004; Gaß 2005: 357– 360; Baker 2016: 150–156. 7 Galil 1994b: 8–17; 2018c.

The Formation of the Book of Judges

69

historiography. As noted above, the book contains a polemic concerning the character of the desirable regime for Israel: theocracy or monarchy; a vicious diatribe against the tribe of Benjamin and the house of Saul; and mostly an ongoing polemic over the image of the age of the Judges, and over the role and contribution of the various tribes and personalities active in this period.8 V.2.1 The First Edition of the Book of Judges (“The Book of the Saviors”) The first edition of the book of Judges, “The book of the Saviors” (or “The book of the Kingdom of God realized by the Saviors”) is an early – if not the earliest – historiographic composition written in Israel. It should be dated to the early days of King Saul (ca. 1025 BCE). The purpose of this composition was to teach its audience the virtues of the kingdom of heaven being realized by the saviors, and to highlight its supremacy vis-à-vis the kingdom of flesh and blood.9 This edition encompassed, in my opinion, the main layer of Judg 3–16, as well as that of the first chapters of Samuel (1 Sam 1–2, 7–8, 10–12), as follows (HT): Judg 3:13*, 15–30a (Ehud); 4:2b–3a, 4a, 5–24; 5:1– 7, 9–31a (Deborah and Barak); 6:2–6, 11–24, 33–40; 7:1–25; 8:22–23, 28b, 29–32 (Gideon); 9:1–57 (Abimelech); 10:17–18; 11:1–40 (Jephthah); 13:2–25; 14:1–19; 15:1–19; 16:1–31a (Samson); 1 Sam 1:1– 12, 17–28; 2:1–10a, 11, 18b–21; 7:5–6a, 7–14; 8:4–5*, 6–7, 9–17, 19–22; 10:17–27; 11:1–15; 12:1–6a, 16b– 20a, 23 (Samuel and Saul). The early layer of the book of Judges describes this period not only as one in which the advantages of the kingdom of the Lord are demonstrated, but also as one in which the people do not sin against God: the Israelites are attacked from time to time, but God always hastens to their aid, and sends them a “savior” (for this term see 3:15 and more; the term “judges” is attested only in the third edition of the book). The “Saviors” operate with paltry resources, but they succeed in overcoming aggressive kings with regular armies (such as the kings of Ammon, Moab, “Canaan,” and more), which shows that king and armies are no guarantee of defense or victory on the battlefield. On the contrary, the kings are portrayed derisively, in life as in death; where the desired regime is the “kingdom of God” realized by his messengers, the saviors. As noted, the book of the Saviors contains a harsh, overt and covert, polemic against the monarchy. Special mention should be made of Abimelech who murders his seventy brothers, and destroys his subjects (as stated above).10 The opposition of A’s author to monarchy is also evinced in 1 Sam 8 and 12: the people’s demand for a king is presented as wrong in the eyes of God and Samuel, and as a repulsion of the Lord: “They have not been turned away from you, but they have been turned away from me, not desiring me to be king over them” (1 Sam 8:7); and “But today you are turned away from your God, who himself has been your savior from all your troubles and sorrows; and you have said to him, ‘Put a king over us’” (1 Sam 10:19, see also 12:17). In 1 Sam 8:1–17 the author emphasizes only the monarchy’s shortcomings, as an oppressive and exploitative institution: “He will take your fields and your vine-gardens and your olive-gardens, all the best of them, and give them to his servants. He will take a tenth of your seed and of the fruit of your vines and give it to his servants. He will take your menservants and your maidservants, and the best of your oxen and your asses and put them to his work. He will take a tenth of your sheep: and you will be his servants.”11

8

On the polemics in the book of Judges see Sweeney 1997; Amit 2000a; 2000b; Wong 2007; Galil 2012b: 299–301. For the book of the Saviors see Richter 1963; 1964; Mayes 1985: 10–13; Soggin 19872: 17–33; Becker 1990; Galil 1994b: 9–12; Guillaume 2004: 14–26, 72–75; Römer 2005: 37; Amit 2009: 315; Biddle 2012: 8–9. In Richter’s opinion the first edition of a Retterbuch (Judg 3–9) was compiled in the days of Jehu. A northern Deuteronomic redactor revised this edition by adding the framework passages, moving from the anti-monarchical focus to the theme of retribution. A Deuteronomic redactor in Judah later composed the account of Othniel, and also gave some southern content to the 2nd edition. Dtr combined (in exile) the 3rd edition of his Retterbuch with the lists of minor judges and the Jephtah and Samson stories, and also composed Judg 2:7, 10–13, 14, 15aαb, 16, 18aβb, 19; 3:10–11, 31; 4:4b–5, 16; 10:6–16. My attitude is very different, but I agree with Richter that different generations of Israelites read the stories of Judges in different ways. I also agree with him about the anti-monarchical flavor of the “book of Saviors,” but in my opinion the “book of Saviors” was composed in the days of Saul, and included all saviors attested in Judges and Samuel (see below). 10 For Abimelech’s story see Bluedorn 2001: 182–263; Guillaume op. cit.: 55–71; Gunn 2005: 121–132; Niditch 2008: 106–118; Heller 2010; Biddle op. cit.: 101–112; Sasson 2014: 373–415; Baker 2016: 266–269: 277–280; Milstein 2016: 150–160. 11 1 Sam 8:14–17; see Clements 1974; Schmid 1976; McCarter 1980a; Klein 1983: 72–79; Gordon 1986a; Elat 1998; Dietrich 2011; Garsiel 2012: 192–195; Milstein op. cit.: 160–173. 9

70

Chapter V

But even in this idyllic description of the Kingdom of Heaven, the author of the book of the Saviors does not forgo a polemic against the tribe of Judah. The only passage referring to the members of this tribe is found in the Samson cycle: the people of Judah are depicted as the Philistines’ collaborators, who hand Samson over to the enemy (15:9–13).12 Moreover, Judah’s neighbors and allies, the tribes of Simeon and Levi, are not numbered at all; Reuben, “the firstborn of Israel,” is mentioned only once – in the song of Deborah, as one of the tribes that did not join in the war against the Canaanites (5:15–16); so of the four first sons of Lea, the author has criticized two and ignored the others.13 In this edition, all the saviors without exception are descended from the tribes of the house of Joseph: Ephraim and Manasseh, Joseph’s sons; Benjamin, Joseph’s brother (who is also counted as member of the house of Joseph, see 1 Sam 19:21);14 or from the sons of Bilhah, Rachel’s handmaiden – Dan and Naphtali. It is therefore reasonable to assume that this first edition of Judges was composed in the land of the house of Joseph, by people who opposed the establishment of a monarchy, at the end of the 11th century BCE. It is reasonable to suppose that already in this edition of the book of Judges, the “saviors” (except Samson) are presented not as local heroes who operated in a limited area, but as saviors of all Israel. The author emphasizes that the saviors act in “the spirit of the Lord” and as messengers of God, and not out of their own power and virtue. Samson is not a mythological hero in the book of Judges, but a human being dependent on powers awarded to him by the Lord.15 The author of the first edition inserted into his composition legendary elements (especially in the stories of Samson), and sometimes presented complementary traditions, for example, two versions (prose and poetry) of Deborah’s war against the Canaanites (Judg 4 and 5). The first edition of the book of Judges was not arranged in chronological order, and no continuity of the saviors is indicated. It is set in an associative-chiastic order. The book opens with the story of a Benjaminite savior, Ehud, and concludes with the story of Saul of the tribe of Benjamin (1 Sam 10:17 – 11:15). After Ehud comes Deborah, and before Saul the author places the story of Samuel. Deborah and Samuel operate in the same area, south of Mount Ephraim (Samuel lived in Ramah, and Deborah is associated with the area between Ramah and Bethel). Both nominate a savior (Barak and Saul – Judg 4:6 ff.; and 1 Sam 10:17–25); and in both literary units, songs are presented by women (Deborah and Hanah). The story of Deborah mentions Barak of the tribe of Naphtali, and during the rule of the Philistines (the time of Samuel) Samson the Danite operates (Samson is mentioned before Samuel in this edition of the book). Barak and Samson are descended from the tribes of Bilha, Rachel’s handmaiden. The fourth judge in this edition is Gideon, and before Samson, Jephthah is attested: both Gideon and Jephthah are from the tribe of Manasseh (Gideon from the west, Jephthah from the east). In the first literary unit the author presents three stories with four saviors: Ehud, Deborah, Barak and Gideon; in the second literary unit four saviors are again attested in three stories: Jephthah, Samson, Samuel and Saul. At the pivot of this literary chiastic structure the author sets the story of Abimelech, using it as a negative example to illustrate the shortcomings of the monarchy and present the results of the aversion to the Kingdom of God. The fourth figure in the first unit is Gideon, who rejects the proposal that he become king, and presents monarchy in contrast to theocracy; and the fourth figure in the second unit, Saul, is the human being who is actually nominated instead of God as king of Israel, and through his nomination the aversion to theocracy is realized. In addition to the chiastic principle, an associative principle in setting the stories of this edition may be observed.16 a. Similar motifs are attested in the stories of Ehud and Deborah, e.g., Eglon and Sisera are killed by treachery when they trust their enemies; b. in the stories of Deborah and Gideon the skeptical hero needs encouragement before saving Israel (Deborah encourages Barak; the Angel encourages Gideon – 4:6–9; 6: 11–24); c. the relation between Gideon and Abimelech is well known; d. Abimelech and Jephthah are sons

12

For this episode see Moore 1895: 344; Boling 1975: 238; Zakovitch 1982: 135–141; Amit 1999a: 240–241; 2009: 313; Niditch 2008: 159; Biddle 2012: 156–158; Baker 2016: 26, 163, 199. 13 For Deborah’s song see Kaufmann 1962: 128–147; Globe 1975; Caquot 1978; 1986; Fokkelman 1995; Amit 1999a: 92–115; Gaß 2005: 266–270; Wong 2007; Mayfield 2009; Frolov 2013: 120–154; Baker op. cit.: 179–182, 218–225, 230–233; Barton 2016: 22. 14 See Dietrich 2015: ad loc. 15 For Samson’s story see Blenkinsopp 1963; Crenshaw 1978; Zakovitch 1982; Hendel 1987: 42–43; Alter 1990; Niditch 1990; Gunn 2005: 170–230. 16 Zakovitch 1983.

The Formation of the Book of Judges

71

of “another” woman (not the chief wife), and both are supported by good-for-nothings (9:4; 11:3; both mothers are unnamed);17 e. Samson and Jephthah determine their fate with their own mouths: Samson gives away his secret to Delilah (16:4–31) and Jephthah vows to sacrifice the first person who steps out of his house to meet him; this proves to be his only daughter, whom ultimately he is bound to sacrifice (11:30–31, 34–40); f. Both Samson and Samuel fight the Philistines; the hair of both must never be cut (Judg 13:5; 16:17; 1 Sam 1:11); their mothers were barren (Judg 13:2; 1 Sam 1:2, 5); and the opening patterns of both stories are similar (see below): Judg 13:2:

And there was a certain man from Zorah,

1 Sam 1:1:

And there was a certain man from Ramathaim of the Zuphites, from the hill-country of Ephraim, named Elkanah

from the clan of the Danites,

named Manoah

Most savior stories end in a similar formula (see table 1 below): No. 1

Savior Ehud

Reference Judg 3:30

2

Deborah

Judg 4:23–24

3

Gideon

Judg 8:28

4

Jephthah

Judg 11:33

5

Samuel

1 Sam 7:13

Closing Formula So humbled (‫ )ותכנע‬was Moab that day beneath the hand of Israel And God humbled (‫ )ויכנע‬on that day Jabin, King of Canaan, before the descendants of Israel And humbled (‫ )ויכנע‬was Midian before the descendants of Israel And humbled (‫ )ויכנעו‬were the descendants of Ammon before the descendants of Israel And humbled (‫ )ויכנעו‬were the Philistines and did not come into the country of Israel again ...

Table 1: The Book of the Saviors: Closing Formulae It is possible that the book of the Saviors was written in the Proto-Canaainte script, which is attested in the Qeiyafa inscription. This pictorial script was used by the Israelites in the late 11th – early 10th century BCE.18 V.2.2 The Second Edition of the Book of Judges (The Judahite Edition) The author of the Judahite edition of the book of Judges (the second edition of the book = author B) is in my opinion also the author of the book of Samuel (see chapter VI). To the book of Judges he added mainly Judg 1 and the appendices (Judg 17–21), and from it he omitted the early layer of 1 Sam 1–12 (which he transferred to the book of Samuel). This author engages in a polemic directly and indirectly with the theological and historical views set out in the book of the Saviors. Judg 17–21 reflect a positive attitude to the institution of kingship: the pre-monarchic period is presented as a time of anarchy, while the monarchy is a desired goal and the desirable escape from the social, political and religious chaos. This author’s affection for the tribe of Judah is salient in Judg 1 and in the appendices: he stresses Judah’s importance, and its centrality in the period considered.19 By contrast, this edition contains a sharp and severe polemic against Benjamin, and apparently against Ephraim, too. The Rachel tribes are no longer merely the tribes from which the saviors descended: they also stir up internecine strife and are responsible for political failure, moral decay and ritual sins. These include the Canaanites’ dispossession, Gideon’s ephod, Micah’s graven image, and the story of the Levite’s Concubine. Author B added to the book of Judges the following passages (HT): Judg 1:1b–36; 2:1–5 (Introduction); 3:[8]*, 9–10a, 10c (Othniel); 6:7–10, 25–32; 8:1–21, 24–27 (Gideon); 12:1–6 (Jephthah); 17:1–13; 18:1– 30a, 31b (Micah and the Danites); 19:1–30; 20:1–27a, 28b–48; 21:1–19a, 20–25 (the story of the Levite’s

17

See Brenner 2013: 128–129. Galil 2010a. 19 On Judg 1 see Auld 1975; 1998: 79–101; Mullen 1984; Kallai 1998: 243–260; Amit 1999a: 27–46; Schneider 2000: 1–23; Pressler 2002: 127–133; Rake 2006; Van Bekkum 2012; Baker 2016: 124–126. 18

72

Chapter V

Concubine). On the other hand, the stories of Samuel and Saul were transferred from the book of the Saviors to the book of Samuel by the same author. The second edition of the book was composed in Jerusalem in the 10th century BCE, during the reign of Solomon. Evidence for this is the sharp polemic against Benjamin that it contains, which cannot be dated after the time of Solomon, mainly because after the schism, Benjamin was the one and only northern tribe that joined Judah and the house of David. In a few of the sections added by author B to the book of Judges there is tension between Benjamin and Judah – a remnant from the period of the fierce struggle between the house of David and the house of Saul, as well as the rivalry between the tribe of Ephraim and the tribe of Judah. Ephraim was probably one of the dominant tribes in the pre-monarchic period, while Judah was a small tribe, apparently of little importance. Only after David’s coronation as king of Israel did Judah become the most important tribe, favored by David and Solomon and receiving preferred status over the other tribes of Israel. The story of the Levite’s Concubine is set in this edition instead of the story of Saul’s acts as a savior (at the end of this edition). The people of Gibeah, Saul’s hometown, are displayed as villains, by means of metaphors appearing in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen 19) and motifs presented in 1 Sam 11:7. Moreover, the people of Jabesh-Gilead are mentioned in the story of the Levite’s Concubine and in 1 Sam 11 and 31:11–12.20 The polemic against Ephraim is presented in the book of Judges three times (8:1–3; 12:1–6; 17–18). In the first two sections, the sons of Ephraim are presented as a loudmouthed mob trying – but failing – to enforce their supremacy over the tribes of Israel. In the first story Gideon reaches a compromise with them, but in the second their brash actions cause a bloody and bitter civil war, leaving thousands of Israelites dead.21 In contrast to these two events, the author of this edition twice points to Judah’s superiority and election (1:1–2; 20:18): in both cases God elects Judah, and he is very successful, leading the people of Israel to notable achievements; Ephraim’s activities achieve nothing but sheer disaster.22 In the story of Micah and the Danites, the children of Ephraim are portrayed as cheats and sinners. Micah steals a fortune from his mother: eleven hundred shekels of silver (the same amount guaranteed by the Philistines to Delilah for Samson’s extradition – 16:5). After he confesses the theft to his mother, she promises to dedicate the stolen money to the Lord; but only a part of it is donated. This gives rise to an additional sin: the children of Ephraim use the remainder to make a graven image, which they erect in their city (cf. Ex 20:3; Deut 5:8).23 Author B probably added the description of Gideon’s war against the people of Succoth and Penuel (8:13– 17), which results in the annihilation of the people of Penuel at the hands of Gideon. There is also a hidden polemic against Gideon and the house of Joseph, hinting at his son Abimelech’s murder of the men of Shechem, and pointing out that not just the king (Abimelech) may harm his subjects, but also the “savior” (Gideon).24 In another passage added to the book by author B, Gideon is described as a sinner who prepares the ephod, which becomes a “moqesh,” a cause of sin for Gideon and his house (8:27 cf. 2:3). Author B mentions the sins of Israel at the very beginning of the age of the Judges (2:1–5). The Israelites are accused of making alliances with the inhabitants of the land, as well as not breaking the altars of their gods: “And you are to make no agreement with the people of this land; you are to see that their altars are broken down: but you have not given ear to my voice” (2:2). They even build an altar of Baʿal in their own city, Ophrah, the hometown of Gideon/Jerubaʿal (6:25–32). True, Gideon destroys the altar of Baʿal, but the people of his city do not praise him; on the contrary, they wish to execute him, and only the intervention of 20

For the Levite’s Concubine story, see Moore 1895: 402–454; Niditch 1982; 2008: 185–211; Block 1990; Bohmbach 1999; Amit op. cit.: 337–367; Schneider op. cit.: 245–285; Edenburg 2003; Guillaume 2004: 204–226; Eynikel 2005; Gunn 2005: 243–275; Yee 20072; Biddle 2012: 181–205; Stanley 2013; Milstein 2016: 175–206. 21 For the Judg 8:1–3 and 12:1–6, see Amit op. cit.: 145–146, 209–211; Schneider op. cit.: 118, 183–186; Niditsch 2008: 103–104; Biddle op. cit.: 94–95, 133–135. 22 For the Judg 1:1–2 and 20:18, see Lindars 1995: 10–12; Amit op. cit.: 32, 281–282, 302; Schneider op. cit.: 3–4, 274; Rake 2006; Niditsch op. cit.: 38, 204; Biddle op. cit.: 21, 195. 23 For the story of Micah and the Danites see Noth 1962; Malamat 1970; Cross 1973: 198–200; Amit op. cit.: 257–279; 1999b: 313–336; 2009: 310; Weitzman 1999; Bauer 2000; Guillaume 2004: 129–143; Gunn 2005: 231–242; Bray 2006; Yee 20072; Niditsch op. cit.: 172–185; Heller 2010: 230, 235; Biddle op. cit.: 172–181; Frolov 2013: 287–300; Hutton 2018. 24 For Judg 8:13–17 see Amit op. cit.: 151; McCann 2002: 69; Assis 2005a; Niditch op. cit.: 104; Biddle op. cit.: 95–96.

The Formation of the Book of Judges

73

Joash his father keeps him alive. The demand of the men of Ophrah is phrased similarly to that of the men of Gibeah and the peoples of Sodom and Gomorrah: cf. Judg 6:30: “Send out your son to be put to death, for pulling down the altar of Baʿal and cutting down the holy tree which was by it;” cf. Gen 19:22: “Send out that man who came to your house;” and Gen 19:5: “Send them out to us.” The four opening and closing formulae for the book’s appendices were also composed by author B (see table 2 below).25 17:6 18:1 19:1 21:25

In those days In those days And in those days In those days

there was no king in Israel there was no king in Israel When there was no king in Israel there was no king in Israel

A man what was right in his eyes he would do

A man what was right in his eyes he would do

Table 2: The Four Opening and Closing Formulae for the Appendices of the Book of Judges The second edition of the book of Judges, like the first, is set in an associative-chiastic order, not in chronological order. It opens and closes with the election of Judah by the Lord (1:1–2; 20:18). In both literary units Judah is presented in contrast to Benjamin, and the motif of the Israelites’ weeping is attested in both (2:1– 5; 20:26). The stories of Othniel and Ehud follow the introduction, also pointing out Judah’s superiority over Benjamin, since the Judahite savior is presented first and the Benjaminite only second. After Ehud, author B inserts the story of Deborah (of Ephraim), which mentions Barak of Naphtali; and after the story of Samson the Danite, he inserts the first appendix: Micah (of Ephraim) and the Danites. The next judge is Gideon (with his son Abimelech); and before Samson, Jephthah is attested (with his daughter), as in the first edition: both Gideon and Jephthah are from the tribe of Manasseh (Gideon from the west, Jephthah from the east). The polemic against Ephraim is deliberately presented in these two stories (Gideon and Jephthah). After describing the war against the Canaanites in the first chapter, the author inserts a short prophetic section (2:1–5) with obvious connection to Judg 1: God’s angel appears to the children of Israel near Bethel (a place called “Bochim” in Judg 20:26; 21:1–2). He blames Israel for violating the divine command to destroy the Canaanite altars, and not to form alliances with them. The angel informs them that they will be punished for these sins (see Judg 2:3): a. they will fail to complete the conquest (“I will not send them out from before you”); b. the Canaanites will constitute a threat to Israel and will be their enemies (“they will be a danger to you);” c. Israel will not withstand the temptation and will adhere to their gods: “for you their gods will be a cause of falling” [= lemoqesh].26 In author B’s description of the age of Saviors, God’s verdict presented by the angel in Judg 2:3 is fully realized (in the days of Joash, Gideon and Micah, all of them from the house of Joseph): a. the Israelites have not completed the conquest of the land (see Judg 1); b. the Canaanites assemble to threaten and attack Israel (see especially Judg 4–5); c. the Israelites do not resist the temptation and cling to the Canaanites’ gods – at least three times: a. the people of Ophrah build an altar to Baʿal in their own city (6:25–32); b. Gideon destroys this altar, but he himself builds an ephod which becomes a moqesh for him and for his house (8:27: “And Gideon made an ephod from them and put it up in his town Ophrah; and all Israel went after it there and were false to the Lord; and it became a cause of sin for Gideon and his house”); c. Micha also makes a sculpture, which is also called Ephod (17:3–5: “Then his mother took two hundred shekels of silver and gave them to a metal-worker who made a pictured image and a metal image from them: and it was in the house of Micah. And the man Micah had a house of gods; and he made an Ephod and family gods and put one of his sons in the position of priest”). In sum, author B describes “the age of the Saviors” as a period of anarchy, emphasizing Judah’s hegemony and superiority in a bitter polemic against the tribes of Ephraim and Benjamin. Contrary to the description in the first edition of Judges, the descendants of Rachel’s sons are described not only as the saviors of Israel but also as the makers of civil wars, and as responsible for moral injustice and sins; these include non-shattering

25

Cf. Dumbrell 1983. For Judg 2:1–5 see Lilley 1967: 94–95; Lindars 1995: 73–79; Neef 1995; Amit 2000; Gaß 2005: 194–195; Niditch op. cit.: 49; Biddle op. cit.: 33–35; Sasson 2014: 177–184.

26

74

Chapter V

of the Canaanites’ altars, building altars to Baʿal, making the ephod in the time of Gideon, and preparing a graven image in the time of Micah. V.2.3 The Third Edition of the Book of Judges (The Deuteronomistic Edition) The polemic over the image of the period of the “saviors” continues into the Deuteronomistic edition of the book. Dtr presents the period of the “saviors” negatively, and goes even further in blackening it than author B. In his perception, the “saviors,” whom he calls “judges,” are characterized by recurrent sinning, increasing from generation to generation, and a deepening of the chasm between God and his people. The book of the Saviors, apparently written at the beginning of the monarchic age to highlight the advantages of the Kingdom of Heaven, becomes, in the Deuteronomistic edition of Judges, a gloomy and chilling account of one of the gravest crises in the history of the relations of Israel with their God.27 Dtr wishes to stress through the book of Judges more tenets of his world view, including the great importance of repentance; the endless cyclicity of the relationship between God and the people of Israel; insistence that there have been other difficult low points in the history of Israel, but salvation and redemption always followed. Moreover, Dtr wishes to teach his readers that even in their exile, God is constantly attentive to the desires of their heart and to their expectations to return to Him; as He protected and saved them in the past, so will he in the future deliver them and bring them back to the Land of Israel.28 Dtr added to the book of Judges the following passages (HT): 1:1a; 2: 6–23 (Introduction); 3:4–8, 10b, 11 (Othniel); 3:12, 14, 30b (Ehud); 4:1–2a, 3b, 4b; 5:31b (Deborah); 6:1; 8:28a, 33–35 (Gideon); 10:6–16 (Jephthah); 13:1, 5b; 15:20; 16:31b; 18:30b (Samson).29 The first words of the book of Judges (“Now after the death of Joshua”) connect Judges with Joshua, and set the time of the events described in the first chapter of Judges to the days of the elders who outlived Joshua; this is also evident from Judg 2:6–10.30 Dtr added to the book of Judges two relatively large passages: Judg 2:11–23; 3:4–8 and 10:6–16. In the other cases he just inserted short chronological notes and pragmatic frameworks for the stories of the Judges (see below). Dtr presents a clear and unequivocal distinction between the time of Joshua and the elders who followed him, on the one hand, and the Judges, on the other hand. In the days of Joshua and the elders, the people of Israel were loyal to the Lord and did not worship other gods. But after the demise of that generation the new one left the Lord and worshiped only other gods (Judg 2:12–13, 17, 19; 10:6). Dtr reformulates Othniel’s story and presents it as a paradigm for the endless cyclicity of the relation between the God and Israel. He also sets out his ideas in the introduction to the book, in 2:11–19. This pragmatic framework includes five main components: a. Sin: (2:11–13, 17, 19; 3:7, 12; 4:1; 6:1; 10:6; 13:1);31 b. Punishment / Subjugation: (2:14–15; 3:8, 12; 4:4; 6:1; 10:7; 13:1); c. Outcry / Repentance (2:18c; 3:9, 15; 4:3; 6:6; 10:10); d. Salvation (2:16, 18a; 3:9, 15); e. Peace (3:11, 30; 5:31; 8:28. See also 2:18b). In Dtr’s opinion, the era described in the book of Judges is divided into two major periods. First is the time of the first four judges: Othniel, Ehud, Deborah and Gideon, which was an era of peace of 40 or 80 years. But then follows the age of the three unsatisfactory leaders: Abimelech, Jephthah and Samson, characterized by a worsening of sins and cruelty (Abimelech murders his brothers and his subjects, Jephthah kills his 27

For the Deuteronomistic edition of Judges see Noth 1981: 42–53; Eissfeldt 1965: 266–267; Cross 1968; Smend 1971; 19842: 116; Nelson 1981b: 43–53; Van Seters 1983: 337–346; O’Brien 1994: 83–98; Galil 2004: 413–421; 2017; Amit 2009: 297–309; Biddle op. cit.: 9–11; Baker 2016: 293–299. 28 I agree with Noth that “the linguistic evidence is the most reliable basis for attributing parts of the various traditions to Dtr” (Noth op. cit.: 5). A full list of the 20 Deuteronomistic cliché attested in the book of Judges is presented in the appendix of this book (nos. 28, 36, 37, 46, 61, 73, 75, 76, 79, 104, 105, 106, 108, 110, 120, 132, 134, 137, 138, 140). 29 In a few cases the original was probably rewritten by Dtr: a. Judg 3:7–8, 10b, and 11 were composed by Dtr, and vv. 9 and 10a, c by the author of the second edition of Judges. The original text was probably rewritten by Dtr who deleted the words “And Cushan-rishathaim king of Aram smote Israel” (‫)*ויך כושן רשעתים מלך ארם את ישראל‬, from the beginning of v. 9, to avoid repetition of these words, which are attested in v. 8; b. Judg 3:12 and 14 were composed by Dtr, and v. 13 by the author of the book of Saviors. The original text of v. 13 was probably rewritten by Dtr who deleted the words “Eglon the king of Moab” (‫ )*עגלון מלך מואב‬at the beginning of v. 13 to avoid repetition of these words, which are attested in v. 12, so we may read the original text as follows: “and [Eglon the king of Moab] gathered unto him the children of Ammon …” (‫)ויאסף אליו ]*עגלון מלך מואב[ את בני עמון‬. 30 Galil 2004; cf. Neef 2012. 31 For this cliché see Weinfeld 1972: 339 and cf. McCarter 1980a: 20, 270; Amit 2009: 301–302.

The Formation of the Book of Judges

75

daughter). The four first periods of subjection lasted only 53 years (8+18+20+7), and were followed by a continuous period of subjection of 58 years (18 years to Ammon, and 40 years to the Philistines, without any peace in between). This depiction of the second half of the age of the Judges conforms well with the description of anarchy and moral corruption presented in the appendices to the book, and it is likely that in Dtr’s opinion the events described in them relate to the period of the Philistine subjection. It also accords with the sin of Gideon’s ephod, which dates towards the end of Gideon’s life. The chronological notes in the book of Judges were introduced by Dtr – not earlier. The “period of the Judges” described in the Deuteronomistic edition of the book lasted in its author’s opinion 314 years.32 Dtr goes even farther than author B in demonizing the age of the Judges. In his view, it is characterized by repeated sins of the children of Israel, who are punished again and again, but still do not learn their lesson. On the contrary, their sins constantly multiply, and the abyss between God and Israel continues to deepen. The book of the Saviors, which was composed to idealize the advantages of a theocracy, now in Dtr’s hands tells of a gloomy and bitter crisis in the relation between God and Israel. But this sharp break is not intended to instill in his listeners a sense of despair and cessation. Quite the reverse: Dtr wishes through the story of the Judges to teach his readers that the relationship has known low and extremely difficult points, even a subjugation of 58 years, but all throughout, the people kept crying out to God. He did not disappoint them and appointed a judge to save them, wishing to teach them that God is constantly attentive to the desires of Israel in exile, and looks forward to their return: just as He was their savior in the past, so will it be in the future, and ultimately He will restore Israel to their land. V.2.4 The Fourth Edition of the Book of Judges (The Priestly Edition) The Priestly edition of the book of Judges was set in the Persian period (ca. 450 BCE). The author of this fourth edition ( = Author D) added to the book of Judges the following passages (HT): 3:1–3 (Introduction); 3:31 (Shamgar); 10:1–5; 12:7–15 (the Minor Judges); 18:31; 20:27b–28a; 21:19a (the Appendices). Author D completes the quorum of judges to twelve – the number of the tribes of Israel, and stresses their privileged and honored social status (this trend may be explained by the rise in importance of genealogies in the Persian period). A few judges mentioned in this edition are actually just personifications of family names enumerated in the genealogies in the Pentateuch and the book of Chronicles. This is especially noticeable in the description of Judge Tola son of Puah, who dwelt (“yosheb”) in Shamir, see Judg 10:1: “Tola, the son of Puah … a man of Issachar … he was living in Shamir in the hill-country of Ephraim.” The relation to the genealogies of Issachar is clear, for the first four sons of Issachar were Tola, Puah, Jashub and Shimron: see 1 Chron 7:1: “And of the sons of Issachar: Tola and Puah, Jashub and Shimron, four;” and Num 26:23–25: “The sons of Issachar by their families: Tola … Puah … Jashub … Shimron.” The accounts of the minor judges are clearly secondary in the book of Judges. They are devoid of any theological aspect: in these passages we find no sin, no repentance, and no forgiveness. Salvation is mentioned, but no salvation stories are related, and even the typical rounded figures are not mentioned. Moreover, the interpolation of these passages in Judg 10 and 12 evidently contradicts Dtr’s attitude to the period of the Judges, since, in his opinion, the Israelites were on a downward slope: “as soon as the judge was dead, they would relapse into deeper corruption than their forefathers” (Judg 2:19). Accordingly, the reaction of the Lord changed: “I will deliver you no more” (Judg 10:13), so there was no more room for prosperity and success, but only for judgment, decline and oppression. As suggested above, Dtr divides the epoch of the Judges into two main parts: the period of the four saviors (Othniel, Ehud, Deborah, Gideon), who succeeded in their mission, and the period of the three judges/leaders who disappointed: Abimelech, Jephthah and Samson.33 The period of these last three leaders is described by Dtr as dark and cruel, without rest or peace, deeply corrupt, and one of the lowest points in the relationship between God and His chosen people. This is exactly the point where author D of Judges inserts the accounts of the minor judges, in an effort to balance Dtr’s harsh and gloomy description of the relation between God and the Israelites: “In the midst of escalating social

32 33

For more details, see chapter II of this book, and cf. also Washburn 1990; Faiman 1993. Amit 1999a: 8–9.

76

Chapter V

chaos, the notices of the minor judges serve as a refreshing interlude of order, family growth and prosperity.”34 It is also clear that the chronological notes related to the minor Judges were not included in the Deuteronomistic edition of the book.35 So it is evident that the passages which describe the minor judges were added by author D of the book. They are formulated on the basis of a fixed pattern consisting of three primary components: first the judge’s personal name and his city’s name are presented, with the addition of the words “and he judged” or “and he rose up” plus the words “and after him came” or “after,” emphasizing the judges’ chronological continuity. Next recorded is the number of years he judged Israel. Sometimes this part also enumerates his sons, daughters and possessions, aimed to highlight his high social and economic status. The third part of the pattern describes his death and burial place (usually salvation is not mentioned, except 3:31 and 10:1). The description of Jair the Gileadite is presented now as an example: “(a) And after him came Jair the Gileadite, (b) who was judge over Israel for twenty-two years. And he had thirty sons, who went on thirty young asses; and they had thirty towns in the land of Gilead, which are named Havvoth-Jair to this day, (c) And at the death of Jair his body was put to rest in the earth in Kamon” (10:3–5). Judg 12:7 was probably composed by author D, aiming to strengthen the link between Jephthah and the three minor judges mentioned in 12:8–15. The six-year period of Jephthah’s leadership clearly contradicts the chronology of the Deuteronomistic edition of the book. Moreover, the obscure observation “and he was buried in the cities of Gilead” indicates that author D has no real tradition about his burial place.36 Author D added the passages describing the minor judges to the book in an associative-chiastic order: Shamgar’s activity is placed after Ehud’s story, since Shamgar is mentioned in the song of Deborah (5: 6). On the other side of the literary structure the story of Samson is set. Both (Shamgar and Samson) fought the Philistines – the similarities between the stories are evident (cf. 3:31; 15:15–16). After the insertion of Shamgar’s story, author D strengthens the associative connection between it and the story of Ehud through the words “and after him there was …”. But Ehud’s death, mentioned in the first verse of Judg 4 (“and Ahud died”), which reinforces the link between Ehud and Deborah in the Deuteronomistic edition of the book, is not deleted. So Shamgar’s story is clearly a later interpolation, since Judg 4 opens with the death of Ehud and not of Shamgar.37 Moreover, Shamgar’s story is placed between Ehud (Benjamin) and Deborah (Ephraim); and the stories of Samson (Dan) and Micha (Ephraim) and the Danites are set before the story of the Levite’s Concubine, which is related to Gibeah of Benjamin. The story of Abdon (of Ephraim) is set before Samson’s story. The presentation of Shamgar as a savior links him to Ehud and Othniel on the one hand, and to the minor judges on the other.38 The Zebulunite judges, who represent the north, are placed before Abdon the Ephraimite – a placement that builds a chiastic parallel between them and the story of Barak and Deborah: Barak led the northern tribes of Naphtali and Zebulun in the war against the Canaanites, and Deborah was probably of the tribe of Ephraim. At the crossing of the chiastic structure are Gideon and Tola on the one hand, and Jair and Jephthah on the other (the first two are from the west, the other two from the east). The “land which is still to be taken” is described by author D in 3:1–3, a passage obviously related to Josh 13:2–6. This is another indication that author D of Joshua is actually one and the same as author D of Judges.39 In contrast to the detailed presentation in Josh 13, the text in Judg 3 is laconic. But it is identical to Joshua 13 since it mentions the five Philistine kings, as well as the people of Mount Lebanon, from Mount Hermon to Lebo-Hamath.40 The note about Phinehas in Judg 20:28 (“And Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron, was in attendance before it in those days”) is a clear addition by the Priestly editor of the book of Judges. It is similar to comments by author D in the book of Joshua, which were added in order to point out the activity of leaders 34

Pressler 2002: 194. See Galil 2004, and chapter II, above. 36 For Judg 12:7 see Moore 1895: 310; Boling 1975: 213–214; Schneider 2000: 185; Barthélemy 1982: 106; Amit 1999a: 212; Sasson 2014: 455. 37 Lindars 1995: 156; Brettler 2002: 24; Biddle 2012: 51. 38 For Shamgar’s story see Fensham 1961; Danielus 1963; Van Selms 1964; Craigie 1972; Lindars op. cit.: 156–159; Snyman 2005; Niditch 2008: 58–59; Biddle op. cit.: 51; Sasson 2014: 242–245. 39 See Galil 2018c. 40 For Judg 3:1–3 Kaufmann 1962: 101–102; Boling 1975: 77–79; Lindars 1995: 112–116; Gaß 2005: 218–220; Sasson 2014: 198–206. 35

The Formation of the Book of Judges

77

of the house of Aaron (Phinehas here; Eleazar and Phinehas in Joshua).41 This addition contradicts Dtr’s opinion that the stories described in the appendices date to the Philistine subjection period, which ended in Samuel’s time. Author D probably also added the notes in 18:31 and 21:19b, both related to Shiloh. The first points out that the icon of Micah was in Dan “all the days that the house of God was in Shiloh” (not “until the day of the exile of the land” – Judg 18:30). The second adds the exact location of Shiloh, which was probably unknown in the days of author D.42 The First edition (52.5%): Judg 3:13*, 15–30a; 4:2b–3a, 4a, 5–24; 5:1–7, 9–31a; 6:2–6, 11–24, 33–40; 7:1–25; 8:22–23, 28b, 29–32; 9:1–57; 10:17–18; 11:1–40; 13:2–25; 14:1–19; 15:1–19; 16:1–31a; 1 Sam 1:1–12, 17–28; 2:1–10a, 11, 18b–21; 7:5–6a, 7–14; 8:4–5*, 6–7, 9–17, 19–22; 10:17–27; 11:1–15; 12:1– 6a, 16b–20a, 23. The Second edition (38%): Judg 1:1b–36; 2:1–5; 3:[8]*, 9–10a, 10c; 6:7–10, 25–32; 8:1–21; 24–27; 12:1– 6; 17, 1–13; 18:1–30a, 31b; 19:1–30; 20:1–27a, 28b–48; 21:1–19a, 20–25. The Third edition (6%): Judg 1:1a; 2:6–23; 3:4–8, 10b, 11, 12, 14, 30b; 4:1–2a 3b, 4b; 5:31b; 6:1; 8:28a, 33–35; 10:6–16; 13:1, 5b; 15:20; 16:31b; 18:30b. The Fourth edition (3.5%): Judg 3:1–3, 31; 10:1–5; 12:7–15; 18:31; 20:27b–28a; 21:19a. Appendix: The Book of Judges: Sources and Editions

41

See Galil 2017; 2018c. Cf. Wellhausen 19634: 232; Moore 1895: 400–402, 450–451; Burney 1970: 415, 435; Kaufmann 1962: 276–277, 302– 303; Zakovitch 1983: 179; Soggin 19872: 277–278; Amit 1999a: 277–279, 314; Niditch 2008: 184–185, 210; Gaß 2005: 400–404. 42

Chapter VI The Formation of the Book of Samuel

The formation of the book of Samuel has been discussed extensively in research.1 Most scholars agree that the first two chapters of the book of Kings were an integral part of the book of Samuel before their inclusion in Kings. In this chapter, I will therefore refer to a literary unit that opens with 1 Sam 1:1 and is sealed with 1 Kgs 2:46, with the statement that: “The kingdom was established in the hand of Solomon.” VI.1 Doublets and Contradictions in the Book of Samuel VI.1.1 Attitudes Towards Kingship The book of Samuel contains a harsh polemic against monarchy, presenting it as conflicting with theocracy (see 1 Sam 8; 10; 12). This is evident especially in 1 Sam 8:7: “… Yahweh told Samuel: … It is not you that they have rejected from being king over them, but me.” See also 1 Sam 10:19: “You have rejected this day your God … when you said ‘No, you must place a king over us;’” and 1 Sam 12:17: “… your evil which you have done is great in the eyes of Yahweh by asking for a king for yourselves.” In addition, 1 Sam 8:11–17 points out the disadvantages of kingship, presenting it as an exploitive institute: “Your fields, your vineyards, and your olive orchards – the best ones – he will take and give them to his royal servants” (1 Sam 8:14).2 However, other scriptures in Samuel reflect a positive attitude to the institution of kingship. They even mention the eternity of the dynasty, a very rare idea in ancient Near eastern literature. This is attested to several times in 2 Sam 7:13, 16, 25, 29 (“and I shall set up firmly his [Solomon’s] throne forever … Thus your house and your kingdom will continue forever before me and your throne will be secure forever …”),3 as well as in 2 Sam 22:51 (“… who keeps his promises to his anointed one, to David and to his descendants forever”); and 2 Sam 23:5 (“for he has given me an everlasting covenant set forth in every respect and guaranteed”; cf. also 1 Kgs 2:4). Moreover, 1 Sam 9:16–17; and 16:1–3 point out the fact that it was the Lord’s initiative to constitute the institution of kingship, and it was God who actually appointed a king to save his people from the Philistines.4 Yet, 1 Sam 8; 10:17–25; and 12 present a negative attitude towards the people’s request to appoint a king.5 VI.1.2 Attitudes Towards David: Apology and Justification Versus Criticism Although the book of Samuel is named after the prophet Samuel, it deals with David. The first 15 chapters of 1 Samuel describe the period before David, and from 1 Sam 16 onwards, the focus is on David, though Samuel is still alive.6 Many chapters in the book of Samuel justify David’s acts, presenting a detailed apology that confronts all claims against David, and rejects malicious rumors. However, other chapters in Samuel criticize David’s sins, as well as the crimes of Amnon, Absalom and Adonijah, Solomon’s elder brothers. These contradictions don’t reflect an objective approach of one author – David’s actions are justified on some occasions and criticized on others. In fact, they suggest that different writers composed the book, since a

1

Smith 1912; Driver 1913; Hertzberg 1964; Bosch 1966; Mauchline 1971; Stöbe 1973; Clements 1974; Veijola 1975; 1977; Schmid 1976; Segal 1976; Gunn 1978; McCarter 1980a; 1980b; 1994; Bartal 1982; Klein 1983; Fokkelman 1986; Gordon 1986a; 1986b; Anderson 1989; Brueggemann 1990; Bar Efrat 1996a; 1996b; Elat 1998; Jobeling 1998; Murray 1998; Alter 1999; Peterson 1999; Simon 2000; Campbell 2003; 2004; 2005; Tsumura 2007; Borgman 2008; Auld 2011; Dietrich 2011; 2012; 2015; Michelson 2011; Garsiel 2012; 2018. 2 For 1 Sam 8:11–17 see Driver op. cit.: 398–410; Clements op. cit.: 398–410; Schmid op. cit.: 43–55; Klein op. cit.: 72–79; Polzin 1989: 81–89; Peterson op. cit.: 55–57; Tsumura op. cit.: 253–259; Garsiel 2012: 192–195. 3 For 2 Sam 7 see Veijola 1975: 72–78; Anderson 1989: 109–128; Polzin 1993: 71–87; Murray 1998: 160–230; Campbell 2005: 70–79; Garsiel 2018: 315–325. 4 See Campbell 2003: 107, 161. 5 See Jobeling 1998: 41–42, 51–57. 6 Cf. Auld 2011: 1–2.

80

Chapter VI

different approach to similar acts of David can be observed (cf. for example the story of Abigail in 1 Sam 25,7 to the Bath-sheba affair in 2 Sam 11–12).8 The justification of David’s actions is expressed mainly in 1 Sam 16–31; and 2 Sam 1; 3–4; 9; 21. It is a statement of defense and justification, which includes many arguments focusing mainly on the struggle between David and Saul, based on the following claims: David did not betray Saul; he did not kill him or Abner or Esh-Ba‛al; he did not participate in the battle on mount Gilboa, etc. (see below). However, as pointed out above, another author presents a sharp criticism of the sins and crimes of David and his elder sons, pointing out the importance of the prophets Nathan and Gad. This trend (indicated mainly in 2 Sam 11–20; 24; 1 Kgs 1) focuses on David’s two major sins (the murder of Uriah and the census) as well as on the crimes of his elder sons: rape, murder and rebellion. VI.1.3 Attitudes Towards Saul and Benjamin: Praise Versus Polemic and Criticism The book of Samuel contains a sharp and severe polemic against Saul and Benjamin. The description of his battles is veiled and distorted. Saul is presented as a mad person who God despises and depresses. He is bloodthirsty and vengeful; disobedient of the Lord’s words; a person who is not only mentally ill but also unable to admit his mistakes and instead blames his people for his sins and failures; a tragic and ridiculous man; a failure with extreme moods (1 Sam 16:14–16; 18:10–11; 19:9–10, 23–24); who lacks discretion and does not hesitate to achieve his goals at any cost; a person whose ends justify his means; who murders his subjects (1 Sam 22:19); a crazy man who sought to slay his eldest son only because he had violated his wrong instruction (1 Sam 14:44; cf. 1 Sam 20:33).9 David, on the other hand, is presented in these chapters as a perfect person; a hero; a wise and handsome man; loyal and God-fearing, loved by his people; and always supported by the Lord. David is portrayed as an innocent victim, unjustly persecuted by Saul – a tyrannical, ruthless and disturbed ruler, who is jealous of David’s successes and spoils all his time with an obsessive idle pursuit of the man who fought his wars and brought him honor and glory, victories on the battlefield and peace for his soul. In contrast with the morbid and failing character of Saul, Jonathan, his son, is presented in a relatively more positive light: a daring warrior, whose soul was bound up in David’s, and who was able to acknowledge David’s skills, and therefore made a covenant with him and generously relinquished the monarchy in favor of David (Saul’s few achievements, which are included in these chapters of the book of Samuel, are credited to Jonathan). However, negative characteristics of Jonathan are also mentioned; mainly his disloyalty to his father (“… But he did not tell his father” – 1 Sam 14:1; “My father has troubled the land” – 1 Sam 14:29; “You son of a perverse, rebellious woman” – 1 Sam 20:30; and more). In contrast to this trend, which is hostile to Saul and his house, the book of Samuel contains scriptures that praise and glorify Saul’s personality, exalt his achievements and note his accomplishments. This approach is especially noticeable in 1 Sam 9:1–8, 10–27; 10:1–7, 9–16; 13:3–4a, c, 5, 15b–23; 14:1a, 2–3a, 4– 16, 20–23a, 47–52; 15:4–7 (see details below). VI.1.4 Three Versions of Saul’s Coronation The book of Samuel contains three conflicting versions of the coronation of King Saul. One version (1 Sam 7:5–6, 7–14; 8:4–5b, 6–7, 9–17, 19–22; 10:17–25; 11:1–11, 15; 12:1–6a, 16b–19a, 20a, 23) opens with Samuel’s sweeping victory over the Philistines (1 Sam 7:13). After Samuel’s victory over the Philistines, they returned all the cities they had taken from Israel, and peace was even established between Israel and the Amorites (1 Sam 7:14).10 Vis-à-vis this idyllic reality, the people of Israel’s request of Samuel to appoint a 7

For 1 Sam 25 see Driver 1913: 195–204; Hertzberg 1964: 199–205; Mauchline 1971: 167–172; Segal 1976: 194–203; Klein 1983: 243–253; Fokkelman 1986: 474–528; Brueggemann 1990: 174–182; Elat 1998: 58, 72, 106, 114; Jobeling 1998: 92–93, 149–160; Peterson 1999: 119–121; Campbell 2003: 255–262; Borgman 2008: 83–85; 206–207; Dietrich 2015: 732–799; Westbrook 2015: 65–86. 8 For the Bath-sheba affair see Andereson 1989: 150–169; Polzin 1993: 109–130; Campbell 2005: 111–124; Westbrook op. cit.: 113–141; Garsiel 2018: 421–431. 9 For the presentation of David in comparison to Saul see Hertzberg 1964: 217; Stöbe 1973: 487–488; McCarter 1980a: 422; Klein 1983: 243–253; Polzin 1989: 217; Borgman 1990: 188–189, 191; Garsiel 2008: 288–289; Campbell 2003: 280–281; Auld 2011: 283–303. 10 For 1 Sam 7:13–14 see Driver 1913: 195–204; Hertzberg op. cit.: 69; Segal 1976: 59; McCarter op. cit.: 150; Noth 1981: 24; Klein op. cit.: 64, 69; Elat 1998: 41–42; Jobeling 1998: 57–68; Auld op. cit.: 86, 89.

The Formation of the Book of Samuel

81

king over them “like all the Gentiles” seems arbitrary and ungrateful, an act which is nothing but an indecent longing to resemble the Gentiles. The demand of the people of Israel is bad in the eyes of God and in the eyes of Samuel, and the king is clearly forced upon God. Later, Samuel gathers the people of Israel in Mitzpeh, where Saul’s name is first mentioned in a kind of lottery. In 1 Sam 11, Saul still acts as one of the saviors, and following his victory over Ammon he gains the recognition of all the people of Israel. This version closes in 1 Sam 12 with a concluding speech by Samuel. A second version is presented in 1 Sam 9:1–8, 10–27; 10:1–7, 9–16. The political situation is very different from that described in the previous one. The Israelites are under the yoke of the Philistines, and God hears their outcry and decides to save them, by anointing a king: “Now the Lord told Samuel: ‘Tomorrow … I will send thee a man … and thou shalt anoint him to be captain (nagid) over my people Israel, that he may save my people out of the hands of the Philistines: for I have looked upon my people, because their cry is come unto me” (1 Sam 9:15–16). Moreover, the garrison of the Philistines sits in Give’at Benjamin (1 Sam 10:5). This situation continued even in the beginning of the days of Saul – until the assassination of the Philistine commissioner by Jonathan (1 Sam 13:3–4). The Philistines forbid the Israelites to possess weapons (1 Sam 13:19–22) and require them to serve in the Philistine army (1 Sam 14:21). These two versions are combined: the editor quotes a paragraph from the first version, followed by a paragraph from the second version, and adds only a few words of his own.11 VI.1.5 Attitudes Towards the House of Eli, Saul and Ebiathar the Priest Many scriptures in the book of Samuel express a hostile and negative attitude towards the house of Eli and Ebiathar the priest, who was a descendant of Eli (see below). However, other chapters in Samuel mention the covenant between David and the priests of Nob, who belonged to the house of Eli; as well as Ebiathar the priest’s loyalty to David during his wanderings in the wilderness of Judah and the stay in Ziklag. David is assisted by Ahimelech the priest, a member of the house of Eli, in his flight from Saul (1 Sam 21:2–10). Following the revelation of this conspiracy, Saul executes all the priests of Nob (1 Sam 22:6–19). Ebiathar, the son of Ahimelech, is the only one who survives this terrible massacre, and the only one who manages to escape to David (1 Sam 22:20–23).12 David and Ebiathar’s fates are intertwined, as they are both considered rebels against the king and are wanted by Saul (1 Sam 22:20–23). Ebiathar is mentioned in the Keilah story (1 Sam 23:6, 9), and in the description of the battle against the Amalekites (1 Sam 30:7–8). After the coronation of David as king of Judah and Israel, Ebiathar continues to serve as David’s priest, and his name appears in the lists of David’s ministers, alongside Zadok (2 Sam 8:17; 20:25). Both lists enumerate Zadok before Ebiathar, but it is not clear if this was the original order. In all these scriptures, there is not a single negative word about Ebiathar or the house of Eli. Ebiathar and his son, Jonathan, are also supporters of David during the Absalom revolt (2 Sam 15:24–37; 17:15). In sum, Ebiathar is presented as one of David’s important allies over many years. The special relationship between David and Ebiathar is emphasized even in the words that king Solomon says to Ebiathar in 1 Kgs 2:26: “and to Ebiathar the priest said the king: ‘Get thee to Anathoth unto thine own fields; for thou art worthy of Death: but I will not at this time put thee to death, because thou barest the ark of the Lord God before David my father, and because thou hast been afflicted in all wherein my father was afflicted.’” However, in other passages in Samuel, Ebiathar the priest and his family of the house of Eli – are severely criticized. This hostile trend is exhibited especially in 1 Sam 1–7 (cf. also 1 Kgs 2:27). 1 Sam 2:12–17 emphasizes the sins of the sons of Eli, who are accused of “very great sins,” and even “lay with the women that assembled at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation” (1 Sam 2:22). The prophecy of the man of God to Eli is particularly severe (1 Sam 2:27–29, 31–34, 36): the sons of Eli are blamed for the contempt of God (“kick ye at my sacrifice and at mine offering”). The prophet foretells a black future for the house of Eli: they would be deposed from their status and office, most of them would die, and the rest would starve for bread and be subject to the graces of priests that God would establish under them. This hostile trend is also evinced 11

For 1 Sam 8–12 see Mauchline 1971: 88–110; Segal op.cit.: 60–91; Brueggemann 1990: 57–97; Elat op.cit.: 57–144; Jobeling op.cit.: 59–76; McKenzie 2000; Borgman 2008: 18–23; Auld op.cit.: 91–137; Milstein 2016: 196–206; Green 2017: 33–52. 12 For the massacre of the priests of Nob see Driver 1913: 180–182; Hertzberg 1964: 185–189; Segal op. cit.: 178–182; Klein 1983: 221–226; Auld op. cit.: 266–270; Dietrich 2015: 612–621; Brueggemann op.cit.: 157–162; Garsiel 2018: 146.

82

Chapter VI

in 1 Sam 3: God is revealed to Samuel and again announces the destruction of the house of Eli (1 Sam 3:14). 1 Sam 4 describes the defeat and death of the sons of Eli on the battlefield according to the word of God, and Saul completes the liquidation of the house of Eli by committing a massacre of the priests of Nob (1 Sam 22:6–19). We come full circle in 1 Kgs 2:27, which emphasizes that the expulsion of Ebiathar by Solomon “from being a priest to God” is actually the fulfillment of “the word of the Lord which he spoke concerning the house of Eli in Shiloh.” VI.1.6 The Amalekites One story in 1 Sam (15) depicts the killing of all Amalekites by Saul, and the completion of the mission by Samuel, who executes Agag, king of Amalek (1 Sam 15:8); so it seems that no Amalekite survived. But another story in 1 Sam (27:4) describes David’s campaign against the Amalekites; and 1 Sam 30 describes the attack of the Amalekites on Ziklag and David’s important victory over them, pointing out that although David kills many Amalekites, 400 manage to escape. VI.1.7 Additional Duplications and Possible Contradictions in the Book of Samuel There are other duplications and possible contradictions in the book of Samuel (most of them in 1 Sam 16– 27): a. two different stories about David’s arrival at Saul’s palace (1 Sam 16:14–23; 17:55 – 18:2); b. twice Saul tries killing David by throwing a bayonet (1 Sam 18:11; 19:9); c. twice the people of Ziph report to Saul on David’s location (1 Sam 23:19–24; 26:1–2); d. twice David escapes to Achich, king of Gath (1 Sam 21:11– 16; 27:1–4); e. twice Saul falls into David’s hands but David refrains from killing him (1 Sam 24; 26); f. twice a covenant is made between David and Jonathan (1 Sam 18:3; 20:16; cf. also 1 Sam 20:42); g. there are two versions of Goliath’s death: one claims that David killed him (1 Sam 17; 21:10; 22:10);13 the other attributes the act to Elhanan son of Yaari (Yishai?) from Bethlehem (2 Sam 21:19);14 h. the book of Samuel also has two lists of David’s ministers, who have quite a few differences between them, in the order of the ministers, their names and positions (2 Sam 8:16–18; 20:23–26). Most of these duplications do not indicate different sources, but are a means of rhetoric, part of the author’s literary program, which sought to emphasize a motif through its duplication. The key to distinguishing between different sources and recurring literary motifs lies in the theological or historiographical views expressed in the scriptures in question: if the purpose of a twice-mentioned story is no different in the two contexts in which it is found, we are not dealing with different sources. VI.2 The Book of Samuel: Sources and Editions The best way to understand these different views expressed in the book of Samuel is to posit that two main editions of the book were created over a lengthy and protracted process of formation, each an update of the foregoing. The first edition of the book of Samuel (1 Sam 1:1 – 2 Sam 20:26 + 1 Kgs 1–2 + 2 Sam 21:1–22; 23:8 – 24:25) was composed during the reign of Solomon in Jerusalem (ca. 950 BCE); the second (1 Sam 1:1 – 2 Sam 24:25) was completed by Dtr in Babylonia ca. 560 BCE. Four main sources were probably incorporated into the first edition: a. “The book of the Saviors,” (composed in the north at the beginning of the Age of Monarchy); b. “The book of the acts of Saul” (composed by Saul’s scribes); c. “The book of the acts of David” (composed by David’s scribes); d. “The book of Jashar.” A gloss was added to Samuel during the 9th–6th centuries BCE (1 Sam 27:6b).15 The author of the first edition of Samuel (who is also the author of the second edition of the book of Judges), created a new composition based on his sources (approx. 54%) as well as on his own stories and interpretation of the realty described in his edited text (approx. 41%). The most important and largest source preserved in the book of Samuel is the acts of David which encompasses about 42% of the book. Dtr added to the book of Samuel about 3% of its scope, but he changed the 13

For the battle between David and Goliath see Garsiel op.cit.: 43–75. For the LXX to 1 Sam 17–18 see Klein op.cit.: 267–274; Auld op. cit.: 123–220; Dietrich op. cit.: 320–334. 14 See Driver 1913: 354–355. 15 For 1 Sam 27:6b see Klein 1983: 263–264. It is clear that we should not date the composition of Samuel just on the basis this single isolated gloss. For literary activity in the days of king Hezekiah see Prov 25:1: “These are also proverbs of Solomon which the men of Hezekiah king of Judah copied out.”

The Formation of the Book of Samuel

83

order of the chapters, built the appendices in a concentric order (2 Sam 21–24), and moved 1 Kgs 1–2 from Samuel to the book of Kings. In the next section we will review the scope and nature of the sources and editions mentioned above. VI.3 The Sources of the First Edition of the Book of Samuel VI.3.1 The Book of Saviors “The book of the Saviors” was composed probably during the early days of King Saul (see chapter V). The purpose of this composition was to teach its audience the virtues of the kingdom of heaven being realized by the Saviors, and to highlight its supremacy vis-à-vis the kingdom of flesh and blood.16 This book encompassed the main layer of Judg 3–16, as well as that of the first chapters of Samuel (1 Sam 1:1–12, 17–28; 2:1–10a, 11, 18–21; 7:5–6a, 7–14; 8:4–5a, c, 6a, 7, 9–17, 19–20a, 20c–22; 10:17–25; 11:1–11, 15; 12:1–6a, 16b–19a, 20a, 23). The book of the Saviors describes the pre-monarchic age as one in which the advantages of the kingdom of the Lord are demonstrated. It contains a harsh, overt and covert polemic against the monarchy. The opposition of the author of the book of the Saviors to monarchy is evinced in 1 Sam 8 and 12: the people’s demand for a king is presented as wrong in the eyes of God and Samuel, and as a repulsion of the Lord (see 1 Sam 8:7; 10:19; 12:17). In 1 Sam 8:1–17 the author of the book of the Saviors emphasizes only the monarchy’s shortcomings as an oppressive and exploitative institution.17 The book of the Saviors describes Samuel’s victory over the Philistines (1 Sam 7:13). After this victory the Philistines return all the cities they had taken from Israel, and peace is even established between Israel and the Amorites (1 Sam 7:14).18 Vis-à-vis this idyllic reality, the people of Israel’s request of Samuel to appoint a king over them “like all the Gentiles” seems arbitrary and ungrateful, an act which is nothing but an indecent longing to resemble the Gentiles. The demand of the people of Israel is bad in the eyes of God and in the eyes of Samuel, and the king is clearly forced upon God. Later, Samuel gathers the people of Israel in Mitzpeh, where Saul’s name is first mentioned in a kind of lottery. In 1 Sam 11, Saul still acts as one of the saviors, and following his victory over Ammon he gains the recognition of all the people of Israel. This version closes in 1 Sam 12 with a concluding speech by Samuel, which is sealed by his following words: “I will teach you the good and the right way” (1 Sam 12:23). VI.3.2 The Acts of Saul A few scriptures in the book of Samuel glorify Saul, praise him, present his acts positively, point out his achievements and advantages, and highlight his personal qualities. These scriptures contradict other chapters in Samuel which criticize Saul, and focus on his failures and madness. The positive passages were probably written by Saul’s scribe, who wrote his “acts,” of which four main passages were incorporated into Samuel: a. Saul’s election and legitimation (1 Sam 9:1–8, 10–27; 10:1–7, 9–16); b. Saul’s victory over the Philistines (1 Sam 13:3–4a, c, 5, 15b–23; 14:1a, 2–3a, 4–16, 20–23a); c. Saul versus Amalek (1 Sam 15:4–7); d. summary of his wars and genealogy (1 Sam 14:47–52).19 VI.3.2.1 Saul’s Election and Legitimation Saul’s election and legitimation (1 Sam 9:1–8, 10–27; 10:1–7, 9–16), opens with an exposition that praises and glorifies Saul’s personal qualities, and marks his pedigree through a linear genealogy that lists his ancestors. Saul is described as “a choice young man, and a goodly; and there was not among the children of Israel a goodlier person than he” (1 Sam 9:2); a disciplined son; caring towards his father; humble and polite; chosen 16

For the book of Saviors see Richter 1963; 1964; Mayes 1985: 10–13; Soggin 19872: 17–33; Becker 1990; Galil 1994b: 9–12; Guillaume 2004: 14–26, 72–75; Römer 2005: 37; Amit 2009: 315; Biddle 2012: 8–9. 17 1 Sam 8:14–17; cf. Clements 1974; Schmid 1976; McCarter 1980a; Klein 1983: 72–79; Gordon 1986a; Elat 1998; Dietrich 2011; Garsiel 2012: 192–195. 18 For 1 Sam 7:13–14 see Driver 1913: 195–204; Hertzberg 1964: 69; Segal 1976: 59; McCarter op. cit.: 150; Noth 1981: 24; Klein op. cit.: 64, 69; Elat 1998: 41–42; Jobeling 1998: 57–68; Auld 2011: 86, 89. 19 For the scriptures that glorify Saul, see Hertzberg op. cit.: 238; Klein op. cit.: 80–101; Brueggemann 1990: 97–104; Auld op. cit.: 96–118, 166–181; Campbell 2003: 70–79; Tsumura 2007: 383.

84

Chapter VI

by God; Samuel supported him and anointed him as king; and the Spirit of God came upon him. Saul proved himself on the battlefields: he freed Israel from the yoke of the Philistines (1 Sam 13:3–4a, c, 5, 15b–23), struck the Amalekites (1 Sam 15:4–7), and fought all of Israel’s enemies (1 Sam 14:47–48). The people supported him, made him king, and remained loyal to him until his death.20 VI.3.2.2 Saul’s Victory Over the Philistines The description of the battle of Michmash (1 Sam 13:3–4a, c, 5, 15b–23; 14:1a, 2–3a, 4–16, 20–23a) is very hostile towards Saul. But even this false description acknowledges Saul’s main achievement: the liberation of Israel from the yoke of the Philistines. The author of the first edition of the book of Samuel inserted in this distorted description excerpts from the “acts of Saul,” which describe a different picture of reality: not a confused and delusional king who sought to kill his son and failed in battle, but a bold and brave king, imbued with personal sacrifice, who went out to this war as well as to the war at Gilboa, with his sons. King Saul probably had only a small army (contrary to the description of the author of the first edition of Samuel). Jonathan’s assassination of the Philistine commissioner was coordinated with his father (1 Sam 13:4), and this act began the great revolt against the Philistines who had hitherto ruled the land. Saul did not flee from the land of Benjamin to the Jordan Valley and did not return from there, nor did he make any sacrifices there – all these fantastic stories were drawn from the author’s imagination. Jonathan’s action caused embarrassment among the Philistines, and Saul took advantage of this and attacked the Philistines, defeated them, and they retreated from the central hill area of Israel to their cities. In any case, Saul had no intention of destroying the Philistine army or conquering their land; he only sought to remove them from the territories of Israel; a task in which he was completely successful – liberating the tribes of Israel from the yoke of the Philistines until the end of his reign. The description of the “acts of Saul” ends in 1 Sam 13:23 with the words: “And the Lord saved Israel that day;” the sequel is a false and distorted addition that reflects the trends of the author of the first edition of the book of Samuel (see below).21 VI.3.2.3 Saul’s Victory Over the Amalekites Saul’s victory over the Amalekites (1 Sam 15:4–7) is described briefly and modestly: Saul gathered the host, ambushed the “city of Amalek,” separated them from the Kenites, and defeated the Amalekites. In the Chronicle presented in 1 Sam 14:48, the scribe just noticed that “he smote Amalek and delivered Israel out of the hands of them that spoiled them.” The original source of 1 Sam 15:7 probably says nothing but: “Saul smote Amalek;” it is possible that the detailed geographical description is an addition by the author of the first edition of the book of Samuel. No super power was able to solve the problem of the nomads in the ancient Near East – not even the Assyrians. In the short and modest description in 1 Sam 15:4–7 there is no claim that Saul solved the problem of the Amalekites. This motif was added only in the extended version composed by the author of the first edition of Samuel, who took advantage of this story to explain God’s overthrow of Saul (see details below).22 VI.3.2.4 Summary of Saul’s Wars and Genealogy The description of Saul’s wars and genealogy in 1 Sam 14:47–52 is short and modest. The author enumerated all kingdoms defeated by Saul, and even one of his most important achievements – halting the Aramaeans – was noted in only a few words: “the kings of Zobah.”23

20

For 1 Sam 9–10 see Driver 1913: 68–85; Hertzberg op. cit.: 75–90; Segal 1976: 64–71; Noth 1981: 49–50; Klein 1983: 80–101, 142; Auld op. cit.: 96–118. 21 For the battle of Michmash see Driver op. cit.: 97–119; Segal op.cit.: 81–113; Bartal 1982: 78–83; Fokkelman 1986: 25–83; Polzin 1989: 126–145; Brueggemann 1990: 31–33; Auld op.cit.: 166–181; Dietrich 2015: 1–112. 22 For 1 Sam 15 see Segal op. cit.: 117–127; Bartal op. cit: 88–96; Foresti 1984; Fokkelman op. cit.: 85–111; Polzin op. cit.: 145–151; Brueggemann op. cit.: 108–118; Auld op. cit.: 137–166; Dietrich op. cit.: 129–189. 23 For the list in 1 Sam 14:47 see Hertzberg 1964: 119; Stöbe 1973: 277; Segal op. cit.: 116–118; Ulrich 1978: 78; Klein 1983: 131–133, 142; Malamat 1983: 196–203; Campbell 2003: 148; Auld op. cit.: 166; Tsumura 2007: 383; Dietrich op. cit.: 113–123.

The Formation of the Book of Samuel

85

VI.3.3 The Acts of David The “acts of David” is the largest and most important source incorporated into the first edition of the book of Samuel. It was probably composed by David’s scribe. Four main trends characterize it: a. the justification of David’s acts and crimes (“apology”);24 b. the legitimization of David and de-legitimization of Saul; c. the sharp criticism of Saul and Joab; d. pointing out David’s victories and political achievements. The following passages were probably copied from the “acts of David” and included in Samuel: 1 Sam 16–31; 2 Sam 1:1– 16; 2:1–9, 10b, 12–32; 3–4; 5:1–3, 6–25; 6; 8–9; 21; 23:8–39. The “acts of David” describes David’s life and career from his first appearance in the court of Saul until his death. It is divided into five main parts, and set in a concentric-geographic order (see table 1 below): the first and the last parts (A and E) are related to the land of Benjamin (A. David’s Rise: 1 Sam 16:1 – 19:17; E. David king of Jerusalem: 2 Sam 5:1 – 6:23; 8:1 – 9:13; 21; 23:8–39);25 the second and fourth ones (B and D) occur in the land of Judah (B. David the persecuted, and Saul the persecutor: 1 Sam 19:18 – 26:25; D. David king of Judah: 2 Sam 2:4 – 4:12);26 and at the pivot of this literary concentric structure (C) is a description of the “days of Ziklag” (1 Sam 27:1 – 2 Sam 2:3).27 A. David’s rise – in the land of Benjamin B. David the persecuted, and Saul the persecutor – in the land of Judah C. The days in Ziklag – in Philistia D. David king of Judah in Hebron – in the land of Judah E. David king of Israel in Jerusalem – in the land of Benjamin Table 1: The Structure of the “Acts of David” VI.3.3.1 The Justification of David (The Apology) The main intention of the author of the “acts of David” was, as stated, to justify David’s actions.28 This is particularly evident in 1 Sam 16–31; and in 2 Sam 1; 3–4; 6–21. The Apology can be summarized in the following ten main points: a. David did not betray Saul, on the contrary; he was loyal, competent and loved by the royal family, officials and the people (1 Sam 16–20); b. David did not eliminate Saul or even try to harm him in the palace, in Judea or on the Gilboa. On the contrary; it was Saul who frequently attempted to slay David (1 Sam 18:10–13; 19:9–10), often pursuing him for this purpose (1 Sam 22–26); and while David could have assassinated Saul twice, he avoided doing so (1 Sam 24; 26).29 David was not present at the battle of mount Gilboa (1 Sam 29–30), and he did, in fact, execute the Amalekite boy who claimed to have harmed Saul, the Lord’s anointed king (2 Sam 1); c. David did not extort protection money from the people of Judah (1 Sam 25:10–11); rather, he protected them and sent them loot (1 Sam 23:1–5; 25; 30:26–31); d. David did not assassinate Nabal in order to marry Abigail, his wife. In fact, David had no covert personal contact with Abigail while Nabal was alive, nor was he directly connected to Nabal’s death. David married Abigail only after Nabal’s death (1 Sam 25); e. David did not defect to Philistia with his men in order to act against his people, but fled to save his life, as he had no other alternative (1 Sam 27:1–2); f. David did not attack Judah from Ziklag, but attacked his people’s enemies, the nomads, including the Amalekites (1 Sam 27:7–12; 30); g. David did not take part in the battle of Gilboa; he did agree to go to war with the Philistines (1 Sam 28:1– 2), even reaching Aphek, and was prepared to join them in the battle field (1 Sam 29); but if he had indeed 24

Cf. Whitelam 1984. For the Story of David’s Rise, see Rost 1926; Hertzberg 1964: 240–244; Thiel 1977: 161–171; McCarter 1980b: 493– 504; Klein 1983: 163–290; Gordon 1986a: 68–83; Fokkelman 1986: 143–682; Campbell 2003: 167–170, 310–317; Tsumura 2007: 13–14; Green 2017: 69–137. 26 For 2 Sam 2–4 see Anderson 1989: 31–73; Polzin 1993: 26–53; Campbell 2005: 30–52. 27 For the literary structure of 1 Sam 27:1 – 2 Sam 2:3 see Driver 1913: 213–214, 349; Hertzberg 1964: 217, 222; Segal 1976: 112–113; Fokkelman 1986: 555–682; Campbell 2003: 278–279; Dietrich 2012: 85–86. 28 McCarter 1980b: 493–540; Malul 1996: 518–525. 29 For 1 Sam 24; 26 see Hertzberg 1964: 194–199, 205–211; Gordon 1986b: 37–64; Fokkelman 1986: 451–473, 528– 551; Polzin 1989: 205–215; Brueggemann 1990: 166–174; Bar Efrat 1996a: 301–308; 326–355; Dietrich 2004: 232– 253; 2015: 688–731, 800–837; Tsumura 2007: 561–574; 594–607; Borgman 2008: 86–91. 25

86

Chapter VI

gone there, he would have fought the Philistines and become a fifth column (“an adversary to us” – 1 Sam 29:4) since he was the Lord’s anointed emissary (“an angel of God” – 1 Sam 29:9). However he was sent back to Philistia by the Philistine kings – who did not trust him (1 Sam 29:10–11), and there he fought the Amalekites on the day of the battle of Gilboa (1 Sam 30:1–21);30 h. David did not murder Abner; in fact he made a pact with him, and had no interest in eliminating him. Abner was murdered by Joab, and David, who knew nothing about it, was not an accomplice (2 Sam 3); i. David didn’t kill Esh-Ba‛al, in fact he executed his murderers (2 Sam 4);31 j. David did not eliminate the House of Saul – quite the opposite – he showed kindness to Mephibosheth, the son of Jonathan (2 Sam 9), but was obliged to hand over Saul’s progeny to the Gibeonites in order to end the drought and prevent starvation (2 Sam 21:1–14).32 VI.3.3.2 The Legitimacy of David and the Delegitimizing of Saul David was a usurper who forcefully seized power; and since he was not the son of a king, it is unsurprising that the author of the “acts of David” made an effort to emphasize the legitimacy of David. In contrast, he portrayed Saul and his son, Esh-Ba‛al, as illegitimate rulers, who were ill suited to their positions. We will first relate to the arguments of the author of the “acts of David” in favor of David’s legitimacy:33 a. David was chosen by the Lord (the first anointment by Samuel); b. God reiterated this choice by delegating his spirit in David and championing him throughout; c. the people chose him too (Judah – the second anointment; Israel – the third anointment); d. Jonathan formed an alliance with him, recognized his right to reign after Saul, and in fact relinquished the throne to David; e. David was considered a member of the Royal Family (Saul’s son in law); f. the priests of Nob supported David; g. the prophet Samuel anointed David and endorsed him; h. David was endowed with excellent skills: “… he was … withal of a beautiful countenance, and goodly to look to … cunning in playing, and a mighty valiant man, and a man of war, and prudent in matters, and a comely person, and the LORD is with him” (1 Sam 16:11–12, 18);34 i. David was worthy of the position as he proved himself in every action, before he was crowned (his victory over Goliath, his raids against the Philistines, his protection of the Judeans, his victory over the Amalekites, his offering of the spoils to the elderly of Judea) and after becoming king (the wars against Jerusalem, the Philistines, Moab, Amon, Edom and Aram); j. Israel and Judea loved David, as did Saul, Jonathan, Michal, and the king’s slaves. The author delegitimized Saul and Esh-Ba‛al, his son, and expressed the harsh criticism against both of them as well as the tribe of Benjamin, by emphasizing the following points in the “acts of David:” a. The Lord was displeased with Saul; b. God petrified Saul with an evil spirit; c. Saul tried to murder David; d. Saul killed his subjects (the killing of the priests of Nob, just as Abimelech killed his subjects); e. Saul was a liar – the story of Merab and Michal; f. Saul was hesitant and afraid; he sent a boy to fight against Goliath the Philistine; g. Saul was mentally ill (see above); h. Saul consulted the witch when distressed, contrary to his principles; i. Saul wasted time in idle pursuit of David instead of battling the Philistines; j. Saul and his army were defeated in the Battle of Gilboa, and Saul himself died in humiliating circumstances; k. Esh-Ba‛al was not chosen by the Lord, nor by the people – Abner was the one who chose him; l. Esh-Ba‛al was weak and lacked skills; he was controlled by Abner. VI.3.3.3 Criticism of Joab Joab, David’s army minister, the man who made a significant contribution to the establishment of David’s kingdom, is mentioned in “David’s acts” only in 2 Samuel, particularly in the list of ministers (8:8–18), and the story of the death of Asahel and Abner (2:12 – 3:39). Two passages, 2 Sam 2:12–32; 3:28–30, are mainly intended to justify David, rule out any connection between David and the murder of Abner, and blame Joab and his brother Abishai for the murder of Abner. The first emphasizes that Abner was forced to kill Asahel 30

For the battle on mount Gilboa see Mauchline 1971: 190–194; Bartal 1982: 142–146; Fokkelman op. cit.: 622–630; Polzin op. cit.: 223–224; Gabriel 2003: 216–220; Garsiel 2018: 241–245; Galil 2020: 9–38. 31 For David’s connection to the murder of Abner and Esh-Ba‛al see VanderKam 1980. 32 For 2 Sam 21:1–14 see Driver 1913: 349–353; Bartal 1982: 142–146; Anderson 1989: 246–252; Brueggemann 1990: 166–174; Polzin 1993: 210–214; Peterson 1999: 242–267; Simon 2000: 53–91; Campbell 2005: 184–192; Borgman 2008: 202–204; Auld 2010: 360; 2011: 345–350; Westbrook 2015: 209–224. 33 For the legitimation of David see Weiser 1966: 325–354; Veijola 1977. 34 For 1 Sam 16 see Dietrich 2015: 248–288.

The Formation of the Book of Samuel

87

during the battle of Gibeon, and the second mainly focuses on accusing Joab and his brother for the murder of Abner.35 In addition, the author of the first edition of the book of Samuel accused Joab of five other charges: a. actively participating in the murder of Uriah; b. granting pardon to Absalom and returning him from Geshur; c. killing Absalom, contrary to David’s instructions; d. murdering Amasa; e. participating in the rebellion of Adonijah. VI.3.3.4 Emphasizing David’s Military and Political Achievements The author of the “acts of David” emphasized David’s military and political achievements during his reign in Hebron and Jerusalem, but the scope of these descriptions is limited in relation to all the scriptures that have survived from the “acts of David.” The depiction of the wars of David in 2 Sam 8 is short and concise – like the summary inscriptions in the Assyrian royal inscriptions.36 In the description of David’s wars against Jerusalem and against the Philistines (1 Sam 5), the hidden is greater than the visible. David’s covenants with neighboring kingdoms during his reign in Hebron were mentioned only indirectly: a. the covenant with the king of Geshur was implicit just from the list of the sons of David born to him in Hebron (2 Sam 3:3); b. we learn about the covenant with Hiram king of Tyre from the description of the building of the house of David (2 Sam 5:11–12); c. the special relations between David and the king of Moab were mentioned only indirectly in 1 Sam 22:3–4; d. the covenant with the king of Ammon does not appear at all in the “acts of David,” but only in 2 Sam 10:2, which was compiled by the author of the first edition of the book of Samuel. In addition, the book of Samuel does not include administrative lists preserved in the book of Chronicles – such as the list of David’s property ministers (1 Chron 27:25–34) – a few of which may have been original lists the author of the first edition of Samuel omitted from the book of Samuel. VI.3.3.5 Attitudes Towards the House of Eli, Saul and Ebiathar the Priest The special relationship between David and Ebiathar the priest, a member of the house of Eli, was emphasized by the author of the “acts of David.” He mentions the covenant between David and the priests of Nob, who belonged to the house of Eli; as well as Ebiathar the priest’s loyalty to David during his wanderings in the wilderness of Judah and the stay in Ziklag. David and Ebiathar’s fates were intertwined, as they were both considered rebels against the king and were wanted by Saul (1 Sam 22:20–23). In the “acts of David” there is not a single negative word about Ebiathar or the house of Eli. On the contrary, Ebiathar is presented as one of David’s most important allies, for a period of about forty years. VI.3.4 The “Book of Jashar” David’s lament over Saul and Jonathan (2 Sam 1:17–27) also appears in the “book of Jashar” (“Here it is written in the book of Jashar” (2 Sam 1:18). This lost composition was also mentioned in Josh 10:13, and in the LXX addition to 1 Kgs 8:13 (“Here It is written in the book of the song [shir]”). In Joshua this book was mentioned by the author of the first edition of the book, composed probably in the 8th century BCE, but also included sources that may have been, in part, recorded at the beginning of the age of the monarchy. It is possible that the “book of Jashar” included passages of poetry referring to various events that took place in different periods, in the pre-monarchical and the early-monarchic era. Two alternative hypotheses can be raised concerning the relationship between the book of Samuel and the “book of the Jashar:” a. the author of the first edition of the book of Samuel quoted the lament from the “book of the Jashar” and added the remark that referred to his source (“Here it is written in the book of Jashar”); b. alternatively, it can be assumed that David’s lament (without the comment mentioned) was first included in “David’s acts,” similar to David’s brief lament over Abner’s death (2 Sam 3:33–34). In the next stage, the lament was included in the first edition of the book of Samuel, while the note “Here it is written in the book of Jashar” is a late gloss, as in 1 Sam 27:6b. According to this possibility, the “book of Jashar” is not the source from which these passages were quoted, rather, the author of “book of Jashar” compiled fragments of

35 36

For the attitudes towards Joab in the book of Samuel see Bietenhardt 1998. For the description of David’s wars see Malamat 1983: 195–202; Auld 2011: 432–426; Younger 2016: 195–202.

88

Chapter VI

poetry from various books, including Joshua, Samuel and the “acts of Solomon,” similar to the practice of collecting proverbs and grouping them into one anthology (cf. Prov 25:1).37 VI.4 The First Edition of the Book of Samuel The author of the second edition of Judges (“author B”) is also the author of the first and main edition of Samuel. This person was probably one of the members of the group that supported Solomon, and confronted Joab and Ebiathar, who upheld and crowned Solomon’s brother Adonijah. In the passages composed by this author, Ebiathar, his family (the house of Eli) and Joab are severely criticized. At the same time the author of the first edition of Samuel also criticized David and Solomon’s three elder brothers: Amnon, Absalom and Adonijah. The tension between the house of David and the house of Saul (and Benjamin) is well documented in this first edition of Samuel, similar to the sharp and severe polemic against Benjamin in the second edition of Judges. Both kings mentioned in the book of Samuel, Saul and David, were criticized, but in the opinion of this author, monarchy was the favored destination and the one and the only desirable egress from the social, political and religious chaos and anarchy of the pre-monarchic period (see mainly 2 Sam 7 and cf. Judg 17–21).38 In addition to scriptures copied from the “book of Saviors” (mentioned above) and a short text from the “book of Jashar” (2 Sam 1:17–27), the author of the first edition of Samuel also inserted in his composition passages taken from the “acts of Saul,” and from the “acts of David.” The author of the first edition of Samuel composed the following scriptures himself: 1 Sam 1:13–16; 2:10b, 12–17, 22–30, 31b–34, 36; 3:1–11a, 12–21; 4:1–18a, 19–22; 5–6; 7:1; 10:8, 26–27; 11:12–14; 13:2, 4b, d, 6–15a; 14:1b, 3b, 17–19, 23b–46; 15:1–3, 8–35; 2 Sam 7:2–10, 11b–12, 14–15, 17–21; 10–20; 24. VI.4.1 The Structure of the First Edition of the Book of Samuel The first edition of the book of Samuel opens with 1 Sam 1:1 and is sealed with 1 Kgs 2:46. It is divided into three parts (see table 2 below): a. before David (1 Sam 1–15: Eli, Samuel and Saul); b. King David (1 Sam 16:1 – 1 Kgs 2:12); c. after David (1 Kgs 2:13–46: a short description of the constitution of Solomon’s reign).39 The author of the first edition of Samuel focused on three negative prophetic circles that discuss the sins of the house of Eli, Saul, and David and their punishment. In the middle, between the first sins and their punishment, and the division that describes the sins of David and their punishment, he quoted passages from the “acts of David,” followed by the prophecy of Nathan (2 Sam 7). After the description of David’s sins and punishment, he inserted scriptures referring to David’s will and death. At the end of the book he placed a literary unit describing the constitution of Solomon’s reign; the only man in the book of Samuel about whom it was said that the God loved him (2 Sam 12:24–25).

1 Sam 1–15 Before David

1 Sam 16:1 – 1 Kgs 2:12 King David

1 Kgs 2:13–46 After David

Table 2: The Literary Structure of the First Edition of the Book of Samuel The first part (“before David:” 1 Sam 1–15) was divided into two units: a. Eli and Samuel (1 Sam 1:1 – 8:22); b. Saul (1 Sam 9:1 – 15:35). This part emphasizes the sins and the punishment of the sons of Eli, as well as the sins and punishment of Saul. The second part (“David:” 1 Sam 16:1 – 1 Kgs 2:12) – the main body of the book of Samuel – was divided into five main units, mostly quoted from the “acts of David” (see above). It is likely that a few passages now placed in the appendices (2 Sam 21–24) were first placed in the fifth unit, of the “acts of David” which was first set in the following: Third Coronation (2 Sam 5:1– 4); Conquest of Jerusalem (2 Sam 5:5–10); Hiram builds a house for David (2 Sam 5:11–12); Sons of David born in 37

For the “book of Jashar” see Hertzberg 1964: 238; Segal 1976: 235; Anderson 1989: 14–15. For 2 Sam 7 see Veijola 1975: 72–78; Polzin 1993: 71–87; 1998: 88–108; Murray 1998: 230–260; Kitchen 2003: 94; Campbell 2005: 70–79; Garsiel 2018: 315–325, 402–420. 39 Auld 2011: 1–2. 38

The Formation of the Book of Samuel

89

Jerusalem (2 Sam 5:13–16); War with the Philistines (2 Sam 5:17–25);40 Heroes of David (A; 2 Sam 21:15– 22); Heroes of David (B; 2 Sam 23:8–39); The ark of the covenant (2 Sam 6); Wars of David and the List of Ministers (2 Sam 8); “Grace” to the House of Saul (A) – (2 Sam 21:1–14); “Grace” to the House of Saul (B) – Mephibosheth (2 Sam 9). Nathan’s prophecy (2 Sam 7) was probably first placed after 2 Sam 9, and after it the author of the first edition of Samuel inserted the detailed description of David’s sins and their punishment. This description may have opened with the sin of the census related to the prophet Gad (2 Sam 24), but focused on the sin of Uriah the Hittite (2 Sam 10–12) and especially on his punishment (2 Sam 13–20; 1 Kgs 1). The description of the punishment for this sin was divided into five literary units: a. the murder of Amnon (13); b. Joab and the woman from Tekoa (14); c. the Absalom Revolt (15–19); d. the revolt of Sheba the son of Bichri and the murder of Amasa (20); e. the rebellion of Adonijah (1 Kgs 1). This division was signed by the will of David and his death (1 Kgs 2:1–12). VI.4.2 The Tendencies of the Author of the First Edition of the Book of Samuel VI.4.2.1 Attitudes Towards the House of Eli and Ebiathar the Priest The author of the first edition of Samuel expressed a hostile and negative attitude towards the house of Eli and Ebiathar the priest, who was a descendant of Eli. This hostile trend is documented especially in 1 Sam 1–7 (cf. also 1 Kgs 2:27). In 1 Sam 2:12–17, the sins of the sons of Eli are emphasized. The prophecy of the man of God to Eli is especially severe (1 Sam 2:27–29, 31–34, 36). The Prophet foretells a black future for the house of Eli: they would be deposed from their status and office, most of them would die, and the rest would starve for bread and be subject to the graces of priests that God would establish under them. The reason for this hostile attitude lies in Ebiathar’s support for Adonijah, and it is clear that there was a connection between Ebiathar’s expulsion and his political position. Indeed, the author of the first edition of Samuel did not hide the political reason, mentioning that Ebiathar supported Adonijah. This was also the reason for the harsh words king Solomon spoke to Ebiathar (1 Kgs 2:26). Since Ebiathar did not endanger Shlomo’s rule, his sentence was reduced from death to deportation. VI.4.2.2 Attitudes Towards Saul and Benjamin I have pointed out above that the book of Samuel contains a sharp and severe polemic against Saul and Benjamin. Two authors were responsible for this attitude in Samuel: the author of the “acts of David” and the author of the first edition of the book of Samuel. The author of the “acts of David” did not refer to the history of Saul’s reign before the appearance of David (in 1 Sam 16), so it is likely that the trends against Saul, especially in 1 Sam 13–15, were the work of the author of the first edition of the book of Samuel, while the harsh criticism of Saul and the members of the house of Saul in 1 Sam 16 – 2 Sam 4 was compiled by the author of the “acts of David,” who was also responsible for the literary comparison between Saul and David. In 1 Sam 7–12, the author of Samuel intertwined two versions of Saul’s coronation (adding only a few words of his own) – although both were difficult for him: the first treated the monarchy negatively, and the second praised and glorified Saul. The intertwining of the stories with slight additions served the trend of the author of the first edition of Samuel, who sought to raise the issue of the nature of the desired regime for Israel: the author rejected the possibility of a rule of priests, as well as the leadership of a king who did not walk in the path of God (Saul). This also resulted in a depiction of Saul as the man responsible for the people’s rejection of the kingdom of heaven and overthrow of God. The author of the first edition of the book of Samuel’s description of Saul’s battles in 1 Sam 13–15 is veiled and distorted. He presented Saul as a mad person who God despised and depressed. He depicted him as a bloodthirsty and vengeful man; disobedient of the Lord’s words; a person who was not only mentally ill but also unable to admit his mistakes and instead blamed his people for his sins and failures; a tragic and ridiculous man. Saul’s few achievements, which were included in these chapters of the first edition of the book of Samuel, were credited to Jonathan. However, negative characteristics of Jonathan were also mentioned (see details above).

40

For 2 Sam 5 see Anderson 1989: 74–95; Polzin 1993: 56–60; Murray 1998: 85–111; Campbell 2005: 53–63; Garsiel 2018: 71–87.

90

Chapter VI

In 1 Sam 15, the author of the first edition of Samuel detailed a short story about Saul’s victory over the Amalekites, turning it into a long tract that explains Saul’s overthrow. The explanation was simple: Saul did not follow the orders of God, and therefore did not deserve to be a king. After Samuel proved Saul’s sin, Saul, unlike David, did not confess – but argued with Samuel and did not address the essence of his sin. Later in the book, the author of Samuel would place David in opposition to Saul: David also sinned, but he immediately confessed and said only a few words to Nathan: “I have sinned against the Lord” (2 Sam 12:13). VI.4.2.3 Polemics Against Joab The polemic against Joab was first depicted in the book of the “acts of David” (see above). This polemic and hostile trend is even more significant in the chapters composed by the author of the first edition of the book of Samuel. He accused Joab not only of the murder of Abner, but of five additional charges: a. active participation in the murder of Uriah (2 Sam 11:14–25); b. granting pardon to Absalom and returning him from Geshur (2 Sam 14); c. killing Absalom, contrary to David’s instructions (2 Sam 18–19); d. murdering Amasa (2 Sam 20:4–13; 1 Kgs 2:5, 32); e. participation in the rebellion of Adonijah (1 Kgs 1).41 VI.4.2.4 Attitudes Towards David and Solomon’s Elder Brothers The author of the first edition of Samuel criticized David’s sins, as well as the crimes of his sons, Amnon, Absalom and Adonijah – Solomon’s elder brothers. This trend (indicated mainly in 2 Sam 11–20; 24; 1 Kgs 1) focuses on David’s two major sins (the murder of Uriah and the census) as well as on the crimes of his elder sons: rape, murder and rebellion. The author of the first edition of the book of Samuel quoted all the chapters of apologetics listed in the “acts of David;” and reduced the evidence of his political, military, and administrative achievements. After the Bath-sheba affair, the author of Samuel deliberately described a chain of personal mistakes and tragedies, a punishment for David’s grave sins. His wars and achievements as the founder of the kingdom were reduced and noted shortly between these two great literary divisions. In this way, the history of David became a sequence of problematic deeds that had to be justified, on the one hand, and a chain of mistakes and tragedies on the other hand, leaving limited space for his political, military and administrative achievements. So David was presented by the author of the first edition of the book of Samuel as a tragic person. The author of the book of Chronicles took the opposite approach: he erased most of the justifications, sins, and punishments, and described in detail David’s actions as the founder of the kingdom. VI.5 The Second Edition of the Book of Samuel (The Deuteronomistic Edition) Samuel is indeed the less Deuteronomistic book in the Deuteronomistic composition, since Dtr added only about 3% to its first edition (see below), but these additions are a good indication of most of Dtr’s ideas, and the distinct resemblance in content and form demonstrate that the Deuteronomistic editing in Deuteronomy, Joshua–Kings and Jeremiah, was the work of a single person.42 Dtr made two important changes in the structure of the first edition of Samuel (see table 3 below): a. he built the concluding part of Samuel (2 Sam 21–24), and set it in a concentric order. This part included two poetry texts (2 Sam 22:1–51; 23:1–7) and a few chapters that he transferred from the main body of the first edition of the book of Samuel (2 Sam 21:1– 22; 23:1 – 24:25); b. he moved 1 Kgs 1–2 from Samuel to Kings. Dtr also added the following scriptures to the first edition of Samuel: 1 Sam 2:31a, 35; 3:11b; 4:18b; 7:2–6, 15–17; 8:1–3, 5b, 8, 18; 9:9; 12:6b–16a, 20b–22, 24a; 13:1; 2 Sam 2:10–11; 5:4–5; 7:1, 11a, 13, 16, 22–29.

1 Sam 1–3 Preface

1 Sam 4–15 Before David

1 Sam 16 – 2 Sam 20 King David

2 Sam 21–24 Appendices

Table 3: The Literary Structure of the Deuteronomistic Edition of the Book of Samuel 41

For the rebellion of Abshalom see Anderson op. cit.: 178–228; Polzin op. cit.: 149–196; Campbell op. cit.: 138–166; Garsiel op. cit.: 487–515. 42 For the Deuteronomistic edition of Samuel, see Noth 1981: 48–57; McCarthy 1965; Veijola 1975; Mettinger 1976: 48–63; Anderson op. cit.: xxv; Polzin 1989: 9–13; Elat 1998: 31–44; McCarter 1994: 260–280; Auld 2011: 134–135.

The Formation of the Book of Samuel

91

Dtr added chronological formulas to the book of Samuel (see discussion above in chapter II). The chronological data documented in his sources regarding this period were few, so he had to use general formulas that defined sub-periods using typological numbers, such as twenty or forty years. In 1 Sam 13:1 the age of Saul was lost, and the number of years of the reign of Saul and Esh-Ba‛al – deliberately changed. In a few scriptures in Samuel, Dtr defined the period of the Judges as a period of sin (1 Sam 7:3–6; 8:8; 12:9–10). In 1 Sam 8:18 Dtr mentioned a temporary concealment, an idea documented also in Dtr’s addition in Judg 10:13 (for more details see chapter X). The term “judge” (= leader, not judge) appears only in the Deuteronomistic edition of Judges and Samuel (see Judg 2:16–19; 1 Sam 8:1–2; 2 Sam 7:11). The verb “to judge” (= to rule, not to judge) is mentioned in the books of Judges and Samuel only in Deuteronomistic scriptures (Judg 3:10; 15:20; 16:31; 1 Sam 4:18; 7:6, 15–17; 8:5d, 6b, 20b), or in post-Deuteronomistic passages in Judges (10:2–3; 12:7–9, 11, 13–14). The emphasis on the eternity of the covenant to the house of David and God’s eternal love for Israel in the book of Samuel were probably ideas Dtr inserted into the book. In his opinion, God promised an eternal covenant with the House of David, like the eternal covenant with Israel: “I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever … and thy house and thy kingdom shall be made sure forever before thee; thy throne shall be established forever” (2 Sam 7:13, 16; cf. 2 Sam 7:25, 29; and also 1 Kgs 2:4).43 In Dtr’s view, it was not a theoretical hypothesis but a fact, for what was an eternity, if not a continuous rule of more than four centuries of kings of a single dynasty. 1. “Grace” to the House of Saul – (2 Sam 21:1–14) 2. Heroes of David (A) – (2 Sam 21:15–22) 3. “David’s song” (2 Sam 22) – poetry 4. The “last words of David” (2 Sam 23:1–7) – poetry 5. Heroes of David (B) – (2 Sam 23:8–39) 6. The census (2 Sam 24) Table 4: The Literary Structure of 2 Sam 21–24 The concluding unit of the book of Samuel (2 Sam 21–24 = the appendix) was built, as stated above, by Dtr in a concentric order: at the center of the structure, he incorporated poetry, the origin of which is unclear. 2 Sam 22 is parallel to Ps 18; and “the last words of David” (23:1–7) has no biblical equivalent. Before and after the poetry, two passages appear, discussing the heroes of David and their deeds (21:15–22 and 23:8– 39; see table 4 above). The concluding unit opens with the story of the “grace” that David did for the descendants of Saul, and ends with the story of the census in 2 Sam 24. There are many similarities between these two stories: in both, God brought calamity upon the people (famine or plague) because of the sin of the king (Saul or David); David needed strangers to end the catastrophe in both cases; and the two stories end with the knowledge that God forgave his people.44 Dtr attributed great importance to his composition’s literary design. This is indicated, among other things, by the great attention he devoted to the frameworks, especially the opening and closing patterns he composed for the various literary units in his work. He chose, as stated, to end the books with poetry, which was inserted not only in the appendices of the book of Samuel, but also in Deuteronomy and Jeremiah. In Deuteronomy the “song of Moses” (32:1–43) and the “blessing of Moses” (33:2b–29) appear in the concluding section, and many poetic prophecies were included in the book of Jeremiah, which concludes the entire DC. 2 Sam 21–24 do not constitute Deuteronomistic clichés, but in my opinion they were positioned by Dtr, as they interrupt the sequence of the story of David’s sin and its punishment, which opens with the Bath-sheba affair and is sealed with the revolt of Adonijah and the coronation of Solomon. Dtr built each book in the DC

43

This idea also arises from the poetry attributed to David in 2 Sam 22:51 and 2 Sam 23:5 (“an everlasting covenant He hath made with me”). 44 For the structure of 2 Sam 21–24 see Mauchline 1971: 29–30, 300–327; Segal 1976: 364; Anderson 1989: 246–287; Borgman 2008: 335–357; Polzin 1993: 202–214; Simon 2000; Campbell 2005: 184–210; 2010: 347–358; Auld 2010: 359–366.

92

Chapter VI

as a closed literary unit comprising an opening and sealing unit.45 Dtr chose these passages for various reasons. Dietrich is right in claiming that the editor sought to sign the book in a description of a conflict between David and the Philistines, and also rightly claimed that he alternated between stories of war and alliance between David and the Philistines, as follows: A1. War: David and Goliath and his activities against the Philistines in the days of Saul; B1. Alliance: the days of Ziklag; A2. War: after the unification of Israel and Judah; B2. Alliance: in the days of the revolt of Absalom; A3. War: the Stories of the Heroes of David in the Appendix. Dtr included poetry here in accordance with his intention to incorporate poetry in the signature of the literary units in his composition, as stated above. He chose poetry outside of Samuel that also expressed the eternity of the covenant with the House of David – in line with his tendency (2 Sam 22:51; and 23:5). The story of the census was transferred to the end of the book to link it to the description of the construction of the Temple, and to present David as a kind of partner in it: he bought the land on which Solomon, his son, would build the Temple. The story of the Gibeonites was placed at the top of the Appendix due to the similarity between it and the story of the census, as stated above. This story looks to the past, to the deeds of Saul; while the story of the census refers to the future, to the construction of the Temple by Solomon. It is clear that the story of the Gibeonites, the deeds of the heroes of David, and perhaps also the census, did not occur at the end of the days of David’s reign. This is another indication of the literary quality of Dtr’s work: he sometimes preferred the literary order over the chronological order (the prophecy of Nathan in 2 Sam 7 is another example of preferring a literary/thematic order over a chronological order, as stated above). Sources (54%) Book of Saviors (6%): 1 Sam 1:1–12, 17–28; 2:1–10a, 11, 18–21; 7:5–6a, 7–14; 8:4–5a, c, 6a, 7, 9–17, 19–20a, 20c–22; 10:17–25; 11:1–11, 15; 12:1–6a, 16b–19a, 20a, 23. Acts of Saul (5.5%): 1 Sam 9:1–8, 10–27; 10:1–7, 9–16; 13:3–4a, c, 5, 15b–23; 14:1a, 2–3a, 4–16, 20– 23a, 47–52; 15:4–7. Acts of David (42%): 1 Sam 16:1–27:6a; 27:7–12; 28:1–31:13; 2 Sam 1:1–16; 2:1–9, 10b, 12–32; 2–4; 5:1–3, 6–25; 6; 8–9; 21; 23:8–39. Book of Jashar (0.5%): 2 Sam 1:17–27. The First edition (41%): 1 Sam 1:13–16; 2:10b, 12–17, 22–30, 31b–34, 36; 3:1–11a, 12–21; 4:1–18a, 19– 22; 5–6; 7:1; 10:8, 26–27; 11:12–14; 13:2, 4b, d, 6–15a; 14:1b, 3b, 17–19, 23b–46; 15:1–3, 8–35; 2 Sam 7:2–10, 11b–12, 14–15, 17–21; 10–20; 24. The Second edition (3%): 1 Sam 2:31a, 35; 3:11b; 4:18b; 7:2–4, 6b, 15–17; 8:1–3, 5b, d, 6b, 8, 18, 20b; 9: 9; 12:6b–16a, 19b, 20b–22, 24; 13:1; 2 Sam 2:10a, 11; 5:4–5; 7:1, 11a, 13, 16, 22–29. Other Sources of the Second Edition (2%): 2 Sam 22; 23:1–7 Gloss: 1 Sam 27:6b Appendix: The Book of Samuel: Sources and Editions

45

Haran 2003: 283: “Each sub-unit was also a complete thematic circle in itself, which made the section a kind of literary composition to itself.”

Chapter VII The Formation of the Book of Kings

The formation of the book of Kings has been discussed extensively in research.1 Many scholars agree that the book of Kings includes pre-exilic sources (although there is no agreement as to their scope, exact date and character). It is also clear that the book underwent a Deuteronomistic editing, but there is controversy over the following questions: was it edited by a single Deuteronomistic editor or several; are the different editions found in different chapters or at different levels of the book; and should the editions be dated to the period of the First Temple, the Babylonian exile, or to a later period (see discussion below). VII.1 Doublets and Contradictions in the Book of Kings The book of Kings was edited, in my opinion, by Dtr in Babylon, ca. 560 BCE.2 Dtr constructed the book in a sophisticated literary structure, inserted his sources into it, and wrote about a quarter of the book himself. Only several dozens of words were added to the book after the completion of the Deuteronomistic edition of the book, mainly by a priestly editor. Dtr explicitly (and frequently) mentioned three sources: “the book of the acts of Solomon” (1 Kgs 11:41), “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah,” and “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel.” Dtr probably also included passages from other sources, including northern and southern prophetic sources. There are also glosses in the book, most of which were probably pre-exilic. A few duplications and contradictions appear in the book of Kings, as follows: a. 1 Kgs 4:20; 5:4–5 and more, emphasize that in the days of Solomon there was peace and prosperity, and “there is neither adversary, nor evil occurrence” (1 Kgs 5:18). This description contradicts the story about the adversaries who acted against Solomon (1 Kgs 11:14–25);3 b. 1 Kgs 9:20–22 indicates that Solomon imposed forced labor only on the “rest of the Amorites,” while on the Israelites he did not impose this obligation. Yet according to 1 Kgs 5:27; 11:28; 12:4 and more, Solomon imposed forced labor on the Israelites, which was one of the main reasons for the schism;4 c. The description of Sennacherib’s campaign in 2 Kgs 18:13 – 19:37 includes duplications and contradictions. For example, according to 2 Kgs 18:13–16 (Source A) Sennacherib’s campaign ended with the surrender of Hezekiah; but according to 2 Kgs 19:35–37 (Source B2), the campaign failed and the Assyrian army was destroyed by the angel of the Lord at the gates of Jerusalem;5 d. The last siege of

1

For the formation of the book of Kings see Keil 1872; Benzinger 1899; Kittel 1900; Hölscher 1923; Montgomery and Gehman 1951; Jepsen 19562; Gray 1963; Noth 1968; 1981; Dietrich 1972; Clements 1976; Würthwein 1977; 1984; De Vries 1978; 1985; Nelson 1981b; 1987; 2005; Rehm 1982; Jones 1984a; 1984b; Long 1984; 1991; Hobbs 1985; Campbell 1986; Lohfink 1987; Barré 1988; Cogan and Tadmor 1988; Halpern 1988; Provan 1988; O’Brien 1989; McConville 1989; 2000; Brettler 1991; Halpern and Vandeshooft 1991; Lowery 1991; McKenzie 1991; Schäfer-Lichtenberger 1989; 1995; Knoppers 1993; 1994; 2010; House 1995; Kissling 1996; Person 1997; Mulder 1998; Fertheim 1999; Brueggemann 2000; Campbell and O’Brien 2000; Cohen 2000; 2010; Wilson 2000; Sweeney 2001; 2007a; Harran 2003; Avioz 2005–2006; Römer 2005; Hens-Piazza 2006; Leithart 2006; Walsh 2006; Lamb 2007; Galil 2010b; 2012a; Halpern and Lemaire 2010; Zwickel 2010; Tilly and Zwickel 2011; Stipp 2013; Garsiel 2014; Grabbe 2017; Hull 2017; Cogan 2019; de Waard 2020. 2 See Galil 1994a; 1994b; 2004; 2012b; 2018a; 2018c. 3 For a comparison between 1 Kgs 5:18 and 1 Kgs 11:14–25 see Montgomery and Gehman 1951: 133, 236–242; Gray 1963: 145, 260–266; Noth 1968: 251; Jones 1984a: 237; Long 1984: 125–127; De Vries 1985: 81, 145–150; Nelson 1987: 71; Knoppers 1993: 160–168; Mulder 1998: 563–578; Brueggemann 2000: 144–145; Campbell and O’Brien 2000: 369; Sweeney 2007a: 101–103, 155–157; Grabbe 2017: 30; Cogan 2019: 132–133; 234–239. A few scholars assumed that 1 Kgs 11:14–25 are post-Deuteronomistic additions, and sought to explain in this way the contradiction between them and 1 Kgs 5:18. See for example Würthwein 1977: 52–53, 130, 135; Edelman 1995: 166–191. But this claim is illogical. See the discussion on the structure of 1 Kgs 11 below. 4 For a comparison between 1 Kgs 9:22 (which claims that Solomon did not impose forced labor on the Israelites) – and 1 Kgs 5:27; 11:28; 12:4 see Montgomery and Gehman op. cit.: 209; Gray op. cit.: 148; De Vries op. cit.: 132; Mulder op. cit.: 219–220; 491; Cogan op. cit.: 136, 213. 5 For Sennacherib’s campaign in 701 BCE see Galil 2001: 100–111; Cogan op. cit.: 601–638.

94

Chapter VII

Samaria and the exile of Israel are mentioned twice (2 Kgs 17:1–6; 18:8–11);6 e. Dtr often condemned the worship on high places and demanded the concentration of worship in Jerusalem. Nevertheless, he did not erase the story of Elijah on Mount Carmel, which includes a description of the restoration of the destroyed altar of God and a miraculous proof of the existence of God (1 Kgs 18:30–32);7 f. There are many discrepancies between the chronological data presented in the book of Kings (see details in chapter II).8 The duplications and contradictions mentioned are mostly due to conflicting opinions of the authors of the sources inserted in the book. Some are also due to differences between Dtr’s views and the conceptions of the authors of the sources. However, they are not an indication of the number of Deuteronomistic editors of the book (see below). VII.2 The Sources of the Book of Kings About three-quarters of the Scriptures in the book of Kings are “sources” (Dtr composed most of the remaining Scriptures). Most sources cited by Dtr are not primary but rather collections containing primary texts; specifically, the three sources mentioned explicitly in the book. Four main stages in the formation of the texts thus appear in the book: a. composition of primary sources; mainly administrative documents, royal inscriptions, stories of prophets, and more; b. crystallization of Dtr’s main sources (“the book of the acts of Solomon,” “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah,” “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel,” and more); c. composition of the book by Dtr; d. post-Deuteronomistic (mostly priestly) additions. We will first consider Dtr’s sources. VII.2.1 The First Edition of the Book of Samuel 1 Kgs 1–2 were first included in the first edition of the book of Samuel, before Dtr incorporated them into Kings. In these two chapters the story of David’s reign is sealed: the struggle for his throne ends and other circles that open in the first edition of Samuel are closed: the story of David and Bath-sheba comes to an end with the coronation of Solomon; Joab and Shimei are punished for their crimes; and Ebiathar is dismissed according to the word of God. The author of the first edition of Samuel acted in the first half of the days of Solomon (mid-10th century BCE) and was a member of the political group that supported Solomon. So, although the first edition of Samuel focuses on the kingdom of David, all the threads lead to Solomon, who is the winner of the struggle for David’s throne (see chapter VI for more details). Dtr quoted about 6% of the scope of the book of Kings from the first edition of Samuel (1 Kgs 1:1 – 2:2; 2:5–10, 12–26, 28–33a, 34– 46). The other scriptures in 1 Kgs 1–2 are Deuteronomistic additions (1 Kgs 2:3–4, 11, 27, 33b).9 1 Kgs 1–2 are divided into two sections: a. Solomon’s coronation and David’s Death (1:1 – 2:11); b. Elimination and removal of Solomon’s opponents and the establishment of his kingdom (2:12–46), both set in a concentric structure (see table 1 below). The first section is divided into five units: it opens with the story of David and Abishag the Shunammite, and is sealed with David’s death (v. 5). The second unit describes Adonijah’s revolt and David’s reaction, and the fourth – David’s will. Solomon’s coronation is placed in the middle (v. 3). The second section is also set in a concentric order and is divided into seven units: it opens with 2:12 (“and his [Solomon’s] kingdom was established firmly”) and is sealed with 2:46b (“And the kingdom was established in the hand of Solomon”). After the opening, Abishag the Shunammite is mentioned again, this time 6

For the last siege of Samaria see Galil op. cit.: 66–77; Cogan op. cit.: 574–578; 592–600. For 1 Kgs 18:30–32 see Montgomery and Gehman 1951: 303–304; Gray 1963: 355–356; De Vries 1985: 229; Simon 2014: 229–230; Garsiel 2014: 77–80, 96, 103, 179. 8 See Galil 1996: 12–13, 32–33, 46–70, 83–94, 98–101, 108–112. 9 For the formation of 1 Kgs 1–2 and their relation to the story of the succession of the throne in the book of Samuel see Rost 1926; Montgomery and Gehman 1951: 67–71; Gray 1963: 20–26; Long 1984: 11–60; De Vries 1985: 8–11; McKenzie 1991: 12–13; Knoppers 1993: 60–77; Mulder 1998: 18–20, 32; Campbell and O’Brien 2000: 324–325; 329– 336; Römer and De Pury 2000: 126–128; Leithart 2006: 29–41; Sweeney 2007a: 47–48; Cogan 2019: 64–67, with additional bibliography. Cogan opposes the assumption that 1 Kgs 1–2 are the end of the story of the succession of the throne (following Kaufmann; Liver 1972: 88–98, and others). However, this claim must be rejected. Particularly puzzling are Cogan’s claims that “in all the previous stories in Samuel there is not a single sentence that will prepare the reader for competition over the succession,” etc. (ibid.: 65), or that “the issue of succession does not appear at all in the presumed ‘succession of the throne story’ before 1 Kgs 1” (ibid.). 7

The Formation of the Book of Kings

95

in connection with the execution of Adonijah (2:2). Before the sealing the author gives an account of the execution of Shimei (2:6). The third unit describes the removal and expulsion of Ebiathar, and the fifth unit is an account of the appointment of Zadok as chief priest instead of Ebiathar. Joab’s execution and Benaiah’s nomination, “over the host,” are placed in the middle of this structure (2:4). Dtr used 1 Kgs 1–2 as a preface to the book of Kings, and as an introduction to the description of the reign of Solomon. He quoted the text verbatim from the first edition of the book of Samuel, and his few additions simply enlarged the previous units, but did not damage the stated concentric structures (see table 1 below). A. Solomon’s coronation and David’s Death (1 Kgs 1:1 – 2:11) 1. Opening unit: David and Abishag the Shunammite (1:1–4) 2. Adonijah’s revolt and David’s reaction (1:5–31) 3. Solomon’s coronation and Adonijah’s reaction (1:32–53) 4. David’s will (2:1–2, 5–9) 5. Sealing unit: David’s Death (2:10)

[Dtr: Speech No. 1: 2:3–4] [Dtr: 2:11]

B. Elimination and removal of Solomon’s opponents and the establishment of his kingdom (1 Kgs 2:12–46) 1. Opening unit (2:12) 2. Execution of Adonijah (2:13–25) 3. Removal of Ebiathar (2:26–27a) [Dtr: 2:27b] 4. Execution of Joab and nomination of Benaiah (2:28–33a, 34–35a) [Dtr: 2:33b] 5. Nomination of Zadok instead of Ebiathar (2:35b) 6. Execution of Shimei (2:36–46a) 7. Sealing unit (2:46b) Table 1: The Literary Structure of 1 Kgs 1–2 VII.2.2 “The Book of the Acts of Solomon” Dtr mentioned “the book of the acts of Solomon” only once, in the sealing to the description of Solomon’s reign in 1 Kgs 11:41: “Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, and all that he did, and his wisdom, are they not written in the book of the acts of Solomon.” The pattern “and all that he did” appears 23 times in the sealing formulas in the book of Kings: once here, 11 times in the description of the kings of Israel and 11 times in the description of the kings of Judah. However, the phrase “and his wisdom” is mentioned only here (passages discussing the wisdom of Solomon are mentioned mainly in 1 Kgs 3:4–28; 5:9–14; and 10:1–4). “The book of the acts of Solomon” praises Solomon’s wisdom, wealth, construction projects and economic achievements. This composition is similar to other royal inscriptions (especially summary inscriptions), composed in the ancient Near East, praising the king’s successes. However, in contrast, it lacks references to military victories, emphasizing that there was peace in the land in the days of Solomon (1 Kgs 5:4).10 “The book of the acts of Solomon” is probably based on original documents from the days of Solomon, including administrative documents, building inscriptions, poetry, legends, folk tales, testimonies of political treaties, economic initiatives, and more. These inscriptions were composed by Solomon’s scribes in order to emphasize his successes and obscure his failures. “The book of the acts of Solomon” accounts for about 12% of the book of Kings. Dtr quoted the following passages from “the book of the acts of Solomon:” 1 Kgs 3:1, 4–5, 6a, 7b, 9–13, 15–28; 4:1–20; 5:1–16, 20b, 21–26, 29–32; 6:1a, c, e, 2–10, 14–37, 38a, c; 7:1–51; 8:1a, c, 2a, 3a, 5a, c, e, 6, a, c, 12–13, 62–64, 65a, c, 66; 9:10–28; 10:1–8, 10–29. The description of Solomon’s reign is the most detailed account of all the periods in the book of Kings. It is not set in a chronological but in a literary-thematic order, constructed into a literary structure composed of dozens of summary inscriptions and notes. It is focused on two main building inscriptions that describe the construction of the Temple and the palace. This theme was probably also the central one in “the book of the 10

For “the book of the acts of Solomon” and the account of Solomon’s reign in 1 Kgs 3–10 see Liver 1965; 1972: 83– 105; Gray op. cit.: 27–29; Porten 1967: 93–128; Noth 1968: 48; Knoppers op. cit.: 77–134; Mulder op. cit.: 19–21, 32; Zwickel 1999; Harran 2003: 221–229; Leithart op. cit.: 42–82; Sweeney op. cit.: 31–32; Cogan op. cit.: 19–20, 248– 249.

96

Chapter VII

acts of Solomon.” In addition to the accounts of Solomon’s wisdom, Dtr quoted passages from “the book of the acts of Solomon” which refer to the following matters: Solomon’s construction projects outside Jerusalem, treaties made with the kings of Tyre and Egypt, his international trade, his army, the forced labor he casted, his ministers, the borders of his kingdom and more. These chapters do not mention any military activity, although as far as we know from 1 Kgs 11 and the book of Chronicles, Solomon had to deal with military challenges. The absence of this subject stems from two complementary trends of the author of “the book of the acts of Solomon:” a. presenting Solomon as an ideal and wise king who avoided wars; b. describing Solomon’s reign as a period of peace and prosperity, as a play on the Hebrew words Shlomo (Solomon) and shalom (peace). The author of “the book of the acts of Solomon” deliberately ignored the adversaries that arose against Solomon in Edom, Damascus and Israel. He especially ignored the severe unrest and resentment among the tribes of Israel against the background of the preference for the tribe of Judah, and the heavy forced labor imposed on the Israelites. Similarly, the bizarre presentation of the Cabul cities affair (1 Kgs 9:10–13) testifies to the author’s political bias in “the book of the acts of Solomon,” particularly his intention to cover Solomon’s failures and focus only on his successes, as is usual in ancient Near Eastern royal inscriptions. The account of Solomon’s reign (1 Kgs 3–10) is divided into three main parts, which are opened and sealed with a review of his actions and greatness (1 Kgs 3:1 – 5:14; 9:10 – 10:29). In the middle part, the author placed a description of Solomon’s construction projects in Jerusalem, the Temple and the King’s Palaces (1 Kgs 5:15 – 9:9). The first part (1 Kgs 3:1 – 5:14) is divided into 8 units arranged in a concentric structure, as follows (see table 2 below): it opens with Solomon’s marriage to the daughter of Pharaoh (3:1 with a Deuteronomistic extension [3:2–3]), indicating that Solomon worshiped God in high places before the construction of the Temple. After the opening, the author emphasized Solomon’s wisdom: his dream in Gibeon (3:4–15), and Solomon’s trial (3:16–28; see no.1 in table 2 below). Similarly, the literary unit that closes the structure (no. 7) also addresses Solomon’s wisdom (5:9–15). In the middle, the author placed units 2–6, which refer to administrative matters: the first included Solomon’s ministers and officers (no. 2), and the last (no.6) contained Solomon’s army and the role of the officers; between 2 and 6 he placed three units in a chiastic order (nos. 3–5): they open and are closed with the borders and the prosperity in his kingdom (nos. 3; 5);11 and at the center of the structure (no. 4) comes an account of Solomon’s daily provision (1 Kgs 5:2– 3). The few Deuteronomistic additions inserted in 1 Kgs 3:1 – 5:14 did not change the stated structure quoted from “the book of the acts of Solomon,” similar to the method used by Dtr in 1 Kgs 1–2 – further evidence of the unity of the editing in the book of Kings. Opening unit: Solomon’s Marriage to the daughter of Pharaoh (3:1)

[Dtr: 3:2–3]

1. Solomon’s Wisdom: Dream in Gibeon (3:4–5, 7, 9–13, 15) Solomon’s trail (3:16–28) [Dtr: 3:6, 8, 14] 2. Solomon’s ministers (4:1–6) and officers (4:7–19) 3. Prosperity and Borders (4:20; 5:1) 4. Solomon’s provision (5:2–3) [Gloss: 5:4a] 5. Prosperity and Borders (5:4b–5a; 5b) 6. Solomon’s army and officers (5:6–8) 7. Solomon’s Wisdom (5:9–14) Table 2: Solomon’s Actions and Greatness (HT: 1 Kgs 3:1 – 5:14): Literary Structure 1 Kgs 5:4a (HT: “For he had dominion over all the region on this side the River, from Tiphsah even to Gaza, over all the kings on this side the River”) is probably a post-Deuteronomistic gloss (cf. Ezra 4:10–11 and more).12 The account of the construction of the Temple and the king’s palaces (1 Kgs 5:15 – 9:9) constitutes about 43% of the text in 1 Kgs 1–11. Many Deuteronomistic additions were inserted into it, reshaping its structure, which is divided into three sections: I. Preparations for the construction (5:15–32); II. Construction of the Temple and the king’s palaces (6:1 – 7:51); III. Dedication of the Temple (8:1 – 9:9; see table 3 below). The 11

For the geographical term “the land of the Philistines” in 1 Kgs 5:1, and the possibility that it refers to northern Philistia see Galil 2021c. 12 Cf. Mulder 1998: 192; Cogan 2019: 123.

The Formation of the Book of Kings

97

description of the preparations for the building began with a treaty made between Solomon and Hiram, which ensured the supply of cedars for the construction of the Temple (5:15–26), and was signed with the notation of further preparations for the building (5:29–32). At the center of this section, in 5:27–28, Dtr inserted a note about the forced labor imposed by Solomon on “All Israel” – in order to create a literary structure in this unit. Dtr also added the divine promise of the construction of the Temple to the opening unit. The account of the construction opens with the date of the constitution of the Temple (6:1 – a date extended by Dtr); and closes with the dates of the founding of the Temple, as well as the completion of its construction (6:37–38, also augmented by Dtr). The description of the construction is presented between the opening and the sealing (6:2–36), and is deliberately interrupted by God’s instructions to Solomon (again a Deuteronomistic addition – 6:11–13). The purpose of this is to crystalize the chiastic structure of these verses. The preamble of the building account discusses the dimensions of the Temple, the side-structure and the rows (6:2–10); and its main body deals with the interior of the Temple and the inner courtyard (6:14–36). The account of the construction of the king’s palaces (7:1–12) is placed in the middle, between the section discussing the construction of the Temple and the record of the preparation of the Temple vessels (7:13–51). In “the book of the acts of Solomon” the description of the dedication of the Temple probably included only two units: a. The bringing of the ark (*8:1–13, except for Deuteronomistic and priestly additions, and the glosses in vv. 7–8 – see no. 11 in table 3);13 b. The offering of the sacrifices (8:62–66, except for a priestly addition and a gloss – no. 15 in table 3). Dtr expanded the description, as follows: first, the blessing of Solomon was added after the note about the bringing of the ark (8:14–21 – no. 12 in table 3); later, Solomon’s prayer (8:22–53 – no. 13), and again, Solomon’s blessing (8:54–61 – no. 14); finally, after the note about the offering of the sacrifices (8:62–66 – no. 15), Dtr inserted God’s response to Solomon, which serves as the appendix that seals the description of the dedication of the Temple (9:1–9 – no. 16). I. Preparations for the construction (1 Kgs 5:15–32) 1. Treaty with Hiram (5:15–16, 20b–26) [Dtr: 5:17–20a: God’s promise to build the Temple] 2. [Dtr: 5:27–28: Forced labor imposed by Solomon on “All Israel” – unknown source] 3. Additional preparations (5:29–32) II. Construction of the Temple and the king’s palaces (1 Kgs 6:1 – 7:51) IIa. Construction of the Temple (6:1–38) 4. Opening unit: date of the constitution of the Temple (6:1 – extended by Dtr) 5. Construction of the Temple – dimensions, side-structure and the rows (6:2–10) 6. [Dtr: 6:11–13: God’s instructions to Solomon] 7. Construction of the Temple – the interior of the Temple and the inner courtyard (6:14–36) 8. Sealing unit: dates of the founding of the Temple, and the completion of its building (6:37–38) IIb. Construction of the King’s palaces (7:1–12) 9. Construction of the King’s palaces (7:1–12) IIc. Preparation of the Temple vessels (7:13–51) 10. Preparation of the Temple vessels (7:13–51) III. Dedication of the Temple (1 Kgs 8:1 – 9:9) 11. Dedication of the Temple: a. the ark (*8:1–13 extended by Dtr and RP, without glosses) 12. [Dtr: speech no. 2: 8:14–21: Solomon’s blessing – a] 13. [Dtr: 8:22–53: Solomon’s prayer] 14. [Dtr: 8:54–61: Solomon’s blessing – b] 15. Dedication of the Temple: b. offering of the sacrifices (*8:62–66 extended by RP, without a gloss) 16. [Dtr: speech no. 3: 9:1–9: God’s response to Solomon’s prayer: Solomon’s dream in Gibeon] Table 3: The Construction of the Temple and the Palaces (HT: 1 Kgs 5:15 – 9:9): Literary Structure The second account of Solomon’s actions and greatness in 1 Kgs 9:10 – 10:29 is divided into three sections: I. Hiram, Pharaoh’s daughter and construction enterprises outside Jerusalem (9:10–28); II. The visit of the

13

See Galil 2012a, with additional bibliography.

98

Chapter VII

Queen of Sheba (10:1–3); III. Solomon’s trade (10:14–29). The first section opens and is closed with a reference to the economic relations with Hiram: the affair of the cities of the Cabul (9:10–14 – no. 1 in table 4 below) and the ships at Ezion Gaber (9:26–28 – no. 8). This section also discusses Solomon’s construction projects outside Jerusalem (nos. 2 and 4), as well as the forced labor Solomon imposed on the Amorites, and the officers in charge of the construction work (no. 5). The conquest of Gezer and its donation to Pharaoh’s daughter (9:16 – no. 3) was inserted between 2 and 4; and another reference to Pharaoh’s daughter (9:24 – no. 6), was placed between 5 and 7 (= Solomon’s Sacrifices, 9:25). I. Hiram, Pharaoh’s daughter and construction enterprises outside Jerusalem (9:10 – 9:28) 1. Hiram and the cities of the Cabul (9:10–14) 2. Construction projects outside Jerusalem (9:15) 3. Conquest of Gezer and its donation to Pharaoh’s daughter (9:16) 4 Construction projects outside Jerusalem (9:17–19) 5. Solomon imposes forced labor on the Amorites (9:20–23) 6. Pharaoh’s daughter moves to her palace in the Temple’s mount (9:24) 7. Solomon’s Sacrifices (9:25) 8. Hiram and the ships at Ezion Gaber (9:26–28) II. Visit of the Queen of Sheba (10:1–13) 9. Visit of the Queen of Sheba (10:1–8, 10) [Dtr: 10:9] 10. Sandalwood from Ophir (10:11–12) 11. Conclusion of the visit of the Queen of Sheba (10:13) III. Solomon’s trade (10:14–29) 12. Solomon’s trade (10:14–15) 13. Solomon’s golden shields (10:16–17) 14. Solomon’s chair (10:18–20 15. Solomon’s golden vessels (10:21) 16. Joint trade enterprises with Hiram by the ships of Tarshish (10:22) 17. Solomon’s wealth (10:23–25) 18. Solomon’s army (10:26) 19. Solomon’s wealth (10:27) 20. Solomon’s trade (10:28–29) Table 4: Solomon’s Actions and Greatness (HT: 1 Kgs 9:10 – 10:29): Literary Structure The main story of the visit of the Queen of Sheba is presented in 10:1–10 and is closed in v. 13 (see nos. 9 and 11 in table 4). The importing of sandalwood from Ophir is presented in the middle of this literary structure (10:11–12 – no. 10 in table 4). At the center of the literary structure depicting Solomon’s trade (10:14–29), the author of “the book of the acts of Solomon” inserted the story of the joint trade enterprises with Hiram by the ships of Tarshish (10:22 – see no. 16 in table 4). Units 13–15 are arranged in a chiastic order: they open with Solomon’s golden shields (10:16–17 – no. 13) and are sealed with Solomon’s golden vessels (10:21– no. 15). In the middle comes a description of Solomon’s chair (10:18–20 – no. 14). Units 17–19 present a similar structure: Solomon’s wealth was noted in 17 and 19, and a description of his army was inserted in the middle (10:26 – no. 18). Dtr’s intervention in 9:10 – 10:29 is minimal; he actually quoted it from “the book of the acts of Solomon” almost verbatim (except for his addition in 10:9). So, “the book of the acts of Solomon” is a cohesive and well-edited composition with high literary qualities. In addition, it is probably based on original documents from the days of Solomon. These inscriptions, compiled by Solomon’s scribes in order to emphasize his successes and obscure his failures, were formulated into an elaborate literary structure, as stated above. Dtr generally did not alter the ancient source and contented himself with making brief remarks, which did not change the original structure, and sometimes even improved it. At the same time, in describing the dedication of the Temple, Dtr added many important passages, and took this opportunity to express his views on issues that were close to his heart (see discussion below, and cf. chapter X).

The Formation of the Book of Kings

99

VII.2.3 “The Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah” “The book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah” is mentioned in the book of Kings 15 times, in the concluding passage of the accounts of the kings of Judah. In five cases a concluding passage is missing (Ahaziah the son of Jehoram; Athaliah; Jehoahaz the son of Josiah, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah), and therefore this source is not mentioned either. The concluding pattern usually contains the following elements (in 10 out of 15 times): “And the rest of the acts of …, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah” (see for example 1 Kgs 15:7 and more). In one case the words “and all that he did” (Amaziah) were not mentioned; in another one, the words “and his sin which he sinned,” were added (Manasseh). In the cases of Asa, Jehoshaphat and Hezekiah the concluding pattern opens with the words: “and (all) his heroism.” In Jehoshaphat’s account “his heroism which he did, and which he fought” is emphasized twice, while in the accounts of Asa and Hezekiah their construction projects were also added (“and the cities that he built” – Asa [2 Kgs 15:23]; or “And all his might, and who made the pool and the canal and brought the water into the city” – Hezekiah [2 Kgs 20:20]). So, “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah” contained information about wars and construction projects, two major topics which appear in the royal inscriptions of the ancient Near Eastern kings. It also held data referring to ritual and religious reforms, as well as accounts of revolts and assassinations (similar to the information presented in the “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel”). It may be surmised that “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah” is a collection of contemporary inscriptions composed during the reign of the kings mentioned in these texts, which a compiler (= the author of the “book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah”) collected and included in his composition. It may be a “rolling scroll,” that is, a collection that was updated from time to time.14 Given the centrality of the reforming kings motif in the book of Kings, and the emphasis on Josiah’s reform, it is possible that “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah” was compiled in the days of Josiah (and updated in the days of Zedekiah). It is likely that Dtr copied the following texts from “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah:” 1 Kgs 12:26–31; 14:25–28; 15:12–13, 17–22; 22:47–50; 2 Kgs 8:20–22; 11:1–20; 12:5–19; 14:7–14; 15:5, 35b; 16:5–18; 17:4–5, 6b; 18:9a, c, 10a, c, 11, 13–16; 21:23–24; 22:3–13a, c, 14–17a, 18–19a, c, e, 20; 23:1– 3a, c, e, 4–15a, 11–15a, c, 19 a, c, 20–23, 29–30, 33–35; 24:1–2b, 7, 17. It is not clear whether the southern prophetic texts were also included (at least a few of them) in “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah.” Listed below are the topics reported in the texts mentioned, which Dtr apparently quoted from the “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah:” a. Ritual/religious reforms of the following kings: Jeroboam I (1 Kgs 12:26–31); Asa (1 Kgs 15:12–13) Jehoshaphat (1 Kgs 22:47); Ahaz (2 Kgs 16:10–18); Josiah (2 Kgs 22:8–13a, c; 23:1–3a, c, e, 4–15a, 11– 15a, c, 19 a, c, 20–23, 24a). The description of the reforms of Josiah and Manasseh are probably Deuteronomistic adaptations of texts that originated in “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah.” It is possible that the original description of Manasseh’s sins was composed in the days of Josiah (see below). It is also important that in a few passages quoted from “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah” there was a polemical trend against the kings of the north; for example, the hostile and negative description of Jeroboam’s reforms in 12:26–31. In addition to the scriptures mentioned, Dtr included references to the religious/ritual activity of the kings of Judah in the opening patterns of their account. Some of these may be adaptations of scriptures from “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah,” such as Rehoboam in 1 Kgs 14:23–24a: “For they also built 14

The nature and purpose of “the book of the chronicles of the Kings of Judah” and “the book of the chronicles of the Kings of Israel” is controversial. A few scholars define them as annals or official chronicles, for example, Jepsen 19562: 54–60; Montgomery and Gehman 1951: 43–44, 53; see also Mettinger (1971: 38–40) who suggested that they were actually one synchronic chronicle written in two columns. Other scholars argue that although these books also contained primary sources, they were comprehensive literary compositions, which may also have included prophetic texts and stories of prophets. See for example Keil (1872: 12–14) who claimed that these books were compiled by prophets and also included the stories of Elijah and Elisha. Cf. also Gray 1963: 30–32; Noth 1968: 327–328; Cogan 1999: 78–83; 2019: 15–19; Millard 2010; 155–160. Haran assumed (2003: 221–230; following other scholars) that “the book of the chronicles of the Kings of Judah” and “the book of the chronicles of the Kings of Israel” were not separate literary compositions – but that the Deuteronomistic editor actually quoted E and J, who included passages of original royal annals. But Haran’s assumption is untenable and should be rejected.

100

Chapter VII

them high places, and images, and groves (Asherim), on every high hill, and under every leafy tree; and there were also sodomites (kadesh) in the land.” Other scriptures were probably formulated by Dtr, who sought to present an evaluation for each of the kings of Judah (see below). It is not clear whether similar formulas also appeared in “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah.” This is possible, since the author of this book may have also been interested in the reforms of the kings of Judah. Thus, if “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah” was indeed compiled in the days of Josiah, he may have been influenced by these reforms. I mainly refer to the formula: “Howbeit the high places were not taken away; the people still sacrificed and offered in the high places,” which appears in the following five cases: Jehoshaphat (1 Kgs 22:44); Jehoash (2 Kgs 12:4); Amaziah (2 Kgs 14:4); Uzziah (2 Kgs 15:4); Jotam (2 Kgs 15:35); and also a short version in 1 Kgs 22:14: “Howbeit the high places were not taken away,” which appears in the account of Asa’s reign.15 b. Battles are also mentioned in “the book of the chronicles to the kings of Judah,” for example: the war between Rehoboam and Jeroboam “all the days of his life” (1 Kgs 15:6); the war of Asa and Baasha (1 Kgs 15:16–22); the failure of Jehoram’s campaign against Edom (2 Kgs 8:20–22a); Israel’s defeat of Judah in the Amaziah – Jehoash war (2 Kgs 14:7–14); the campaign of Rezin and Pekah (2 Kgs 16:5–9); the conquest of Samaria (2 Kgs 17:4–6; 19:9–11); the Battle of Megiddo and the Death of Josiah (2 Kgs 23:29–30); Jehoiakim’s revolt and the reaction of Babylon and its allies (2 Kgs 24:1–2a); Babylon’s victory over Egypt (2 Kgs 24:7); as well as the siege of Jerusalem and the exile of Jehoiachin (2 Kgs 24:1–16). “The book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah” is probably also the source of information about Hezekiah’s war against the Philistines and his rebellion against the king of Assyria, which Dtr inserted in the opening formula for Hezekiah in 2 Kgs 18:7b–8: “and he rebelled against the king of Assyria, and served him not. He smote the Philistines unto Gaza and the borders thereof, from the tower of the watchmen to the fortified city.” c. International relations, usually raising taxes and surrendering during the campaigns of the following kings: Shishak (1 Kgs 14:25–28); Hazael (2 Kgs 12:18–19); Sennacherib (2 Kgs 18:13–16); Necho II (2 Kgs 23:33–35). d. Commercial enterprises: Jehoshaphat and the ships in Ezion Gaber (1 Kgs 22:48–50). e. Revolts and assassinations: revolt of Libnah (2 Kgs 8:22b); revolt of Jehoiada and assassination of Athaliah (2 Kgs 11:1–20); assassination of Jehoash (2 Kgs 12:21–22); assassination of Amaziah (2 Kgs 14:19); assassination of Amon (2 Kgs 21:23). f. Diseases of the king: Asa’s foot sickness (1 Kgs 15:23); Leprosy of Uzziah (2 Kgs 15:5). g. Prophecies: The prophecy of Huldah (2 Kgs 22:14–17a, 18–19a, c, e, 20); see also below the discussion on the southern prophetic sources. h. Construction projects and renovations: the cities Asa built (1 Kgs 15:23); Jehoash’s renovations of the Temple (2 Kgs 12:1–17); Jotam’s construction of the Temple’s gate (2 Kgs 15:35); the canal built by Hezekiah (2 Kgs 20:20); Josiah’s Temple renovations (2 Kgs 22:3–7); and probably the construction of Elath by Uzziah, after the death of his father (2 Kgs 14:22). Particular attention should be paid to the passages criticizing the actions of the kings of Israel and Judah, which were apparently quoted from “the book of the chronicles to the kings of Judah.” Criticism of kings in the ancient Near East is found mainly in prophetic texts (e.g., in the Assyrian prophecies); in royal inscriptions composed by the scribes of the son referring to the deeds or misdeeds of his father (e.g., in Hittite or Assyrian historiography, such as “the sin of Sargon,” and more); or in Neo-Babylonian Chronicles acknowledging the reigning king’s failures. It is reasonable and possible to see criticism of the kings of Israel in a text composed by Judean scribes in Jerusalem (such as the critique on Jeroboam’s reforms). Criticism of the kings of Judah in “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah” may be drawn from chronicles of the Temple, or reflect the son’s controversy and criticism of his father. VII.2.4 “The Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel” “The book of chronicles for the kings of Israel” is mentioned in the book of Kings 18 times, in the concluding passage of the accounts of the kings of Israel (twice in the case of Jehoash; no concluding formula appears in the cases of Joram the son of Ahab, and Hoshea, the last king of Israel). The pattern that appears 18 times includes the following components: “And the rest of the acts of …, and all that he did, are they not written 15

For the motif of the reforming kings in the book of Kings see Lowery 1991, with additional bibliography.

The Formation of the Book of Kings

101

in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel” (see for example 2 Kgs 15:11, 15, 21, 26 and more). The formula “and his treason that he wrought” appears in two cases (Zimri and Shallum – 1 Kgs 16:20; 2 Kgs 15:15), instead of the usual pattern: “and all that he did.” In the detailed enumeration of the actions, a note directed to the king’s wars appears eight times in relation to the seven kings: “and (all) his heroism (he fought/did),” or “that he fought” (only in the case of Jeroboam the son of Nebat). Sometimes it mentions with whom he fought (Joash with Amaziah – twice), or the scope of the territories he conquered (e.g., Jeroboam the son of Joash: “who returned Damascus and Hamath” etc.). Only in one case were the king’s construction projects mentioned (Ahab: “and the house of ivory which he built, and all the cities which he built”), and in one case there was a general mention: “And that he reigned” (Jeroboam the son of Nebat). These formulas indicate that “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel” (similar to the “book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah”) included information about the wars and the construction projects of the kings of Israel, and these are indeed the two main topics referred to in the ancient Near Eastern royal inscriptions. There is also information on internal revolts. So, “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel,” similar to “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah,” is a collection of inscriptions composed during the reign of the kings mentioned, by their scribes, which a compiler (= the author of “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel”) collected from the original inscriptions he found and included in his composition. It may be a “rolling scroll.”16 It is possible that it was compiled in the days of Joash, in the beginning of the 8th century BCE, and was updated after the fall of the Kingdom of Israel by scribes who fled from Samaria to Jerusalem. However, it is well known that the book of Kings includes extensive quotations from northern prophetic sources (perhaps even the sources in their entirety) such as, for example, the stories of Elijah and Elisha, but there is no formula which refers to these possible compositions. The following scriptures were probably quoted from “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel:” 1 Kgs 12:25; 15:27–28; 16:9–11, 15b–18, 21–22, 24, 34; 2 Kgs 15:10, 16, 19–20, 29–30. Five out of these 11 scriptures refer to revolts and assassinations (1 Kgs 15:27–28 [Baasha]; 16:9–11 [Zimri]; 16:15b–18 [Omri]; 16:21–22 [Tibni]; 2 Kgs 15:10 [Shallum]); twice wars are mentioned (2 Kgs 15:16, 29); and three times construction projects (1 Kgs 12:25; 16:24,34).17 A tax payment to the king of Assyria was also mentioned (in 2 Kgs 15:19). In other cases, Dtr enlarged the opening formula by a paraphrase possibly quoted from “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel” (see for example 2 Kgs 10:32–33; 13:7). To these scriptures one may add the basic data used by Dtr to compile the opening and closing formulas of the kings of Israel, including the name of the king’s father, the synchronism of the kings of Judah, his capital city and his burial place. All in all, the scope of the passages quoted by Dtr from “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel” is no more than 2% (out of 25,354 words included in the Masoretic text of Kings), in comparison with the scope of the Scriptures quoted from northern prophetic sources, which constitute about one-third of the book of Kings. This shows that Dtr deliberately shortened the descriptions of wars and construction projects (except for the description of the construction of the Temple and the King’s palaces in Jerusalem), and allocated much space to the stories of prophets and the description of religious reforms. Even in the few cases in which wars were extensively described, such as in the cycle of the stories of Elijah and Elisha, or in the description of Sennacherib’s campaign, a strong emphasis was placed on the prophets and their prophecies.18 It is possible that a few texts that will be defined below as northern prophetic sources were also included in “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel,” similar to references to prophecies quoted in Assyrian royal inscriptions.19

16

For “the book of the chronicles of the Kings of Israel,” see note 14, above. For the reconstruction of Jericho in the reign of Ahab see Conroy 1996; Mazor 1988. 18 Violent struggles that usually occurred in the kingdom of Israel led to the destruction of the previous dynasty, so the question arises of where and how the evidence of the kings of Israel was preserved, especially the data on the first three dynasties. Maybe in temples? For the assumption that the information preserved in the book of kings originates from chronicles composed in the Jerusalem Temple – see recently Cogan 2019: 22–23. 19 Nissinen 1998. 17

102

Chapter VII

VII.2.5 Northern Prophetic Sources About a third of the scope of the book of Kings was probably quoted from prophetic sources derived from the words of prophets who prophesied in the kingdom of Israel. First and foremost, we should mention the stories of Elijah and Elisha, which constitute about two-thirds of the northern prophetic sources, and about one-fifth of the scope of the whole book of Kings.20 These are the scriptures that were likely included in the cycle of the stories of Elijah and Elisha: a. Elijah: 1 Kgs 17:1–24; 18:1–46; 19:1–21; 21:1–20a; 2 Kgs 1:2– 17a; 2:11–18; b. Elisha: 2 Kgs 2:19–25; 3:4–27; 4:1–44; 5:1–27; 6:1–33; 7:1–20; 8:1–15; 9:1–8a, 10b–37; 10:1–27; 13:14–21. The northern prophetic sources probably also included the following texts, presented according to the prophets’ names: a. Ahijah the Shilonite (“The prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite” is mentioned in 2 Chron 9:29 – as one of the Chronicler’s sources for Solomon’s reign): 1 Kgs 11:29a–31, 36a, 37; 12:1–18, 20; 14:1–6, 12–13, 17–18; b. Micaiah the son of Imlah: 1 Kgs 22:1–38; c. Jonah the son of Amittai: 2 Kgs 14:25; d. Jehu the son of Hanani: 2 Kgs 16:1–7, whose prophecy was rewritten by Dtr (the “book of Jehu the son of Hanani” is mentioned in 2 Chron 20:34);21 e. an anonymous prophet is mentioned in 1 Kgs 20:13, 22, 35, 38, 41. Dtr probably found an edited version of the cycles of Elijah and Elisha in one united composition, and quoted this composition almost verbatim in the literary units that describe mainly the reigns of Ahab and his sons (1 Kgs 16:29 – 2 Kgs 8:15). Elisha’s death is mentioned in 2 Kgs 13:14–21, after the closing formula to Joash, king of Israel. The cycle of Elijah and Elisha begins in 1 Kgs 17:1, and the first seven units of this cycle are included in 1 Kgs 17–19. Dtr inserted the next three units (which also refer to Elijah) in 1 Kgs 21 (no. 8), 2 Kgs 1:2–17a (no. 9) and 2 Kgs 2:1–18 (no. 10). So Dtr set these ten units which refer to Elijah in two main groups of seven (1 Kgs 17–19) and three (see table 5 below). After the closing of the first seven units in 19:19–21, and before the sealing formula of Ahab’s reign in 22:39–40, Dtr placed two additional sources of prophetic origin, both related to the wars between Israel and Aram (a. 1 Kgs 20; b. 1 Kgs 22:1–38). Between these two accounts, Dtr inserted the story of Elijah and Naboth’s vineyard (1 Kgs 21 = no. 8).22 Elijah’s first seven stories are set in a literary structure: the first and the seventh stories give an account of God’s revelation to Elijah in the brook Cherith, near the Jordan (17:2–7), and on Mount Horeb (19:1–18); in the center of the structure the author placed the story of Elijah and Obadiah (18:1–6). Before and after it, two miracles are described, in stories 2 and 3, which are related to the widow from Zarephath (the flour and oil – 17:8–16, and the reviving the widow’s son – 17:17–24). Similar motifs also appear in Elisha’s stories (see below). Stories 5 and 6 describe two miracles related to Elijah’s activity on Mount Carmel: the miracle of the fire (1 Kgs 18:17–40) followed by the miracle of the rain (18:41–46). Dtr copied this structure from a northern prophetic source that included the cycle of the stories of Elijah and Elisha, and possibly other texts referring to prophets (such as 1 Kgs 20; 22). After describing the reign of Ahab and marking his death in Ramoth Gilad, a short literary unit focusing on the reign of Jehoshaphat king of Judah was inserted (22:2). The description includes opening and closing units (see below). Dtr set this section in an interesting literary order: after the opening and the first closing came an evaluation, and after each evaluation there is a reference to the relations with Israel. First came only a general score of the completion between south and north (22:45), and later the failure of the naval enterprise in Ezion Gaber and the rejection of Ahaziah’s offer to help Judah (22:48–50).

20

For the Elijah and Elisha cycle see Fohrer 1957; Rofe 1982; Schmitt 1972; Hentschel 1977; Rehm 1982; Nelson 1987: 107–129, 153–195; Stipp 1987; Schäfer-Lichtenberger 1989: 198–222; McKenzie 1991: 80–100; Collins 1993; House 1995: 209–284; Overholt 1996; Kissling 1996; Blum 1997; Simon 2014: 189–316; Crüsemann 1997; Bergen 1999; Cohen 2000: 3–56; Otto 2001; 2003; Leithart 2006: 122–144; 165–217; Garsiel 2014; Cogan 2019: 326–347, 401–472. 21 For the assumption about the existence of a prophetic source composed in the days of the house of Jehu, which encompassed prophetic texts in Samuel and Kings (1 Sam 1:1 – 2 Kgs 10:28) see Campbell and O’Brien 2000: 24–32. This assumption is impossible and completely ignores significant differences between the scriptures mentioned in the books of Samuel and Kings. While there are some similarities between some of the texts mentioned, this similarity does not indicate that these texts were taken from a single source. For a critical analysis of Campbell and O’Brien's hypothesis, see Römer and De Pury 2000: 132–133; Sweeney 2007a: 26–30. 22 For the story of Naboth’s vineyard see Montgomery and Gehman 1951: 330–335; Gray 1963: 385–394; Baltzer 1965; Jones 1984a: 349–360; Bohlen 1978; Long 1984: 223–230; De Vries 1985: 252–258; Zakovitch 1983; Nelson 1987: 138–145; Rofe 1982; House 1995: 231, 233; Brueggemann 2000: 257–265; Cronauer 2005; Hens-Piazza 2006: 204– 211; Leithart 2006: 152–164; Sweeney op. cit.: 245–252; Amit 2015: 19–36; Fleishman 2015: 92–116; Garsiel 2015: 37– 64; Shemesh 2015: 117–149; Sutskover 2015: 65–91; Cogan 2019: 365–374.

The Formation of the Book of Kings

103

4. Ahab the son of Omri (1 Kgs 16:29 – 22:40) [Dtr: 16:29–34: Opening formula for Ahab] Elijah and Elisha’s Cycle: A: Stories of Elijah (1 Kgs 17:1 – 19:21; 21; 2 Kgs 1:2–17a; 2:1–18) Opening for chapters 17–19 (17:1) Elijah: no. 1: Elijah: no. 2: Elijah: no. 3: Elijah: no. 4: Elijah: no. 5: Elijah: no. 6: Elijah: no. 7:

God’s revelation to Elijah in the brook Cherith (17:2–7) Elijah in Zarephath: the miracle of the flour and oil (17:8–16) Elijah in Zarephath: the miracle of reviving the widow’s son (17:17–24) Elijah and Obadiah (18:1–16) Elijah and the miracle of the fire on Mount Carmel (18:17–40) Elijah and the miracle of the rain (18:41–46) God’s revelation to Elijah on Mount Horeb (19:1–18)

Closing of chapters 17–19: The meeting of Elijah and Elisha (19:19–21) a. The wars between Israel and Aram (under the guidance of anonymous prophets) Siege of Samaria (20:1–21) Preparations before the Battle of Aphek (20:22–25) Battle of Aphek (20:26–34) The King and the anonymous prophet (20:35–43) Elijah: no. 8: Elijah and the Vineyard of Naboth (21:1–20a) [Dtr: 21:20b–24: Speech no. 7: Elijah’s word to Ahab] [Dtr: 21:25–26: Sins of Ahab] [Dtr: 21:27: Ahab repents] [Dtr: 21:28–29: God’s word to Elijah] b. Micaiah the son of Imlah and Ahab’s Death (22:1–38) Story of Micaiah (22:1–28) Ahab’s death (22:29–38) [Dtr: 22:39–40: Closing formula for Ahab] 5. Jehoshaphat the son of Asa (22:41–51) [Dtr: 22:41–42: Opening formula for Jehoshaphat – first evaluation (22:43–44)] [Dtr: 22:45: Peace with Israel] [Dtr: 22:46: Closing formula for Jehoshaphat – a: – second evaluation (22:47)] Broken ships in Ezion Gaber (22:48–50) [“The book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah”] [Dtr: 22:51: Closing formula for Jehoshaphat – b] 6. Ahaziah the son of Ahab (1 Kgs 22:52 – 2 Kgs 1:18) [Dtr: 1 Kgs 22:52–54: Opening formula for Ahaziah] [Dtr: 2 Kgs 1:1: Moab’s revolt against Israel] Elijah: no. 9:

Elijah and Ahaziah’s death (2 Kgs 1:2–17a) [Dtr: 2 Kgs 1:17b–18: Closing formula for Ahaziah] Elijah: no. 10: Ascension of Elijah to heaven (2 Kgs 2:1–18) Gilgal (2:1) Bethel (2:2) Jericho (2:4) Crossing the Jordan (2:8) Ascension of Elijah to Heaven (2:11) Crossing the Jordan (2:14) Stories of Elisha (2 Kgs 2:19–25; 3:4 – 8:15) Elisha: no. 1: Jericho’s spring (2 Kgs 2:19–22) Jericho (2:18) Elisha: no. 2: Curse of the boys (2 Kgs 2:23–25) Bethel (2:23) Samaria (2:25)

104

Chapter VII

7. Joram the son of Ahab (2 Kgs 3:1 – 8:29) [Dtr: 2 Kgs 3:1–2: Opening formula for Joram] Elisha: no. 3: Elisha and Joram’s campaign against Moab (3:4–27) Elisha: no. 4: Elisha, the widow and the miracle of the oil (4:1–7) Elisha: no. 5: The Shunammite and the miracle of the revival of her son (4:8–37) Elisha: no. 6: Elisha and the improvement of the stew (4:38–41) Elisha: no. 7: Elisha and the bread of the first-fruits (4:42–44) Elisha: no. 8: Elisha and the healing of Naaman (5:1–27) Elisha: no. 9: Elisha and the overflow of the iron axe (6:1–7) Elisha: no. 10: Elisha and the captivity of the Aramaic battalion (6:8–23) Elisha: no. 11: Elisha and the siege of Samaria (6:24 – 7:20) Elisha: no. 12: Elisha and the retuning of the field to the Shunammite (8:1–6) Elisha: no. 13: Elisha’s prophecy to Hazael about Ben-hadad’s death (8:7–15)

→ Elijah: no. 1 → Elijah: no. 2 → Elijah: no. 3

→ Elijah: no. 5

→ Elijah: no. 8 → Elijah: no. 9

8. Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat (2 Kgs 8:16–24) [Dtr: 2 Kgs 8:16–19: Opening formula for Jehoram] Revolts in Edom and Libnah (8:20–22) [“The book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah”] [Dtr: 2 Kgs 8:23–24: Closing formula for Jehoram] 9. Ahaziah the son of Jehoram (2 Kgs 8:25–29) [Dtr: 2 Kgs 8:25–27: Opening formula for Ahaziah] [Dtr: 2 Kgs 8:28–29: Second battle at Ramoth-gilead] * No closing formulas for Joram the son of Ahab and Ahaziah the son of Jehoram – their death is described in 2 Kgs 9. Table 5: The Literary Structure of 1 Kgs 16:29 – 2 Kgs 8:29 The description of the reign of Ahaziah the son of Ahab (1 Kgs 22:52 – 2 Kgs 1:18) is divided into three parts: an opening and a closing unit, and between them Dtr inserted a prophetic source (Elijah – no. 9), which focuses on the death of Ahaziah (2 Kgs 1:2–17a). Before this story, Dtr made a brief remark about the Moabite revolt (1 Kgs 1:1). The story of Elijah’s death (2 Kgs 2:1–18 – Elijah – no. 10) was brought after the sealing of the account of Ahaziah and before the opening of the account of Joram, and therefore this story should not be attached to one of these two units. Similarly, the first two stories of Elisha do not belong to any of these units. A concentric literary structure links the story of the ascension of Elijah to heaven with the first two stories of Elisha (see table 5 above): the ascension of Elijah to heaven is placed at its center (2:11), before and after the crossing of the Jordan (2:8, 14). Bethel is mentioned after the crossing of the Jordan (2:23), as well as before it (2:2). At the opening of the structure, Gilgal is documented (2:1), and at the end of chapter 2 – Mount Carmel and Samaria (2:25). The story of the ascension of Elijah to heaven and the appointment of Elisha, as well as the structure mentioned, emphasize the continuity between Elijah and Elisha. As stated above, Dtr probably found this structure in his source. The account of Joram, the son of Ahab, opens in 2 Kgs 3:1–3 and is encompassed by 2 Kgs 3–8. Most of Elisha’s stories are inserted in these chapters, including the account of Jehoram, the son of Jehoshaphat, which opens in 8:16–19, and is closed in 8:23–24; as well as the opening formula of Ahaziah, the son of Jehoram (8:25–27). The closing formulas for the reigns of Joram the son of Ahab and Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah were not quoted at all. Instead 2 Kgs 9 describes the deaths of Joram the son of Ahab and Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah, during Jehu’s revolt. Elisha’s stories are divided into 14 literary units (see details in table 5).23 The first two units were placed before the opening of the reign of Joram the son of Ahab, and the last unit of Elisha’s stories was presented in the account of Joash (13:14–21).24

23 24

See Rofe ibid. For a comparison between the cycles of Elijah as Elisha see Cohen 2010: 119–120.

The Formation of the Book of Kings

105

VII.2.6 Southern Prophetic Sources The book of Kings includes prophetic texts composed in Judah. It is possible that some of these texts were part of “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah,” like the prophecy of Huldah.25 The following texts were probably “southern prophetic sources” (which comprise about 8% of the texts in the book of Kings): 1 Kgs 12:21–24 (Shemaiah); 1 Kgs 12:32–33; 13:1–32; 2 Kgs 23:16–18 (the anonymous “man of God” from Judah);26 and especially 2 Kgs 18:17–37; 19:1–37; 20:1–19 (the words of Isaiah the son of Amoz). This last source is called in 2 Chron 32:32 “the vision of Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz,” and was also included in the first edition of the book of Isaiah (Isa 36–39). The prophecy of Huldah the prophetess to Josiah (2 Kgs 22:14–20), was apparently quoted from “the book of the chronicles to the kings of Judah” and adapted by Dtr.27 VII.2.7 Other Sources The origins of several passages in the book of Kings are unclear (about 1% of the scriptures in Kings). They are defined below as “other sources,” since it is unlikely that they were included in one of the sources mentioned above. Two main passages may be mentioned: (1) The employment of Israelites in forced labor in the days of Solomon (1 Kgs 5:27). It is possible that this information came from northern sources, like the other evidence of the forced labor imposed by Solomon on the Israelites in 1 Kgs 11–12; (2) The story about the adversaries who act against Solomon in Edom and Damascus (1 Kgs 11:14–28, 40). These reports open with events that took place in the days of David. Therefore, it is possible that they were quoted from the first edition of the book of Samuel, and adapted to the picture described in 1 Kgs 11. On the other hand, it is possible that they were found in “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel,” since this source is mentioned in the closing passage of the account of Jeroboam the son of Nebat. VII.2.8 Glosses A few glosses were introduced into the book of Kings during the First Temple period (about 50 words = 0.2% of the scope of the book of Kings). They were included in 1 Kgs 8:7–8, 65d, and possibly also in 1 Kgs 11:3 (see details below). VII.3 Deuteronomistic Editing in the Book of Kings VII.3.1 Scope and Content In my opinion, Dtr composed about a quarter of the scriptures in the book of Kings. He set them in a chronological-synchronic order (similar to the setting of the texts in the “Babylonian chronicle”). 120 out of 233 Deuteronomistic phrases appear in the book of Kings (in about 418 cases). Moreover, all theological principles that characterize Dtr’s view are mentioned in the book of Kings, the chief among them being faith, faithfulness, and reward (116 times); and sin and its punishment (113 times). Other principles frequently mentioned in kings are the struggle against idols (49 times); concentration of worship and theology of the name (46 times); eternal love, choice and promise to the house of David (33 times); fulfillment of the word of God (31 times);28 Exodus, Covenant and Inheritance of the land (20 25

For Huldah’s prophecy see Provan 1988: 147–149; Weems 2003: 321–339; Nelson 2005: 329–330. For the fulfillment of God’s word prophecies by the man of God in Bethel (1 Kgs 13; 2 Kgs 23:16–18) see Würthwein 1977: 168–172; Rofe 1982: 144–154; De Vries 1985: 164–174; Eynikel 1990; 1996: 278–279; Knoppers 1994: 50–64; Simon 2014: 157–188; Bosworth 2002; Cogan 2019: 264–274. 27 For the southern prophetic sources in the book of Kings see Cogan op. cit.: 20–22. 28 The fulfillment of God’s word in the book of Kings in particular, and in the DC in general, has been extensively discussed in Weippert’s (2000) study. She cited over 60 examples of the fulfillment of God’s word in DH, following von Rad 1953: 74–91; cf. also Rofe 1982: 86–91; Eynikel 1990. The motif of the promise and fulfillment of the word of God frequently appears in the book of Kings, both in scriptures composed by Dtr himself (e.g., 1 Kgs 2:4, 27; 6:12; 8:15, 20, 24, 26, 56; 15:29; 16:12; 2 Kgs 15:12; 17:23; 24:2); and in his sources, including “the book of the chronicles of the Kings of Israel” (1 Kgs 12:15; 14:18; 16:34; 2 Kgs 14:25); southern prophetic sources (2 Kgs 23:15–16), and especially in northern prophetic sources (e.g., 1 Kgs 17:16; 22:38; 2 Kgs 1:17; 2:22; 4:44; 7:16–17; 10:10, 17). For this issue see also the discussion below in chapter X. 26

106

Chapter VII

times);29 and more (see appendix to the book). Dtr likely composed the following scriptures in Kings: 1 Kgs 2:3–4, 11, 27, 33b, 45c; 3:2–3, 6b, 8, 14; 5:17–19, 20a; 6:1b, d, 11–13, 38b; 8:2c, 9, 14–61; 9:1–9; 10:9; 11:1–13, 29a, 32–35, 36b, 38–39, 41–42; 12:19; 13:33–34; 14:7–11, 14–16, 19–24, 29–31; 15:1–11, 14–16, 23–26, 29–34; 16:1–8, 12–15, 19–20, 23, 25–32; 21:20b–29; 22:39–46, 51–54; 2 Kgs 1:1, 17b–18; 3:1–3; 8:16–19, 23–29; 9:7–10a; 10:28–35; 12:1–4, 20–22; 13:1–13, 22–25; 14:1–6, 15–24, 26–29; 15:1–4, 6–9, 11–15, 17–18, 21–28, 30b–35a, 36–38; 16:1–4, 19–20; 17:1–3, 6a, 7–41; 18:1–8, 9b, 10b, 12; 20:20–21; 21:1–22, 25; 22:1–2, 13b, 17b, 19b, d; 23:19b, 24–28, 31–32, 36; 24:2b–6, 8–9, 18–20; 25:1–30. As stated above, a few of these scriptures are probably paraphrases of scriptures originating from Dtr’s sources. Further evidence of the unity of the Deuteronomistic editing in the book of Kings is the special literary structure built by Dtr (see above, and see in detail below as well). VII.3.2 Opening Formulas Dtr drew information from his sources, which appears in the opening formulas of the accounts of the reigns of the kings of Israel and Judah, as indicated by the differences between the information that is provided in these formulas. For example, in the formulas of the kings of Judah, the age of the king at his coronation, as well as his mother’s name and provenances, are usually mentioned. However, these data are missing in the formulas of the kings of Israel (the ages of Abijah and Asa are missing, as well as the names of the mothers of Jehoram and Ahaz).30 A total of 19 opening formulas to the descriptions of the reigns of the kings of Judah (all kings, except Athaliah) have been presented in the book of Kings. They usually include eight elements, typically presented in a uniform order, as follows: A. synchronism to the kings of Israel; B. name of the king; C. name of his father; D. age of the king at his coronation; E. duration of his reign; F. his capital city; G. his mother’s name; H. his mother’s provenances; see for example, Amaziah’s opening formula (2 Kgs 14:1–2): (A) “In the second year of Joash the son of Joahaz king of Israel (B) began Amaziah (C) the son of Joash king of Judah to reign. (D) He was twenty and five years old when he began to reign (E) and he reigned twenty and nine years (F) in Jerusalem; (G) and his mother’s name was Jehoaddan (H) of Jerusalem.” This order also appears in the opening formulas of Azariah, Jotam, Ahaz and Hezekiah. In the seven last formulas (from Manasseh on), the first two components are missing (since they reigned after the Assyrian conquest of Samaria), and the formula opens with an indication of the king’s age. In the opening formula for Jehoshaphat, component A appears only after components B+C (“[B] and Jehoshaphat [C] the son of Asa began to reign over Judah, [A] in the fourth year of Ahab king of Israel” – 1 Kgs 22:41). The opening formula of Jehoash in 2 Kgs 12:1–2, opens with component B+D (his name and age), and continues with components A, E, F, G, and H (“[B] Jehoash was [D] seven years old when he began to reign. [A] In the seventh year of Jehu began Jehoash to reign; [E] and he reigned forty years [F] in Jerusalem; [G] and his mother’s name was Zibiah [H] of Beer-sheba”). The name of Jehoash’s father (component C) is missing from this formula, since it is mentioned in 2 Kgs 11:2. In the opening formula for Rehoboam (1 Kgs 14:21) the synchronism to the 29

The Exodus is mentioned in the book of Kings 11 times, ten times in the scriptures written by Dtr (1 Kgs 6:1; 8:9, 16, 21, 51, 53; 9:9; 2 Kgs 17:7, 36; 21:15); and once in a text probably compiled by the author of “the book of the chronicles of the Kings of Judah” (1 Kgs 12:28). This author probably also composed 2 Kgs 23:21–23, and did not link Josiah’s Passover to the Exodus. Similar to this scripture in all other places outside the Pentateuch, where Passover is mentioned, there is also no link between it and the Exodus (see Galil 2021b). For 2 Kgs 23:21–23 see Cogan 2019: 683, with additional bibliography. In most of the mentions of the Exodus in the book of Kings, Dtr presented it positively, as a founding event, emphasizing the affinity between it and the Temple. But in 2 Kgs 21:15, he used it to emphasize the sins of the children of Israel. He also took a similar approach in Jer 7:24, in contrast to the approach of the prophet Jeremiah, who presented the wilderness period as a honeymoon in God’s relationship with his people Israel (Jer 2:2–3; 31:1–2), emphasizing that the children of Israel began to sin only upon entering the land (Jer 2:7). In 1 Kgs 12:28, the author of “the book of the chronicles of the Kings of Judah,” presented in the tongue of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, an idolatrous proverb connecting the Exodus to the golden calves of Jeroboam (cf. Ex 32:4). The author of the second edition of the book of Joshua similarly used the Exodus to condemn the leader of the tribe of Ephraim, e.g. through the Exodus, he criticized and condemned the failures and sins of Joshua (see Galil ibid.; and cf. Zakovitch 1991). For 1 Kgs 12:28 see Gray 1963: 290–291; Frisch 2013: 151, 230–231; Cogan op. cit.: 258. 30 In addition, there was a disruption in the name of the mother of Abijah, and the version of the book of Chronicles should be preferred, from which it appears that the mother of Abijah was Michaiah the daughter of Uriel of Gibeah (2 Chron 13:2) and not Maachah the daughter of Abishalom (1 Kgs 15:2), who was probably the mother of Asa the son of Abijah (1 Kgs 15:10).

The Formation of the Book of Kings

107

king of Israel (= component A) is missing, since Rehoboam began to reign at that time with Jeroboam (“[B] And Rehoboam [C] the son of Solomon reigned in Judah. [D] Rehoboam was forty and one years old when he began to reign, [E] and he reigned seventeen years in Jerusalem, [F] the city which the LORD had chosen out of all the tribes of Israel, to put His name there; [G] and his mother’s name was Naamah [H] the Ammonitess”). On the other hand, 17 opening formulas have been presented in the book of Kings to the descriptions of the reigns of the kings of Israel (all kings, except Jeroboam and Jehu), and they usually include only five elements, presented in a uniform order, as follows: A. synchronism to the kings of Judah; B. name of the king; C. name of his father; D. his capital city; E. duration of his reign. For example, Jehoahaz’s opening formula in 2 Kgs 13:1: “(A) In the three and twentieth year of Joash the son of Ahaziah, king of Judah, (B) Jehoahaz (C) the son of Jehu began to reign over Israel (D) in Samaria, (E) and reigned seventeen years.” In a few cases, components D and E are placed in reverse order (see for example Zimri, Shallum and Menahem); in other cases, components B+C are placed before A (Nadab, Ahab and his sons, and Shallum); and twice, A is set only after B+C+D (Ahaziah and Joram). In three other cases the capital city (= component D) is missing (Nadab, Pekah and Hoshea). It is written about Omri that he reigned six years in Tirzah (implying that he reigned six years in Samaria). VII.3.3 Evaluations of the Kings of Israel and Judah The book of Kings describes the reign of 40 kings (in addition to David): Solomon, 20 kings of Judah, and 19 kings of Israel. An evaluation is presented in 37 cases (three kings did not receive an evaluation: Ahaziah the son of Ahab, Athaliah and Shallum). These 37 evaluations may be divided into ten ranks, from the kings who did “right in the eyes of God” to the kings who did evil in the eyes of God. On the highest level stand Josiah and Hezekiah, about whom it is said that they did what was right in the eyes of the Lord as David (2 Kings 18:3 = Hezekiah; and 2 Kgs 22:2 = Josiah: “And he did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, and walked in all the way of David his father, and turned not aside to the right hand or to the left;” with the emphasis that “like unto him was there no king before him, that turned to the LORD with all his heart, and with all his soul, and with all his might, according to all the law of Moses; neither after him arose there any like him” (2 Kgs 23:25 = Josiah); or “He trusted in the LORD, the God of Israel; so that after him was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor among them that were before him” (2 Kgs 18:5 = Hezekiah). The scriptures seem contradictory. However, in my estimation the scripture about Hezekiah was corrupted and it should be read: “among them that were not before him” (see note below).31 Moreover, it is said about Josiah that he “turned not aside to the right hand or to the left” (words which were not written about Hezekiah). So, Josiah surpasses Hezekiah and tops the list, which may be an indication that “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah” was composed in the days of Josiah (see stated above). Dtr compared a number of kings to David, emphasizing that David did what was right in the eyes of the Lord; and at the same time, that he sinned in the matter of Uriah (“save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite” – 1 Kgs 15:5). In doing so, Dtr aimed to show his audience that he not only knew the story of Uriah, but also believed that this sin did not obscure David’s superiority. Therefore, we may place David right after Josiah and Hezekiah, since it is said about them that there was no king like them before them, and also because they had not sinned even once (contrary to David). Immediately after Josiah, Hezekiah and David, there are six kings (in the second and third degrees), who “did right in the eyes of the Lord,” but did not remove the high places. Asa is said to have done the right thing, as David, and Jehoshaphat had done as his father Asa. The other four, on the other hand, are said to have done the right thing “just not as David.” This scripture is explicitly stated regarding Amaziah, noting the fact that he did as his father Jehoash; and Uzziah and Jotam did as their fathers (Amaziah and Uzziah). So Jehoash, Amaziah, Uzziah and Jotam stand in the third degree, for they did the right thing, “just not as David,” but “the high places were not taken away.”32 In the fourth degree stands Jehu, the only king of Israel who “hast done well in executing that which is right in Mine eyes” (2 Kgs 10:30), with only one exception: although he destroyed the Baʽal and harmed the 31

The disruption was caused by an incorrect copy of the word “after” that also appears in the next line, as follows: ‫ביהוה אלהי ישראל בטח >ואחריו< לא היה כמהו בכל מלכי יהודה >ו